# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

Discussion Forum : Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No. 9)
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.

• (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.

9.

Statement: Should Indian scientists working abroad be called back to India?

Arguments:

1. Yes. They must serve the motherland first and forget about discoveries, honours, facilities and all.
2. No. We have enough talent; let them stay where they want.
Only argument I is strong
Only argument II is strong
Either I or II is strong
Neither I nor II is strong
Both I and II are strong
Explanation:
Clearly, every person must be free to work wherever he wants and no compulsion should be made to confine one to one's own country. So, argument I is vague. However, talented scientists can be of great benefit to the nation and some alternatives as special incentives or better prospects may be made available to them to retain them within their motherland. So, argument II also does not hold.
Discussion:
5 comments Page 1 of 1.

Pankhuri said:   4 years ago
How the second option is valid? Please tell me.

Kevin said:   5 years ago
I am finding this kind of question to be disturbing. I think it might be because I have not taken the right kind of philosophy class. I did take an online course at Coursera about "How to Think, Reason, and Argue" that might be helpful. That is the only place I've had any discussion of what constitutes a stronger or less strong argument in a context like this. This is certainly not merely logic, but applied logic, and but require us to understand the world in a particular way. In the first option the connector "must" sounds strong but it isn't, and there is much more reasoning that would be needed to connect that conclusion to the premises and/or reality.

I find the explanation offered helpful in understanding the 2nd option: that they are OK where they are doesn't address why it wouldn't be beneficial to have them return.

I will try to discuss the other confusing logic questions in comments too. The ones where newspapers report something or someone puts up a billboard are confusing (in the U.S. we have plenty of billboards that should not be respected). I mainly enjoyed the one where I got to think about whether there have to exist any vegetables in order to figure out whether some rain is vegetables.