Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Argument - Section 2 (Q.No. 11)
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.
11.
Statement: Should persons convicted of criminal offences in the past be allowed to contest elections in India?
Arguments:
- No. Such persons cannot serve the cause of the people and country.
- Yes. It is democracy - let people decide whom to vote.
Answer: Option
Explanation:
Clearly, persons with criminal background cannot stand to serve as the representatives of the common people. So, they should not be allowed to contest elections. Thus, only argument I holds, while II does not.
Discussion:
13 comments Page 1 of 2.
Rajinder Kumar said:
1 decade ago
Criminal offence may be done unknowingly so let the people decide to elect or not in democracy.
Tom said:
1 decade ago
I disagree with this one. The second is a perfectly valid argument.
Harold said:
1 decade ago
This is not a logical answer to the question. It is a personal opinion. The question states: 'You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument. '.
The second option was a stronger argument because it provides reasoning and justification for the claim whilst the first option only expresses a personal opinion. I believe that this is incorrect.
The second option was a stronger argument because it provides reasoning and justification for the claim whilst the first option only expresses a personal opinion. I believe that this is incorrect.
Say X said:
1 decade ago
I would say that 2nd option is equally true. Sometimes there are false charges against some people who are doing their job honestly, only to malign them. I completely agree with what @Harold just pointed out.
Trishul said:
1 decade ago
Because a person has criminal records in the past doesn't mean he has nothing to offer to the country. This logic is not sound maybe he has repented and wants to do better. It should be left to the voters to decide his worth.
Ali said:
9 years ago
Same thoughts, option two is stronger. If it's democracy, then let people decide.
Ifuba Ivan said:
9 years ago
Well, I believe option II is the strongest.
Someone can reform to be a good person after having been convicted and served the sentence.
Someone can reform to be a good person after having been convicted and served the sentence.
Max said:
9 years ago
A is Downright illogical, the meaning of democracy is that people decide who their representatives are. So the absurd argument that "they cannot serve as the representation of the people" is ludicrous unless and until the people say so.
Akanksha said:
9 years ago
B is the perfect option. We are a democratic country after all.
(1)
Akanksha said:
9 years ago
B is the perfect option. We are a democratic country after all.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers