Logical Reasoning - Statement and Argument - Discussion
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' arguments) and which is/are 'weak' arguments) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.
Statement: Should workers/employees be allowed to participate in the management of factories in India?
- Yes. It is the present management theory.
- No. Many workers are illiterate and so their contributions will not be of any value.
- Yes. Employees-owned companies generally have higher productivity.
- No. Employee-union ownership drives up salaries and wages.
Is this to say that all managers are shareholders/owners of the companies in which they work?
Anyone explain, please.
Illiteracy does not imply a lack of skill in problem-solving, pattern recognition, systems thinking, management of people, and so many other attributes that make a good manager. If an employee were exceptional in all of these other areas, it would be ill-advised for a management team to not utilize their assets. In addition, a strong management team utilises the best abilities of team members. Thus if one team member were lacking in a skill set, that deficit could be compensated for by organizing managerial roles accordingly. So, a worker who is illiterate my still have great value.
Examine the language used in the argument. "Many workers are illiterate and so their contributions will not be of ANY value. " The word "any" in this context is used as an absolute meaning they would be useless and have nothing to add to a management team. Absolute arguments must be comprehensively proven to make the argument "strong. ".
Argument 3 is weak.
"Employees-owned companies generally have higher productivity".
Saying that employee that own a portion of their company are more productive thus bringing employees in factories into managerial roles to increase productivity is a weak correlation. In the argument, the reason for increased productivity may be from the ownership stake of employees that work on a factory line, and the far majority of employees may not even participate in a managerial role. The correlations are too weak to draw any conclusions.
Thus, none is strong.
First, it is about workers as a group, so unless ALL workers are illiterate, the literacy of any individual worker is of diminished relevance.
Second, nothing is said about the manner of participation in management--it could entail consulting with workers on matters where literacy is wholly irrelevant, like scheduling shifts, or decisions on using different tools or equipment.
I don't see how illiteracy has got anything to do with inability to negotiate a higher wage.
Also, higher productivity doesn't necessarily mean low wages. III doesn't affect IV. Germany has high productivity and high wage.
IV seems pretty strong to me because an employee-union will not sacrifice their self-interest and higher wages is in their self-interest.
No. Many workers are illiterate and so their contributions will not be of any value.
Either it should be YES. Because literate people are good for management either NO. Because workers aren't literate.