# Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

### Discussion :: Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No.32)

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.

32.

Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?

Arguments:

1. Yes. This will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgement for casting their vote.
2. No. In a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no restrictions.

 [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, if there were less candidates, the voters would find it easy to make a choice. So, argument I holds. Also, every person satisfying the conditions laid down by the Constitution must be given an opportunity and should not be denied the same just to cut down the number of candidates. So, argument II also holds strong.

 Nitin said: (Mar 12, 2012) Only argument B is correct. we can not restrict the no. of contestants simply to increase the utility of the vote. If that be the case then one can also say that multi party system also leads to inefficiency. because votes get divided and we dont get a clear verdict.

 Nkaore said: (Jan 11, 2014) I agree with @Nitin. Its not that if no of contestants are many the people will find it diff to vote. Argument B is strong.

 Johnny said: (Jul 27, 2014) Argument one doesn't connect the term "considered judgement" to the fact that there are less candidates. There's no reason, given in the statement, that one causes the other. However, argument two clearly states that democratic principles imply "any" candidate should be able to run, a direct argument toward the number of candidates. Therefore, only 2 is strong.

 Rajin said: (Oct 24, 2014) How option I is justified in democratic country like India.

 Trishul said: (Jul 10, 2015) I agree with @Johnny here. Having 5 candidates or 10 doesn't make difference to voters who have a 'considered' opinion.

 Bharat Bhushan said: (Jan 14, 2016) I think it is not a healthy argument in a type of democracy, which our country has.

 Asim said: (May 3, 2020) Both arguments are opposite of each other and strong. So, C should be the answer.

 Yash said: (May 25, 2020) Agree, thanks @Nitin.