Practice MCQ Questions and Answer on Statement And Arguments

51. 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 persons convicted of criminal offences in the past be allowed to contest elections in India?

Arguments :
I. No. Such persons cannot serve the cause of the people and country.
II. Yes. It is democracy - let people decide whom to vote.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, persons with criminal background cannot stand to serve as the representatives of the common people. So, they should not be allowed to contest elections. Thus, only argument I holds, while II does not.

52. 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 officers accepting bribe be punished?

Arguments :
I. No. Certain circumstances may have compelled them to take bribe.
II. Yes. They should do the job they are entrusted with, honestly.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, officers are paid duly for the jobs they do. So, they must do it honestly. Thus, argument II alone holds.

53. 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 restriction on the migration of people from one state to another state in India?

Arguments :
I. No. Any Indian citizen has a basic right to stay at any place of his/her choice and hence they cannot be stopped.
II. Yes. This is the way to effect an equitable distribution of resources across the states in India.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, argument I holds strong, while argument II is vague.

54. 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 : Is paying ransom or agreeing to the conditions of kidnappers of political figures, a proper course of action?

Arguments :
I. Yes. The victims must be saved at all cost.
II. No. It encourages the kidnappers to continue their sinister activities.

• (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

Show Answer

Answer & Solution Answer: Option E Solution: Both the arguments are strong enough. The conditions have to be agreed to, in order to save the life of the victims, though actually they ought not to be agreed to, as they encourage the sinister activities of the kidnappers.

55. 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 government jobs in rural areas have more incentives?

Arguments :
I. Yes. Incentives are essential for attracting government servants there.
II. No. Rural areas are already cheaper, healthier and less complex than big cities. So ? Why offer extra incentives!

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, government jobs in rural areas are underlined with several difficulties. In lieu of these, extra incentives are needed. So, only argument I holds strong.

56. 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 practice of transfers of clerical cadre employees from government offices of one city to those of another be stopped?

Arguments :
I. No. Transfer of employees is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it.
II. Yes. It involves lot of governmental expenditure and inconvenience too many compared to the benefits it yields.

• (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

Show Answer

 It is not necessary that any practice which has been in vogue for a long time is right and it must be continued. So, argument I is not strong. Also, a practice must be continued or discontinued in view of its merits/demerits and not on grounds of the expenditure or procedures it entails. The policy of transfer is generally practised to do away with corruption, which is absolutely essential. So, argument II also does not hold.

57. 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 higher education be restricted to only those who can bear the expenditure?

Arguments :
I. Yes. Higher education is very costly; hence it should not be given free.
II. No. There are a large number of brilliant students who cannot afford to pay and they should be given higher education.

• (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

Show Answer

 For the all-round progress of the nation, all the students, especially the talented and intelligent ones, must avail of higher education, even if the government has to pay for it. So, only argument II holds.

58. 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 so much money be spent on advertisements?

Arguments :
I. Yes. It is an essential concomitant in a capitalist economy.
II. No. It leads to wastage of resources.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, the advertisements are/the means to introduce people with the product and its advantages. So, argument I holds strong. But argument II is vague because advertisements are an investment for better gain and not a, wastage.

59. 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 news be controlled by Government in a democracy?

Arguments :
I. Yes. Variety of news only confuses people.
II. No. Controlled news loses credibility.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, the variety of news helps people to develop their own views. So, argument I is vague. Also, controlled news shall be a partial produce. So, it loses credibility Thus, argument II holds.

60. 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 those who receive dowry, despite the law prohibiting it, be punished?

Arguments :
I. Yes. Those who violate the law must be punished.
II. No. Dowry system is firmly rooted in the society since time immemorial.

• (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

Show Answer

 Clearly, laws are made to ensure that no person pursues the practice. So, persons who violate the laws need to be punished. Thus, argument I holds. A wrong practice, no matter how firmly rooted, needs to be ended. So, argument II is vague.