# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

### Discussion :: Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No.3)

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.

• (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.

3.

Statement: Should India make efforts to harness solar energy to fulfil its energy requirements?

Arguments:

1. Yes, Most of the energy sources used at present is exhaustible.
2. No. Harnessing solar energy requires a lot of capital, which India lacks in.

 [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

Explanation:

Clearly, harnessing solar energy will be helpful as it is an inexhaustible resource unlike other resources. So, argument I holds. But argument II is vague as solar energy is the cheapest form of energy.

 Ramesh said: (Jul 5, 2011) Solar energy is not a cheapest form. The capital investment is huge ..... as solar cell cost is very high, it is not affordable

 Sandeep K.M said: (Sep 1, 2011) I think this is a reasoning question and not a GK question so we are supposed to accept the facts given and not question it on the basis of our GK. If we accept the fact given in the second argument to be true, then the 2nd argument has to be considered strong because it is realistic , related to the subject and consequences mentioned is not negligable.

 Ketan said: (Sep 18, 2011) According to me both arguments should be strong. Not as a point of gk but yet we can't neglect any of one.

 Kannav said: (Sep 16, 2012) I agree with ketan.

 Ayush said: (Mar 18, 2013) We can't use our prior knowledge. These type of questions only attract negative marks: (there is no rule. How can one say solar energy does not require a lot of capital.

 Daniel said: (May 30, 2014) I agree with @Ketan. Both are strong. But the way it was answered shows that GK was involved. The statement mentions nothing about the cost of solar energy.

 Dheeraj said: (Jul 9, 2014) I agree with Ist option this is on argument and assumption based we don't know how many we have but if we plant solar system for one we saves our present exhaustible source.

 Patel said: (Aug 9, 2014) According to the explanation, solar energy is the cheapest. However nowhere is it mentioned that solar energy is the cheapest. Obviously then it follows that this statement is based upon general knowledge or prior knowledge. Also according to the second statement, the initial cost is too high since India lacks the capital, so how can that be ignored?

 Neela said: (Aug 12, 2014) According to me both reasons are strong enough. We cannot assume that solar energy is a cheap source of energy since it is nowhere mentioned in the argument.

 Kanu said: (Aug 15, 2014) Both the statements are strong as Solar energy requires a huge capital to be harnessed though after it has been deployed it provides cheapest form of energy.

 Aubrey said: (Sep 10, 2014) To me both argument are strong solar energy need allot of capital to plant it.

 Shubham said: (Dec 5, 2014) Merely stating that India lacks capital isn't a strong argument.

 Vishnu said: (Dec 3, 2015) Both are strong, implementing a solar power plant needs huge amount of investment.

 Abhinav said: (May 26, 2016) I agree @Vishnu. Both are strong statements.

 Mohanish said: (Nov 8, 2016) The statement is weak as it says that India lacks capital but in question, it is saying that effort should carry out to harness energy, as a just shortage of capital can not be a strong reason for trying something. This statement itself is opinion based on no proper evidence cited for its being costly. In such questions, mere opinion based arguments are not strong while in the case of 1st argument it is universally accepted fact.

 Reetika said: (Jul 23, 2017) Statement argument based question are based on GK also, so second argument is also strong. Solar is not a cheap form of energy and not much efficient, so capital investment is high.

 Benoit Mayer said: (Aug 31, 2017) I agree that both responses are logically valid. Even if one considers solar energy to be relatively cheap, it is capital-intensive - the lack of capital is actually an issue for the devleopment of solar energy.

 Punith said: (Jan 1, 2019) I think both options 1 &2 are strong. That require huge capital to build solar cells initially.

 Sankalp Uniyal said: (Apr 6, 2019) Both the arguments are equally strong as although Solar Energy costs no money as it is naturally derived from the sun, the instalments of Solar Panels is equally important.

 Vetri Venthan said: (Dec 25, 2020) Both 1 & 2 are correct in my point of view since huge capital amount initially required.