Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument. Give answer: (A) If only argument I is strong (B) If only argument II is strong (C) If either I or II is strong (D) If neither I nor II is strong (E) If both I and II are strong.
Statement: Should government jobs in rural areas have more incentives?
Arguments:
1. Yes. Incentives are essential for attracting government servants there.
2. No. Rural areas are already cheaper, healthier and less complex than big cities. So ? Why offer extra incentives!
Answer: A
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
Enter details here
Statement: Should the practice of transfers of clerical cadre employees from government offices of one city to those of another be stopped?
Arguments:
1. No. Transfer of employees is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it.
2. Yes. It involves lot of governmental expenditure and inconvenience too many compared to the benefits it yields.
Answer: D
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
Enter details here
Statement: Should young entrepreneurs be encouraged?
Arguments:
1. Yes. They will help in industrial development of the country.
2. Yes. They will reduce the burden on employment market.
Answer: E
Clearly, encouraging the young entrepreneurs will open up the field for the establishment of new industries. Thus, it shall help in industrial development and not only employ the entrepreneurs but create more job opportunities for others as well. So, both the arguments hold strong
Enter details here
Statement: Does India need so many plans for development?
Arguments:
1. Yes. Nothing can be achieved without proper planning.
2. No. Too much time, money and energy is wasted on planning
Answer: A
Before indulging in new development programme it is much necessary to plan the exact target, policies and their implementation and the allocation of funds which shows the right direction to work. So, argument I holds strong. Also, planning ensures full utilization of available resources and funds and stepwise approach towards the target. So, spending a part of money on it is no wastage. Thus, argument II is not valid
Enter details here
Statement: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the Central Government?
Arguments:
1. No. The political party in power should have the freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed.
2. 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
Answer: B
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
Enter details here
Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?
Arguments:
1. Yes. This will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgement for casting their vote.
2. No. In a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no restrictions.
Answer: E
Clearly, if there were less candidates, the voters would find it easy to make a choice. So, argument I holds. Also, every person satisfying the conditions laid down by the Constitution must be given an opportunity and should not be denied the same just to cut down the number of candidates. So, argument II also holds strong
Enter details here
Statement: Should cottage industries be encouraged in rural areas?
Arguments:
1. Yes. Rural people are creative.
2. Yes. This would help to solve the problem of unemployment to some extent.
Answer: B
Clearly, cottage industries need to be promoted to create more job opportunities for rural people in the villages themselves. The reason that rural people are creative is vague. So, only argument II holds
Enter details here
Is paying ransom or agreeing to the conditions of kidnappers of political figures, a proper course of action?
Arguments:
1. Yes. The victims must be saved at all cost.
2. No. It encourages the kidnappers to continue their sinister activities.
Answer: E
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.
Enter details here
Statement: Should foreign films be banned in England?
Arguments:
1. Yes. They depict an alien culture which adversely affects our values.
2. No. Foreign films are of a high artistic standard
Answer: D
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
Enter details here
Statement: Should articles of only deserving authors be allowed to be published?
Arguments:
1. Yes. It will save a lot of paper which is in short supply.
2. No. It is not possible to draw a line between the deserving and the undeserving.
Answer: B
Clearly, I does not provide a strong reason in support of the statement. Also, it is not possible to analyze the really deserving and not deserving. So/argument II holds strong.
Enter details here