Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

Discussion :: Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No.31)

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.

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

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.

 Samrath Bedi said: (Apr 9, 2012) Purchasing power of rupee is less in urban places and more in rural places. Therefore incentives should be same or should be high for urban places. Both the arguments are strong. Therefore C should the answer.

 Dinesh said: (Mar 1, 2013) ARG II is an strong arg and is self explanatory.

 Rutvick Gor said: (Sep 4, 2014) Argument1 is for sure not strong as the statement talks about more incentives and 1 says only incentives are required to attract people, so according to me answer should be none of the above option C.

 Pavan said: (Jun 5, 2015) Argument 2 is correct argument because in rural areas many people are lack of employment so for them getting a job is important than getting more incentives. So B should be the answer.

 Vinod said: (Jul 27, 2015) C - Either of the argument. To attract people in rural area it may be number of the idea. On other side the expenses is very less in rural areas.

 Shale said: (Nov 15, 2015) Wow, well of course extra incentives should be offered. Its a government job, no matter where it is, what it entitles, or how long it will be there, when you work for the government you need extra incentives. With no incentives, who would want to work for the government? Every government job has some sort of incentive or perk, or no one would fill that spot. I was wrong with my original answer option B. It is quite clearly option A.

 Asheesh Tiwari said: (Jul 16, 2016) Both argument are strong as both are the prevail notion of truth as no employ want to work in rural areas if incentive is given then they will be happily willing to work there and 2 statement is an established fact hence both are strong.

 Kirti said: (Oct 29, 2016) According to me, Both arguments are strong.

 Priyanka said: (Jan 28, 2019) Accoding to me, both arguments is strong because 2nd one is planning for saving the government money.

 Yash said: (May 25, 2020) According to me, only argument 2 is strong.

 Rutiksha said: (Oct 12, 2020) I think argument II is strong because in rural areas almost all things are cheaper then why should we give more incentives. In another hand, to attract in a rural area other ideas can be there.

 Pranay Jain said: (Apr 30, 2021) I think both arguments are week as the reasons for the same are not at all logical. Argument 1 is yes and we should increase the incentive in the village to make it equal to urban areas but the reason stated above is not at all clear. Argument 2 - it is giving again a vague reason for the argument as the statement has not at all pointed about a particular village and it's an argument not an assumption that we will assume it on our own. The answer will be D.