Reasoning Aptitude
STATEMENT AND ARGUMENTS MCQs
Total Questions : 635
| Page 58 of 64 pages
Question 571. 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 cutting of trees be banned altogether?
Arguments :
I. Yes. It is very much necessary to do so to restore ecological balance.
II. No. A total ban would harm timber based industries.
Statement : Should cutting of trees be banned altogether?
Arguments :
I. Yes. It is very much necessary to do so to restore ecological balance.
II. No. A total ban would harm timber based industries.
Answer: Option E. -> Both I and II are strong
Clearly, trees play a vital role in maintaining ecological balance and so must be preserved. So, argument I holds. Also, trees form the basic source of timber and a complete ban on cutting of trees would harm timber based industries. So, only a controlled cutting of trees should be allowed and the loss replenished by planting more trees. So, argument II is also valid.
Clearly, trees play a vital role in maintaining ecological balance and so must be preserved. So, argument I holds. Also, trees form the basic source of timber and a complete ban on cutting of trees would harm timber based industries. So, only a controlled cutting of trees should be allowed and the loss replenished by planting more trees. So, argument II is also valid.
Question 572. 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.
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.
Clearly, argument I holds strong, while argument II is vague.
Question 573. 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 more than one High Court in each state in India?
Arguments :
I. No. This will be a sheer wastage of taxpayers' money.
II. Yes. This will help reduce the backlog of cases pending for a very long time.
Statement : Should there be more than one High Court in each state in India?
Arguments :
I. No. This will be a sheer wastage of taxpayers' money.
II. Yes. This will help reduce the backlog of cases pending for a very long time.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Clearly, an increase in the number of High Courts will surely speed up the work and help to do away with the pending cases. So, argument II holds strong. In light of this, the expenditure incurred would be 'utilization', not 'wastage' of money. So, argument I does not hold.
Clearly, an increase in the number of High Courts will surely speed up the work and help to do away with the pending cases. So, argument II holds strong. In light of this, the expenditure incurred would be 'utilization', not 'wastage' of money. So, argument I does not hold.
Question 574. 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 refugees, who make unauthorized entry into a country, be forced to go back to their homeland?
Arguments :
I. Yes. They make their colonies and occupy a lot of land.
II. No. They leave their homes because of hunger or some terror and on human grounds, should not be forced to go back.
Statement : Should all refugees, who make unauthorized entry into a country, be forced to go back to their homeland?
Arguments :
I. Yes. They make their colonies and occupy a lot of land.
II. No. They leave their homes because of hunger or some terror and on human grounds, should not be forced to go back.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Clearly, refugees are people forced out of their homeland by some misery and need shelter desperately. So, argument II holds. Argument I against the statement is vague.
Clearly, refugees are people forced out of their homeland by some misery and need shelter desperately. So, argument II holds. Argument I against the statement is vague.
Question 575. 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 India create a huge oil reserve like some Western countries to face difficult situations in future?
Arguments :
I. No. There is no need to block huge amount of foreign exchange and keep the money idle.
II. Yes. This will help India withstand shocks of sudden rise in oil prices due to unforeseen circumstances.
Statement : Should India create a huge oil reserve like some Western countries to face difficult situations in future?
Arguments :
I. No. There is no need to block huge amount of foreign exchange and keep the money idle.
II. Yes. This will help India withstand shocks of sudden rise in oil prices due to unforeseen circumstances.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
Oil, being an essential commodity, our country must keep it in reserve. So, argument I is vague, while argument II holds as it provides a substantial reason for the same.
Oil, being an essential commodity, our country must keep it in reserve. So, argument I is vague, while argument II holds as it provides a substantial reason for the same.
Question 576. 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 persons below the age of 18 years be allowed to join armed forces?
Arguments :
I. No. Persons below the age of 18 do not attain both physical and mental maturity to shoulder such burden.
II. Yes. This will help the country develop its armed forces which will serve the country for a longer time.
Statement : Should the persons below the age of 18 years be allowed to join armed forces?
Arguments :
I. No. Persons below the age of 18 do not attain both physical and mental maturity to shoulder such burden.
II. Yes. This will help the country develop its armed forces which will serve the country for a longer time.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
The armed forces must consist of physically strong and mentally mature individuals to take care of defence properly. So, argument I holds strong. Clearly, argument II holds no relevance.
The armed forces must consist of physically strong and mentally mature individuals to take care of defence properly. So, argument I holds strong. Clearly, argument II holds no relevance.
Question 577. 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 system of offering jobs only to the wards of government employees be introduced in all government offices in India?
Arguments :
I. No. It denies opportunity to many deserving individuals and government may stand to lose in the long run.
II. No. It is against the principle of equality, does not government owe its responsibility to all its citizens?
Statement : Should system of offering jobs only to the wards of government employees be introduced in all government offices in India?
Arguments :
I. No. It denies opportunity to many deserving individuals and government may stand to lose in the long run.
II. No. It is against the principle of equality, does not government owe its responsibility to all its citizens?
Answer: Option E. -> Both I and II are strong
Merit, fair selection and equal opportunities for all - these three factors, if taken care of, can help government recruit competent officials and also fulfil the objectives of the Constitution. Thus, both the arguments hold strong.
Merit, fair selection and equal opportunities for all - these three factors, if taken care of, can help government recruit competent officials and also fulfil the objectives of the Constitution. Thus, both the arguments hold strong.
Question 578. 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 vehicles older than 15 years be rejected in metros in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This is a significant step to lower down the pollution level in metros.
II. No. It will be very difficult for vehicle owners to shift to other parts in country because they will not get suitable job for their very existence.
Statement : Should the vehicles older than 15 years be rejected in metros in India?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This is a significant step to lower down the pollution level in metros.
II. No. It will be very difficult for vehicle owners to shift to other parts in country because they will not get suitable job for their very existence.
Answer: Option A. -> Only argument I is strong
Clearly, 15 year old vehicles are not Euro-compliant and hence cause much more pollution than the recent ones. So, argument I holds. Argument II is vague since owners of these vehicles need not shift themselves. They might sell off their vehicles and buy new ones - a small price which every citizen can afford for a healthy environment.
Clearly, 15 year old vehicles are not Euro-compliant and hence cause much more pollution than the recent ones. So, argument I holds. Argument II is vague since owners of these vehicles need not shift themselves. They might sell off their vehicles and buy new ones - a small price which every citizen can afford for a healthy environment.
Question 579. 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 the infrastructural development projects in India be handed over to the private sector?
Arguments :
I. No. The private sector entities are not equipped to handle such projects.
II. Yes. Such projects are handled by private sector in the developed countries.
Statement : Should all the infrastructural development projects in India be handed over to the private sector?
Arguments :
I. No. The private sector entities are not equipped to handle such projects.
II. Yes. Such projects are handled by private sector in the developed countries.
Answer: Option D. -> Neither I nor II is strong
Clearly, such projects if handed over to the private sector shall be given to a competent authority. So, argument I is vague. Also, imitating a policy on the basis that it worked out successfully in other countries holds no relevance. Thus, argument II also does not hold strong.
Clearly, such projects if handed over to the private sector shall be given to a competent authority. So, argument I is vague. Also, imitating a policy on the basis that it worked out successfully in other countries holds no relevance. Thus, argument II also does not hold strong.
Question 580. 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 tuition fees in all post-graduate courses be hiked considerably?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will bring in some sense of seriousness among the students and will improve the quality.
II. No. This will force the meritorious poor students to stay away from post-graduate courses.
Statement : Should the tuition fees in all post-graduate courses be hiked considerably?
Arguments :
I. Yes. This will bring in some sense of seriousness among the students and will improve the quality.
II. No. This will force the meritorious poor students to stay away from post-graduate courses.
Answer: Option B. -> Only argument II is strong
A hike in fees is no means to make the students more serious in studies. So, argument I is vague. However, with the increase in fees, poor meritorious students would not be able to afford post-graduate studies. So, argument II holds.
A hike in fees is no means to make the students more serious in studies. So, argument I is vague. However, with the increase in fees, poor meritorious students would not be able to afford post-graduate studies. So, argument II holds.
Latest Videos
Latest Test Papers
Login With Google
Old way of Login
Login With Email