# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

### Discussion :: Statement and Argument - Section 2 (Q.No.2)

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.

2.

Statement: Should government stop spending huge amounts of money on international sports?

Arguments:

1. Yes. This money can be utilized for upliftment of the poor.
2. No. Sports persons will be frustrated and will not get international exposure.

 [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, spending money on sports cannot be avoided merely because it can be spent on socio-economic problems. So, argument I does not hold. Also, if the expenses on sports are curtailed, the sports persons would face lack of facilities and training and our country will lag behind in the international sports competitions. So, II holds.

 Raghu said: (Nov 11, 2011) Why it is unavoided, Is not in the governament hand? so stop spending huge money on sports to getrid socio-economic problem. So I think option A is correct. ? can any tell me if I'm wrong?

 Michelle said: (Aug 13, 2012) I also think that the money which spent on the sports can be utilized for upliftment of the poor. Only international sport groups hold a lots of money, not into our society. Socio-economic problem seems to be not solved by the money from sports.

 Luke said: (Aug 20, 2015) There is no correlation between not spending money on sports and spending money on the poor. So, even though I chose A, I see the point. The reason I chose A and not B is that I think A is a stronger argument than B. The word "huge" in argument II is what made me chose I. Quite probably less money than a "huge" amount could be spent on international sports with enough money for training, exposure, etc. If the word "huge" were not in there, II would have been a strong argument. As it is stated now, I think D should be the correct answer.

 Avinash said: (Sep 10, 2015) What does the 'huge' mean? We can spend only d required money. And rest on poor.! Then why option B?

 Teja said: (Feb 22, 2016) India is a developing country for the past few years so if we invest money on poor then our country will be a developed country within few years better to invest more money on poor boy on sports. Moreover sports persons are few if they have lack of facilities only those people gets affected but there are many who don't have food, shelter etc basic needs.

 Seung Won said: (Aug 18, 2017) There's no need to spend 'huge' amount of money to uplift the poor. Just some money from here and there will do. For argument II, I think that II is also wrong because government spending much money on a sport is nothing to deal with sports guys being exposed internationally. Look at the example of KIm-Yuna, who managed to be #1 in skating without much of Korean government's financial support.

 Anandan said: (Jun 20, 2019) The word "Huge" here is clearly stating the excessiveness than required. So, there is no harm to use that money for social cause. Sportsmen require the basic things that will help them to become better every time.

Name *:

Email   : (optional)