1. Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by four arguments I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should trade unions be banned completely?
Arguments :
I. Yes. Workers can concentrate on production.
II. No. This is the only way through which employees can put their demands before the management.
III. Yes. Employees get their illegal demands fulfilled through these unions.
IV. No. Trade unions are not banned in other economically advanced countries.
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, trade unions provide a common platform for the workers to voice their demands and protests and thus ensure that they are not subdued or exploited. So, argument II holds strong, while I and III do not. Besides, the idea of imitation of other countries in the implementation of a certain policy holds no relevance. So, argument IV also does not hold strong.
2. Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should the public sector undertakings be kilo wed to adopt hire and fire policy?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will help the public sector undertakings to get rid of non-performing employees and reward the performing employees.
II. No. This will give an unjust handle to the management and they may use it indiscriminately.
III. Yes. This will help increase the level of efficiency of these organizations and these will become profitable establishments.
a) Only argument I is strong
b) Only argument II is strong
c) Either I or II is strong
d) Only I and III is strong
Explanation: 'Hire and fire policy' implies 'taking up the performing employees and discarding the non-performing ones'. Clearly, such a policy would stand out to encourage employees to work hard and devotedly to retain their jobs and thus enhance productivity and profitability of the organizations. So, both arguments I and III hold strong. Argument II seems to be vague in the light of this.
3. Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Is caste-based reservation policy in professional colleges justified?
Arguments :
I. Yes. The step is a must to bring the underprivileged at par with the privileged ones.
II. No. It obstructs the establishment of a classless society.
III. Yes. This will help the backward castes and classes of people to come out of the oppression of upper caste people.
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, capability is an essential criteria for a profession and reservation cannot ensure capable workers. So, neither I nor III holds strong. However, making one caste more privileged than the other through reservations would hinder the objectives of a classless society. So, argument II holds strong.
4. Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should there be a complete ban on genetically modified imported seeds?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will boost the demand of domestically developed seeds.
II. No. This is the only way to increase production substantially.
III. Yes. Genetically modified products will adversely affect the health of those who consume these products
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: Genetically modified imported seeds have been specially formulated to increase the yield and quality of produce. So, argument II is strong. Besides, increase in production holds much more significance than the sale of domestically produced seeds. Thus, argument I does not hold. Also, the genetically modified seeds result in a producer of finer quality which is no way harmful to the consumer. So, III also does not hold strong.
5. Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by three arguments I, II and III . You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.
Statement : Should the income generated out of agricultural activities be taxed?
Arguments :
I. No. Farmers are otherwise suffering from natural calamities and low yield coupled with low procurement price and their income should not be taxed.
II. Yes. Majority of the population is dependent on agriculture and hence their income should be taxed to augment the resources.
III. Yes. Many big farmers earn much more than the majority of the service earners and they should be taxed to remove the disparity.
a) Only argument I is strong
b) Only argument II is strong
c) Only II and III is strong
d) Neither I nor II is strong
Explanation: Clearly, if the income of farmers is not adequate, they cannot be brought under the net of taxation as per rules governing the Income Tax Act. So, I is not strong. Besides, a major part of the population is dependent on agriculture and such a large section, if taxed even with certain concessions, would draw in huge funds, into the government coffers. Also, many big landlords with substantially high incomes from agriculture are taking undue advantage of this benefit. So, both arguments II and III hold strong.
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 system of offering jobs only to the wards of government employees be introduced in all government offices in India?
Arguments :
I. No. It denies opportunity to many deserving individuals and government may stand to lose in the long run.
II. No. It is against the principle of equality, does not government owe its responsibility to all its citizens?
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: Merit, fair selection and equal opportunities for all - these three factors, if taken care of, can help government recruit competent officials and also fulfil the objectives of the Constitution. Thus, both the arguments hold strong.
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 the vehicles older than 15 years be rejected in metros in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This is a significant step to lower down the pollution level in metros.
II. No. It will be very difficult for vehicle owners to shift to other parts in country because they will not get suitable job for their very existence.
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, 15 year old vehicles are not Euro-compliant and hence cause much more pollution than the recent ones. So, argument I holds. Argument II is vague since owners of these vehicles need not shift themselves. They might sell off their vehicles and buy new ones - a small price which every citizen can afford for a healthy environment.
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 the tuition fees in all post-graduate courses be hiked considerably?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will bring in some sense of seriousness among the students and will improve the quality.
II. No. This will force the meritorious poor students to stay away from post-graduate courses
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: A hike in fees is no means to make the students more serious in studies. So, argument I is vague. However, with the increase in fees, poor meritorious students would not be able to afford post-graduate studies. So, argument II 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 the persons below the age of 18 years be allowed to join armed forces?
Arguments :
I. No. Persons below the age of 18 do not attain both physical and mental maturity to shoulder such burden.
II. Yes. This will help the country develop its armed forces which will serve the country for a longer time.
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 armed forces must consist of physically strong and mentally mature individuals to take care of defence properly. So, argument I holds strong. Clearly, argument II holds no relevance.
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 all the infrastructural development projects in India be handed over to the private sector?
Arguments :
I. No. The private sector entities are not equipped to handle such projects.
II. Yes. Such projects are handled by private sector in the developed countries.
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, such projects if handed over to the private sector shall be given to a competent authority. So, argument I is vague. Also, imitating a policy on the basis that it worked out successfully in other countries holds no relevance. Thus, argument II also does not hold strong.