Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

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.

5. 

Statement: Should India give away Kashmir to Pakistan?

Arguments:

  1. No. Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India.
  2. Yes. This would help settle conflicts.

[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, India cannot part with a state that is a major foreign exchange earner to it. So, argument I holds strong. Further, giving away a piece of land unconditionally and unreasonably is no solution to settle disputes. So, argument II is vague.

Pranav Maddineni said: (Jul 4, 2011)  
But due to this many terrorist attacks are going on in India and many are losing their lives. But we cant accept giving the land easily without any reason. It makes many countries misunderstand that we are coward people.

Md Imran said: (Aug 10, 2011)  
We should not give kashmir to pakistan just because it is a major foreign exchange earner. Isn't our kashmir?

Saksham said: (Sep 10, 2011)  
"No. Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India."

I dont think this argument is strong as it indirectly implies that giving away other not so profitable states will be justified.

Again, i get puzzled in such scenarios : whether to forget everything, every logic and focus on the given arguments for arriving at the answer or think rationally.

Any help would be appreciated.

Sundar said: (Mar 12, 2012)  
@All

Assume the given question like given below. Then try to answer it.

-------
Statement: Should Country-A give away State-A to Country-B?

Arguments:

I. No. State-A is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for Country-A.

II. Yes. This would help settle conflicts.
-------

Hope this method will help you to find the answer!

Mohit said: (Apr 26, 2012)  
Conditions in kashmir are not very good. People are afraid of going there, hence it brings less people in the state so how it will be helpful in earning foreign exchange.
I don't agree with A!

Onibaba said: (May 10, 2012)  
Both statements are weak for me.

Karthik said: (Jan 26, 2013)  
Both the statements are weak for me. Not giving kashmir just to earn foreign exchange is meaning less.

Ali Akhtar Khan said: (Feb 8, 2013)  
Both the statements are weak for me. Not giving Kashmir just to earn foreign exchange so it is meaning less.

Dinesh Kc said: (Feb 28, 2013)  
I agree with you people. Both are weak arguments. Kashmir have no foreign currency output so its a wrong arg. Itself. II is also weak or wrong as its not proven.

Atreyo Banerjee said: (Feb 28, 2014)  
Both are weak because the statement says that because it's a state that earns foreign exchange and it's beautiful we won't give it, what if the state wasn't beautiful and didn't earn foreign exchange, would we have parted with it? It's too far fetched an argument. Hence, both arguments are invalid. Criticisms are welcome. Thank you!

Prashant said: (Mar 2, 2014)  
I think that both the statements are weak. If there exists a student union then it is not going to create a political atmosphere in the campus. One counter point is that the scope of politics when it comes to campaigning for a electoral candidate deals with a larger number of people and involves more money whereas student union elections are limited to only students. Also it is not necessary that students want to become the future "political" leaders.

Tamanna said: (Jul 25, 2014)  
I think both the statements are strong. In one way, we can end this conflict between Pakistan and India by giving them Kashmir. We can save many peoples' life and can create a strong bond between the two neighboring countries. But the other way round, it will seem that India is coward and yes of course, we can be in great loss as Kashmir is known as heaven of India and we earn much foreign exchange.

Albertanny said: (Aug 11, 2014)  
Statement and argument questions doesn't look for the truth, we need to accept what the truth is given in the statement, if we don't accept this it will be very difficult for us to answer such ambiguous questions. It it would be advisable to not move on with the subject's truth[comparing with present].

Kasinath @Hyd said: (Sep 2, 2014)  
I: Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India.

The Statement means that if the STATE is Not beautiful or not Gaining any foreign exchange for India. Then it can be given to any country as it is of no Use. The Statement very very WEAK.

And Every person in a country believes his STATE as beautiful. So How, one can judge the BEAUTY of STATE.

Kasinath @Hyd said: (Sep 2, 2014)  
II: Yes. This would help settle conflicts.

If we give Kashmir to Pakistan to settle the Conflicts.

[Assume]
Then China will ask for Arunachal Pradesh. Bangladesh will ask some other state. Sri Lanka will ask Tamilnadu. shall we give all the states like this to lesser conflicts. Absolutely No.

This sentence too is very very weak.

Ashu said: (Sep 19, 2014)  
Neither statement is strong.

Random_Dude said: (Oct 27, 2014)  
All the disputes in Kashmir are because of separatists. But, giving it away to Pakistan may or may not bring peace to that area. So the second statement is not strong.

Also, Kashmir is now just being a burden to India, present situation there doesn't make it a tourist place.

Also we are spending a lot of money for military. So, the first statement is not strong as well.

Suraj Verma said: (Oct 29, 2014)  
Both are very cheap arguments. Entire Pakistan, Bangladesh even Afghanistan was the part of India. Kashmir is not something that can be used for earning money.

Every part of India is earning some money. I was supposing that I would find a wise argument.

Satish said: (Mar 25, 2015)  
Can any one help in solving statements and arguments questions?

Is there any logic hidden behind solving these type of questions?

Vikas said: (Aug 15, 2015)  
This is a debatable topic. How can someone correct one answer and set other answer as wrong?

Prateik Vishwakarma said: (Mar 18, 2016)  
Siachen area does not make us earn any foreign exchange then also we are protecting that area from china so none I strong.

Sumit said: (Aug 24, 2016)  
Argument one support for the commercial importance of Kashmir and hence it is strong.

Kartik said: (Dec 21, 2016)  
Yeah, definitely whether an area earns foreign exchange or not, we can't let our property to any country.

Aditi said: (Dec 22, 2016)  
For sure we should not give away Kashmir but just because it earns foreign exchange is wrong according to me.

If we stick to this logic then we should give away all other states which don't earn foreign exchange for us.

Sudhanshu said: (Apr 4, 2017)  
Yes, you are right @Aditi.

Abhishek said: (Apr 25, 2017)  
Both statements are weak as Kashmir is a relegious hub and not because it exchanges notes.

Yashasvi said: (Jul 26, 2017)  
We do not preserve something because its beautiful. If something has been a part of us, it shall remain as it is. So, I is wrong. We should not part away with Kashmir because it belongs to us since the olden days.

Sayan said: (Sep 2, 2017)  
The answer should be neither 1 or 2 because Kashmir is a part of India, not a tourist spot.

Anandan said: (Jun 20, 2019)  
Both are weak arguments. Just because of earnings, India is not fighting for Kashmir. It has been in India ever since Kashmir originated were once Hindu population was more. After the invasion of Afghanise and Mughal, Muslim population started increasing. India is a secular nation where both Hindu and Muslim live together and Kashmir is one of the greatest examples of it. In short, it is about a matter of pride rather than revenue.

Sai said: (Apr 7, 2020)  
The answer should be neither 1 or 2 because Kashmir is a part of India, not a tourist spot.

Post your comments here:

Name *:

Email   : (optional)

» Your comments will be displayed only after manual approval.