Reasoning Aptitude
STATEMENT AND ARGUMENTS MCQs
Total Questions : 635
| Page 56 of 64 pages
Question 551. 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 compulsory medical examination of both the man and the woman before they marry each other?
Arguments :
I. No. This is an intrusion to the privacy of an individual and hence cannot be tolerated.
II. Yes. This will substantially reduce the risk of giving birth to children with serious ailments.
Statement : Should there be compulsory medical examination of both the man and the woman before they marry each other?
Arguments :
I. No. This is an intrusion to the privacy of an individual and hence cannot be tolerated.
II. Yes. This will substantially reduce the risk of giving birth to children with serious ailments.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Clearly, such a step would help to prevent the growth of diseases like AIDS. So, only argument II is strong.
Clearly, such a step would help to prevent the growth of diseases like AIDS. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 552. 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 luxury hotels be banned in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. They are places from where international criminals operate.
II. No. Affluent foreign tourists will have no place to stay.
Statement : Should luxury hotels be banned in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. They are places from where international criminals operate.
II. No. Affluent foreign tourists will have no place to stay.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Clearly, the luxury hotels are a mark of country's standard and a place for staying for the affluent foreign tourists. So, argument II holds. Argument I is not a strong reason because ban on hotels is not a way to do away with the activities of international criminals.
Clearly, the luxury hotels are a mark of country's standard and a place for staying for the affluent foreign tourists. So, argument II holds. Argument I is not a strong reason because ban on hotels is not a way to do away with the activities of international criminals.
Question 553. 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 ban on product advertising?
Arguments :
I. No. It is an age of advertising. Unless your advertisement is better than your other competitors, the product will not be sold.
II. Yes. The money spent on advertising is very huge and it inflates the cost of the product.
Statement : Should there be a ban on product advertising?
Arguments :
I. No. It is an age of advertising. Unless your advertisement is better than your other competitors, the product will not be sold.
II. Yes. The money spent on advertising is very huge and it inflates the cost of the product.
Answer: Option E. -> Both I and II are strong
Clearly, it is the advertisement which makes the customer aware of the qualities of the product and leads him to buy it. So, argument I is valid. But at the same time, advertising nowadays has become a costly affair and the expenses on it add to the price of the product. So, argument II also holds strong.
Clearly, it is the advertisement which makes the customer aware of the qualities of the product and leads him to buy it. So, argument I is valid. But at the same time, advertising nowadays has become a costly affair and the expenses on it add to the price of the product. So, argument II also holds strong.
Question 554. 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 shifting agriculture be practised?
Arguments :
I. No. It is a wasteful practice.
II. Yes. Modern methods of farming are too expensive.
Statement : Should shifting agriculture be practised?
Arguments :
I. No. It is a wasteful practice.
II. Yes. Modern methods of farming are too expensive.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
Clearly, shifting agriculture is a practice in which a certain crop is grown on a land and when it becomes infertile it is left bare and another piece of land is chosen. Clearly, it is a wasteful practice. So, only argument I holds.
Clearly, shifting agriculture is a practice in which a certain crop is grown on a land and when it becomes infertile it is left bare and another piece of land is chosen. Clearly, it is a wasteful practice. So, only argument I holds.
Question 555. 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 our country extend generous behaviour and goodwill to our erring and nagging neighbours?
Arguments :
I. Yes. Goodwill always pays dividend.
II. No. Our generous behaviour and goodwill will be considered as our weakness.
Statement : Should our country extend generous behaviour and goodwill to our erring and nagging neighbours?
Arguments :
I. Yes. Goodwill always pays dividend.
II. No. Our generous behaviour and goodwill will be considered as our weakness.
Answer: Option E. -> Both I and II are strong
Clearly, a good behaviour may at some point of time lead to mutual discussions and peaceful settlement of issues in the long run. So, argument I holds strong. However, such behaviour may be mistaken for our weakness and it would be difficult to continue with it if the other country doesn't stop its sinister activities. Hence, II also holds.
Clearly, a good behaviour may at some point of time lead to mutual discussions and peaceful settlement of issues in the long run. So, argument I holds strong. However, such behaviour may be mistaken for our weakness and it would be difficult to continue with it if the other country doesn't stop its sinister activities. Hence, II also holds.
Question 556. 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.
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.
Answer: Option D. -> Only I and III are strong
'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.
'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.
Question 557. 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.
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.
Answer: Option B. -> Only II is strong
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.
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.
Question 558. 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.
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.
Answer: Option B. -> Only II is strong
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.
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.
Question 559. 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.
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.
Answer: Option C. -> Only II and III are strong
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.
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.
Question 560. 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.
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.
Answer: Option B. -> Only II is strong
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.
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.
Latest Videos
Latest Test Papers
Login With Google
Old way of Login
Login With Email