1. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should the railways in India be privatized in a phased manner like other public sector enterprises?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This is the only way to bring in competitiveness and provide better services to the public.
II. No. This will pose a threat to the national security of our country as multinationals will enter into the fray.
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
Explanation: Privatization would no doubt lead to better services. But saying that this is the 'only way' is wrong. So, argument I does not hold. Argument II also seems to be vague.
2. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should internal assessment in colleges be abolished?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will help in reducing the possibility of favouritism.
II. No, teaching faculty will lose control over students.
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
Explanation: Abolishing the internal assessment would surely reduce favouritism on personal grounds because the teachers would not be involved in examination system so that they cannot extend personal benefits to anyone. So, argument I holds strong. But it will not affect the control of teaching faculty on students because still the teachers would be teaching them. So, argument II is vague.
3. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should all the unauthorized structures in the city be demolished?
Arguments :
I. No. Where will the people residing in such houses live?
II. Yes. This will give a clear message to general public and they will refrain from constructing unauthorized buildings.
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
Explanation: The demolition of unauthorized buildings would teach a lesson to the unscrupulous builders and also serve as a warning for the citizens not to indulge in such activities in the future. This is essential, as unauthorized constructions impose undue burden on the city's infrastructure. So, only argument II holds strong.
4. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the Central Government?
Arguments :
I. No. The political party in power should have the freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed.
II. Yes. The number of ministers should be restricted to a certain percentage of the total number of seats in the parliament to avoid unnecessary expenditure
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
Explanation: Clearly, there should be some norms regarding the number of ministers in the Government, as more number of ministers would unnecessarily add to the Government expenditure. So, argument II holds strong; Also, giving liberty to the party in power could promote extension of unreasonable favour to some people at the cost of government funds. So, argument I does not hold.
5. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should foreign films be banned in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. They depict an alien culture which adversely affects our values.
II. No. Foreign films are of a high artistic standard.
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
Explanation: Clearly, foreign films depict the alien culture but this only helps in learning more. So, argument I does not hold. Also, the reason stated in argument II is not strong enough in contradicting the ban. So, it also does not hold.
6. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should an organization like UNO be dissolved?
Arguments :
I. Yes. With cold war coming to an end, such organizations have no role to play
II. No, In the absence of such organizations there may be a world war.
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
Explanation: An organization like UNO is meant to maintain peace all over and will always serve to prevent conflicts between countries. So, its role never ends. So, argument I does not hold. Also, lack of such an organization may in future lead to increased mutual conflicts and international wars, on account of lack of a common platform for mutual discussions. So, argument II holds.
7.Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should there be no place of interview in selection?
Arguments :
I. Yes, it is very subjective in assessment.
II. No. It is the only instrument to judge candidates' motives and personality
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
Explanation: Clearly, besides interview, there can be other modes of written examination to judge candidates' motives. So argument II is not strong enough. However, the interview is a subjective assessment without doubt. So, argument I holds.
8. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should family planning be made compulsory in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. Looking to the miserable conditions in India, there is no other go.
II. No. In India there are people of various religions and family planning is against the tenets of some of the religions.
a) Only argument I is strong
b) Only argument II is strong
c) Either I or II is strong
d) Both I and II are strong
Explanation: Family planning is an essential step to curb population growth. So, argument I holds strong. Also, family planning being against the tenets of some of the Indian religions, it is not necessary to make it compulsory. Instead, it can be enforced by creating public awareness of the benefits of family planning. So, argument II also holds.
9. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should income tax be abolished in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. It is an unnecessary burden on the wage earners.
II. No. It is a good source of revenue.
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
Explanation: Income-tax is levied so that every citizen can contribute a share of his earning towards the infrastructural development of the nation. So, argument I seems to be vague. However, income-tax is no doubt a good source of revenue for the government. Hence, argument II holds strong.
10. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should there be a ceiling on the salary of top executives of multinationals in our country?
Arguments :
I. Yes. Otherwise it would lead to unhealthy competition and our own industry would not be able to withstand that.
II. No. With the accent on liberalization of economy, any such move would be counter-productive. Once the economy picks up, this disparity will be reduced.
a) Only argument I is strong
b) Only argument II is strong
c) Either I or II is strong
d) Both I and II are strong
Explanation: In the absence of such a ceiling, the companies would be involved in a mutual competition of salaries, in a bid to attract the most competent professionals. So, argument I holds. Also, the prospects of increase in salary would encourage the officials to perform better in the interest of the company they serve, which would otherwise not be so if a ceiling is imposed. So, argument II also holds strong.