Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument

Exercise :: Statement and Argument - Section 1

Each question given below consists of a statement, 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' argument.

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 and
  • (E) If both I and II are strong.

31. 

Statement: Should government jobs in rural areas have more incentives?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. Incentives are essential for attracting government servants there.
  2. No. Rural areas are already cheaper, healthier and less complex than big cities. So ? Why offer extra incentives!

A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
E. Both I and II are strong

Answer: Option A

Explanation:

Clearly, government jobs in rural areas are underlined with several difficulties. In lieu of these, extra incentives are needed. So, only argument I holds strong.

32. 

Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. This will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgement for casting their vote.
  2. No. In a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no restrictions.

A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
E. Both I and II are strong

Answer: Option E

Explanation:

Clearly, if there were less candidates, the voters would find it easy to make a choice. So, argument I holds. Also, every person satisfying the conditions laid down by the Constitution must be given an opportunity and should not be denied the same just to cut down the number of candidates. So, argument II also holds strong.

33. 

Statement: Should so much money be spent on advertisements?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. It is an essential concomitant in a capitalist economy.
  2. No. It leads to wastage of resources.

A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
E. Both I and II are strong

Answer: Option A

Explanation:

Clearly, the advertisements are/the means to introduce people with the product and its advantages. So, argument I holds strong. But argument II is vague because advertisements are an investment for better gain and not a, wastage.

34. 

Statement: Should all the legislators be forced to resign from their profession?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. They will be able to devote more time for the country.
  2. No, nobody will contest election.

A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
E. Both I and II are strong

Answer: Option A

Explanation:

The legislators should surely not be engaged in any other profession because only then will they be able to work with devotion. So, argument I holds. Also, if such a law is enforced, only those people will contest elections who are really prepared to work for the country. So, argument II is vague.

35. 

Statement: Should 'computer knowledge' be made a compulsory subject for all the students at secondary school level?

Arguments:

  1. No, our need is 'bread' for everyone, we cannot follow western models.
  2. Yes. We cannot compete in the international market without equipping our children with computers.

A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
E. Both I and II are strong

Answer: Option B

Explanation:

Nowadays, computers have entered all walks of life and children need to be prepared for the same. So, argument II is strong. Argument I holds no relevance.