Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No. 28)
Directions to Solve
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.
28.
Statement: Should non-vegetarian food be totally banned in our country?
Arguments:
- Yes. It is expensive and therefore it is beyond the means of most people in our country.
- No. Nothing should be banned in a democratic country like ours.
Answer: Option
Explanation:
Clearly, restriction on the diet of people will be denying them their basic human right. So, only argument II holds.
Discussion:
20 comments Page 1 of 2.
Stuti said:
4 years ago
The right answer should be option D.
By 'nothing' does it mean that even drugs or guns shouldn't be banned from the country? Every Life-threatening thing needs to be banned. It's doesn't have anything to do with democracy. It's for the protection of the Democratic people only. How is statement 2 strong in any sense?
By 'nothing' does it mean that even drugs or guns shouldn't be banned from the country? Every Life-threatening thing needs to be banned. It's doesn't have anything to do with democracy. It's for the protection of the Democratic people only. How is statement 2 strong in any sense?
(7)
Attapattu said:
1 decade ago
Yes, isn't that too extreme? The use of the phrase 'nothing should be banned' indicates that even if every household has a rocket launcher and army tank, the government cannot impose any restriction or can on this. How is that correct?
(1)
Anchal said:
7 years ago
The answer should be D.
Because how can we say that nothing can be banned taking into the consideration of the harmful and illegal things?
Because how can we say that nothing can be banned taking into the consideration of the harmful and illegal things?
Bhaskar said:
1 decade ago
Statement 2 says "nothing" should be banned ! It means we cannot ban illegal or harmful things also? How can it be a strong argument?
Philip said:
1 decade ago
The statement 2 says that nothing should be banned, but the que is whether non veg food is to banned.
ANIKET said:
7 years ago
The 2nd argument is vague as it says NOTHING SHOULD BE BANNED which is not appropriate.
Ankit said:
1 decade ago
The second statement is too strong and generalise how it can be the answer.
Garry said:
6 years ago
"Nothing" isn't feel too ambiguous? How can this be answer?
Yunus said:
1 decade ago
In the statement it was not said that the country is democratic.
Shikher said:
9 years ago
How can 2nd argument be strong ?
I think 2nd one is vague.
I think 2nd one is vague.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers