Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion

Having a political environment at college isn't bad ? Why is this statement used to strengthen the option 'no'?

Students unions in the college are mainly for raising issues of students in front of management of colleges and universities. It is not for political leadership development of students. I think both statements not follow.

I don't think Statement 1 follows, but I think Statement 2 does. Statement 1 is fairly vague and the creation of a political atmosphere (even if it does happen) does not necessarily have to be a bad thing (and it's been stated in a very negative sense here). Statement 2 is a general argument that is presented time and again as a universal truth. Students (if not all of them) are still the ones who shall form the political leadership for the future. Hence, I believe that only Statement 2 is a viable option.

I have seen during my graduation. What type of environment is created between the college students. So, in my view option 1 is correct. Because it divides them into groups. Which harms their future also.

@ALL.

If anybody wants to be a politician there is no need of gain political experience in college. Politician means to serve the people by heart either in a state or country. PM Modi says think to do something rather than thinking of achieving something. If students gain political experience in colleges to do politics in future rather than thinking of serving the people. There is no need of such politicians. Thus arg 2 is not correct. Students unions are generally made to manage and reach student's problem or opinion to the college authority by the union leader. But now many of the universities do politics by group separation or division.

So that disturbances happen in studies and college environment is fully disturbed. So I think argument 1 is fully correct.

Argument 1: Only Mentions it will lead to form political environment, but doesn't link how? Certainly, there is a reasonable doubt. So Argument 1 doesn't follow.

Argument 2: Provides an established fact, that the students are/will be future political leaders. But again it doesn't directly link to setting up of the student union.

Both the arguments are WEAK.

Actually, if the QUESTION / STATEMENT have been put up like - Should elections be held among students in college/university?

Arguments 1 & 2 may had followed!

The answer provided for this question is a bit narrow.

I think that students unions play a major role in helping solve problems faced by other students to make sure to build a vibrant student community.

So, what if the political environment is established in the campus, it has nothing to do with education. Hence, I think statement 1 is weak.

I think none of the statements is addressing the real reason of unionisation in a college. The purpose is to stand up for the problems faced by the students. The two options are valid but not strong.

Both arg 1 and arg 2 are both strong. But the problem exists in choosing the correct option, as basically in this sort of question the option is either 1 or 2, but here it is given both. In my opinion, both the argument have different direction respectively. Both are practically possible.