Directions (1-7): In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between “Strong” arguments and “Weak” arguments as they relate to the question. “Strong” arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the questions. “Weak” arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the questions or may not be directly related to a trivial aspect of the questions. Each question below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a strong argument and which is a weak agreement.

Give answer
(a) If only argument I is strong
(b) If only argument II is strong
(c) If either I or II is strong
(d) If neither I nor II is strong
(e) If both I and II are strong

 

1. Statement: Should there be only one rate of interest for term deposits of varying durations in banks?
   Arguments:
   I. No, people will refrain from keeping the money for longer duration resulting into reduction of liquidity level of banks.
   II. Yes, this will be much simpler for the common people and they may be encouraged to keep more money in banks.
2. Statements: Should labour reforms be immediately introduced in India?

Arguments:

1. Yes, this will help increase the productivity in all the sectors in general and in the public sector in particular.
2. No, many other countries have not implemented this so far.
3. Statements: Should the system of paying the minimum purchase price for farmers for wheat, rice and the like be scrapped in India?
   Arguments:

1. No, farmers who produce our staple food must get a decent return on their investment and labour in a welfare state like India.

2.Yes, it is an outdated practice which we must discard.

 

Solution(1-3):

1. Ans.(a)

Sol.

The higher rate of interest attracts people to deposit money for a longer duration. If a higher rate of interest is available for a short duration, then people will refrain from keeping the money for a longer duration.

So, arguments I is strong while II is not.

2. Ans. (a)

Sol.

 Argument I is strong because labour reforms will encourage the labour to work more efficiently, which will be helpful in increasing the productivity.

Argument II is not strong because basic needs of India are different from other countries.

3. Ans. (a)

Sol.

Argument I is strong because of the welfare state theory.

Argument II is not strong because it does not give a proper reason.

4. Statement: Should private institutions be given over to government institutions?

Arguments

1. Yes, standard of education will improve.
2. No, the standard of education will diminish.

(a) Only argument I is strong

(b) Only argument II is strong

(c) Either argument I or II is strong

(d) Neither argument I nor II is strong

(e) Both arguments I and II are strong

 

Solution: 4

Both arguments are incorrect since the standard of education of an institution, in general, cannot be related to whether the institution is private or a government one.

 

5. Statement: Should schools in India have only one board of education?

Arguments:

1. Yes, it will create uniformity and equality in education.
2. No, it will reduce chances of either quality education or/and may affect literacy rate.

(a) Only argument I is strong

(b) Only argument II is strong

(c) Either argument I or II is strong

(d) Neither argument I nor II is strong

(e) Both arguments I and II are strong

 

Solution: 2

India is a huge country with many languages, cultures, and religions. Under such circumstances, where many students are dropping out, if the system is made restricted to a certain language or medium, there might be a serious drop in the literacy rate of the country.

 

6. Statement: Is cashless economy the right way for India to become digitalized?

Argument:

1. Yes, we live in a digital age and so it’s luxury.
2. No, India has a wide population that is illiterate and hence, there has to be an education for the same instead of plunging the country into a new system.

(a) Only argument I is strong

(b) Only argument II is strong

(c) Either argument I or II is strong

(d) Neither argument I nor II is strong Incorrect

(e) Both arguments I and II are strong

 

Solution: 2

Having a cashless economy is one of the aims of digital India campaign by the government. Option 1 is not the correct answer as it provides a weak argument in support of the question. However, the second option is correct as it provides a logical argument of why the imposition of the cashless economy might not be the best option.

 

7. Statement: Should the government impose a ban on luxury resorts?

Arguments:

1. No, affluent tourists would have no place to stay as they will not stay in lesser resorts.
2. Yes, they facilitate operation of international criminals.

(a)Only argument I is strong

(b) Only argument II is strong

(c) Either argument I or II is strong

(d) Neither argument I nor II is strong

(e) Both arguments I and II are strong

 

Solution: 1

Here, we do not have any evidence to show that international criminals operate in luxury resorts. Also, even if they do, a ban cannot be imposed on all resorts. This is a weak argument. The other argument is strong because affluent tourists stay in luxury resorts and do not stay in lesser resorts. The government cannot, without any reason, ban the affluent from doing what they want and thereby curtail the rights of one section of the society.

 

 

Directions (8- 13): each of the following questions consist of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. Choose the best answer from the given options.

 

8. Statement: Should a lot of money be spent on promoting movies?

Arguments:

1. Yes. It is an essential component of attracting more audience.
2. No. it only leads to wastage of resources.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A or B
• Both A and B

Solution: 1

The benefit of producing a movie lies in the fact that the film earns money along with creative appreciation. These two things are only possible if the viewers watch these movies. The best means to attract viewers is through promotions where the movies are officially introduced allowing the viewers to analyze whether a particular movie is worth meeting their expectations.

Hence, argument A strongly justifies the given statement. Argument B which talks about the wastage of money through promotions is quite weak because promotions are investments so that the gain at the end can be better. It is no way that it can be considered as ‘only’ wastage of money.

Hence, 1 is the correct answer.

 

9. Statement: Should there be compulsory police verification before a person applies for a passport?

Arguments:

1. No. This is a sheer intrusion into the privacy of an individual.
2. Yes. It is a very valuable document and it is necessary to ensure that it does not go into the wrong hands.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A or B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 2

Passports are significant official documents which act as identity proof. Additionally, they can be used to cross the boundary of the home country and it is possible that criminals can escape the country. Thus, it is quite important for an individual to undergo a police verification process to possess a passport. If a delicate document like this goes into the wrong hands, a lot of law and order problems may arise. Thus, argument A which talks about intrusion into privacy is a matter of less concern than the matter of national security. So, B is the only strong argument in relation to the given statement. Hence, 2 is the correct answer.

 

10. Statement: Should taxes on air conditioners be further increased?

Arguments:

1. Yes. The air conditioner is a luxury item and only rich people buy them.
2. No. Air conditioners are bought by the poor too.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A or B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 4

Taxes levied on a particular item does not depend on the financial capacity of the consumers. Hence it cannot be argued whether the tax on air conditioner be increased or decreased depending on the purchasing power of the buyers.

Hence both the arguments are too weak to support the given statement. Thus, the correct answer is 4.

 

11. Statement: Should the practice of transfer of sub-inspectors from police stations of one city to those of another be stopped?

Arguments:

1. No. Transfer of officers is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it.
2. Yes, it involves a lot of government expenditure and causes inconvenience to many in comparison to the benefits it yields.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A nor B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 4

Argument A calls for continuing an official custom just for the sake of it. It does not give any other concrete reason for continuing the routine transfer of sub-inspectors. It is not necessary that it is right to practice a ‘routine administrative matter’. Statement B on the other hand talks about transfers leading to a lot of government expenditure and causing inconvenience to many as compared to the benefits it yields. Now a government should continue or discontinue a practice on the basis of the output yielded. Certainly, if continuing a practice yields better outcome than discontinuing it, the practice should be continued. The concern, thus, should not be the expenditure, procedure or convenience of the people involved in the process.

Hence, neither of the statements is strong enough to support the given statement. The correct answer is 4.

 

12. Statement: Should government services be linked with an academic degree and diploma?

Arguments:

1. No. A large number of people with meagre academic qualifications will apply.
2. No. Importance of higher education will be diminished.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A or B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 2

One of the major reasons for acquiring a higher education is to obtain government jobs. Thus, linking jobs with degrees will render the activity of obtaining higher studies futile. Hence, argument B follows a strong argument in support of the given statement. The first argument is weak because if the provisions are at all changed, even the people with meagre academic qualifications will be deemed to apply. Hence, the correct answer is 2.

 

13. Statement: Should the railways in India be privatized like other private sector enterprises?

Arguments:

1. Yes. This is the only way to bring in competitiveness and provide better services to the public.
2. No this will pose a threat to the national security of our country as multinational companies will enter into the fray.

• Only
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A nor B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 4

Argument A is weak because privatization is not the only means to provide better services to the public. Even the government can take measures to provide good services. Argument B talks about multinational companies posing threat to national security of our country, which is totally a bizarre idea. Multinational companies cannot create national crises which pose threat to the well being of a country. Thus, 4 is the correct answer.

 

14. Statement: A well known English proverb states that you will always attract more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Argument:

1. Flies are pests and can be attracted to their early demise with honey.
2. English proverbs may have double meanings.

• Only Argument I is
• Only Argument II is implicit.
• Either Argument I or II is implicit.
• Neither Argument I nor II is implicit.
• Both the Argument I and II are implicit.

 

Solution: 2

Argument (I) considers the flies to be pests and assumes that one needs to kill them by attracting them with honey. This might be a vague Argument since the statement is a proverb. What is conveyed through a proverb does not necessarily carry the literal meaning but usually they are figurative in nature. So Argument I is not implicit. Since a proverb may have a hidden meaning and it can also be expressing some other point, Argument (II) is more implicit.

Hence option 2 is the correct answer.

 

15. Statement:

Should internal assessment in schools be abolished?

Arguments:

1. Yes. This will help in reducing the possibility of favouritism.
2. No. Teaching faculty will lose control over students.

• Only A
• Only B
• Either A or B
• Neither A or B
• Both A and B

 

Solution: 1

Argument A is strong because there is always a possibility of the practice of favouritism. This will affect the grading system and prove to be unfair to many students. B forms a weak argument because internal assessments are not means to gain control over students. Even if teachers do not evaluate the internal assessments, they will continue to mentor pupil. Hence, option 1 is the correct answer.