Statement And Arguments - Study Mode
[#146] 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.
Correct Answer
(B) Only II is strong
Explanation
Solution: 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.
[#147] 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.
Correct Answer
(D) Only I and III are strong
Explanation
Solution: '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.
[#148] 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.
Correct Answer
(B) Only II is strong
Explanation
Solution: 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.
[#149] 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.
Correct Answer
(B) Only II is strong
Explanation
Solution: 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.
[#150] 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.
Correct Answer
(C) Only II and III are strong
Explanation
Solution: 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.