Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

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.

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.

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].

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.

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.

Neither statement is strong.

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.

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.

Can any one help in solving statements and arguments questions?

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

This is a debatable topic. How can someone correct one answer and set other answer as wrong?