Reasoning Aptitude
STATEMENT AND ARGUMENTS MCQs
Total Questions : 635
| Page 11 of 64 pages
Question 101.
Statement: Should all the profit making public sector units be sold to private companies?
Arguments:
I.Yes. This will help the government to augment its resources for implementing the development programmes.
II.No. The private companies will not be able to run these units effectively.
III.Yes. There will be a significant improvement in the quality of services.
Iv.No. There would not be job security for the employees at all the levels.
Answer: Option C. -> Only III and IV are strong
The
government cannot sell off public sector units just to pool up funds
for development. Besides, if it does so, these units shall be handed
over to private companies which are fully equipped to run these units
effectively. So, neither I nor II holds strong. Privatization shall
surely ensure better services, but private companies adopt hire and fire
policy and they are free to terminate the services of any employee as
and when they wish to. Thus, both III and IV hold strong.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
Clearly, India cannot part with a state that is a major foreign exchange
earner to it. So, argument I holds strong. Further, giving away a piece
of land unconditionally and unreasonably is no solution to settle
disputes. So, argument II is vague.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Clearly,
spending money on sports cannot be avoided merely because it can be
spent on socio-economic problems. So, argument I does not hold. Also, if
the expenses on sports are curtailed, the sports persons would face
lack of facilities and training and our country will lag behind in the
international sports competitions. So, II holds.
Question 104.
Statement: Should the council of ministers once appointed be kept the same for the entire period intervening two elections?
Arguments:
I.No. Shuffling of ministers and portfolios is a healthy democratic process.
II.Yes. The ministers do not get a hold on their portfolio unless they are kept for a longer duration.
Answer: Option D. -> Neither I nor II is strong
Shuffling
of Cabinet ministers is just not a regular process, but a step to
ensure proper working and implementation of schemes and avoid
corruption. So, none of the arguments holds strong.
Question 105.
Statement: Should children be prevented completely from watching television?
Arguments:
I.No. We get vital information regarding education through television.
II.Yes. It hampers the study of children.
III.Yes. Young children are misguided by certain programmes featuring sex and violence.
Iv.No. This is the only way to educate the masses.
Answer: Option B. -> Only I is strong
Clearly, television offers various educational programmes which are of
great practical value to the students. So, it serves as a means (but it
is not the 'only' means) to educate the masses. Thus, I holds strong
while IV does not. Besides, the demerits of watching television,
mentioned in II and III, may be done away with by allowing children to
watch selected programmes on television, according to a set schedule.
So, neither II nor III holds strong.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
Clearly, higher education is not the cause of unemployment. In fact, it
has created greater job opportunities. So, argument II is vague. Also,
higher education promotes the country's development. So, argument I
holds.
Question 107.
Statement: Should India go in for computerization in all possible sectors?
Arguments:
I.Yes. It will bring efficiency and accuracy in the work.
II.No. It will be an injustice to the monumental human resources which are at present underutilized.
III.No. Computerization demands a lot of money. We should not waste money on it.
Iv.Yes. When advanced countries are introducing computers in every field, how can India afford to lag behind?
Answer: Option A. -> Only I is strong
Clearly, the need of today is to put to better use the underutilized
human resources. Computers with better and speedy efficiency can
accomplish this. So, argument I holds, while II does not.
Computerization is a much beneficial project and investment in it is not
at all a waste. So, III is not strong. Further, development in a new
field is not a matter of merely following up other countries. So, IV
also does not hold strong.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
The Constitution of India has laid down the doctrine of 'equality before
the law'. So, argument II holds strong. Also, we cannot judge the
intentions of a person behind committing a crime, So, argument I is
vague.
Question 109.
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.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
Clearly, argument I holds strong, while argument II is vague
Question 110.
Statement: Should there be a total ban on tobacco products and smoking in India?
Arguments:
I.Yes. It is wrong to smoke away millions of money.
II.No. It will throw thousands of workers in the tobacco industry out of employment.
III.No. The government will lose huge amount of money as it will not earn by way of taxes on these products.
Answer: Option D. -> Only II and III are strong
Clearly, smoking needs to be abolished because it is injurious to health
and not only to save money. So, argument I is vague. Banning a product
would surely render jobless the large number of workers involved in
manufacturing it. So, argument II holds strong. Also, tobacco products
are a source of big revenue for the government. So, argument III also
holds.
Latest Videos
Latest Test Papers
Login With Google
Old way of Login
Login With Email