Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion
Discussion Forum : Statement and Argument - Section 1 (Q.No. 32)
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.
32.
Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?
Arguments:
- Yes. This will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgement for casting their vote.
- No. In a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no restrictions.
Answer: Option
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.
Discussion:
11 comments Page 1 of 2.
Nitin said:
1 decade ago
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:
1 decade ago
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:
1 decade ago
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:
1 decade ago
How option I is justified in democratic country like India.
Trishul said:
1 decade ago
I agree with @Johnny here. Having 5 candidates or 10 doesn't make difference to voters who have a 'considered' opinion.
BHARAT BHUSHAN said:
10 years ago
I think it is not a healthy argument in a type of democracy, which our country has.
Asim said:
5 years ago
Both arguments are opposite of each other and strong. So, C should be the answer.
(2)
Yash said:
5 years ago
Agree, thanks @Nitin.
Soumya said:
4 years ago
"Considered judgment" means that we carefully consider the complexity of the problems we face and weigh the possible intended and unintended consequences of alternative solutions. So, yes option E is correct.
Arindam Gupta said:
2 years ago
For me, the right option is A as in a democratic country like us, even 1% of total eligible persons become candidates in an election, the number will be countless and the complexity and expenditures will be limitless. Hence, I don't think this is practical. There are so many good students in our country, but the seats for JEE, etc are limited. Then there is the problem of limiting the number of candidates for election.
Am I right? Anyone please clarify.
Am I right? Anyone please clarify.
Post your comments here:
Quick links
Quantitative Aptitude
Verbal (English)
Reasoning
Programming
Interview
Placement Papers