Practice Statement and arguments - verbal reasoning Online Quiz (set-2) For All Competitive Exams

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments.
    * 'Strong' Arguments must be both important and directly related to the question.
    * 'Weak' Arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question.
    Each question below is followed by four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument?

Q-1)  
  • Statement:
  • Should the rule of wearing a helmet for both driver and pillion rider while driving a motorbike to be enforced strictly?
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes, it is a rule and should be followed strictly by all.
  • II. No, each individual knows how to protect his own life and it should be left to this discretion.
  • III. No, it does not ensure safety as only the head is protected and the rest of the body is not.
  • IV. Yes, it is a necessity as head, being the most sensitive organ, is protected by the helmet.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Arguments I and IV are strong because the rule of wearing a helmet for both driver and pillion rider while driving a motor bike should be followed strictly by all.

It protects our head which is the most sensitive organ of the human body.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-2)  
  • Statement:
  • Should there be a complete ban on Indian professionals seeking jobs elsewhere after getting their education in India? 
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes. This is the only way to sustain the present rate of technological development in India.
  • II. No. The Indians settled abroad to send a huge amount of foreign exchange and this constitutes a significant part of foreign exchange reserve.
  • III. No. The practical knowledge gained by Indians by working in other countries helps India develop its economy.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Clearly, none of the arguments provides a substantial reason either for or against the given statements. 

So, none of the arguments holds strong.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-3)  
  • Statement:
  • Should all the students graduating in any discipline desirous of pursuing post-graduation of the subjects of their choice be allowed to enroll in the post-graduate courses?
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes. The students are the best judge of their capabilities and there should not be restrictions for joining post-graduate courses.
  • II. No. The students need to study relevant subjects in graduate courses to enroll in post-graduate courses and the students must fulfil such conditions.
  • III. No. There are not enough institutes offering postgraduate courses which can accommodate all the graduates desirous of seeking post-graduate education of their own choice.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:  

Only argument II is strong. The students cannot be enrolled in the courses just on the basis of their interests, but their compatibility with the same also matters.

So, I do not hold. Besides, lack of institutes is no criteria to deny post-graduate courses to students.

So, argument III also does not hold. II provides a genuine reason and thus holds strong.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-4)  
  • Statement:
  • Should there be only a few banks in place of numerous smaller banks in India? 
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes. This will help secure the investor's money as these big banks will be able to withstand intermittent market-related shocks.
  • II. No. A large number of people will lose their jobs as after the merger many employees will be redundant.
  • III. Yes. This will help consolidate the entire banking industry and will lead to healthy competition.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

The security of the investor's money is not related to the size of the bank.

Besides even after consolidation, the number of investors, their amounts and hence the duties shall remain the same and so no employees will be redundant.

Reducing the number of smaller banks will also not affect the mutual competition among the banks.

Thus, none of the arguments holds strong.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-5)  
  • Statement:
  • Should mercy death be legalized, i.e., all those who are suffering from terminal diseases be allowed to end their lives if they so desire?
  • Arguments:
  • I. No. Nobody should be allowed to end his/her life at his/her will as this goes against the basic tenets of humanity.
  • II. Yes. Patients undergoing terrible suffering and having absolutely no chance of recovery should be liberated from suffering through mercy death.
  • III. No. Even mercy death is a sort of killing and killing can never be legalized.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Clearly, mercy death will serve as liberation to those to whom living is more difficult and painful. But then, it is an inhuman act and does not appeal.

So, both arguments II and III hold strong.

Besides, it becomes our moral duty to encourage such people to live their lives to the fullest and support them through the crisis, and not demoralize them by allowing them to die if they wish to.

Hence, argument I also holds strong.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments.
    * 'Strong' Arguments must be both important and directly related to the question.
    * 'Weak' arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question.
    Each question below is followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument?

Q-6)  
  • Statement:
  • Should smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol by the actors be completely banned in the movies in India?
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes, this will significantly reduce the trend of smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol among the youth in India.
  • II. No, there should be no such ban on the creative pursuits of the filmmaker.
  • III. No, the films portray the society and hence such scenes should be an integral part of the movie if the storyline demands so.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Argument I is strong because such a reduction in trend will be a desirable consequence.

Argument II is weak as it is silent as to what effect the ban will have on the creative pursuits.

Argument III is strong as a ban will take away from the power of the portrayal.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments.
    * 'Strong' Arguments must be both important and directly related to the question.
    * 'Weak' Arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question.
    Each question below is followed by four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument?

Q-7)  
  • Statement:
  • Should all the management institutes in the country be brought under government control?
  • Arguments:
  • I. No, the government does not have adequate resources to run such institutes effectively.
  • II. No, each institute should be given the freedom to function on its own.
  • III. Yes, this will enable us to have standardised education for all the students.
  • IV. Yes, only then the quality of education would be improved.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

None of the arguments has strong reasons to support or to oppose the given statements.

So, none of the arguments is strong

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-8)  
  • Statement:
  • Should India immediately stop digging coal from its mines?
  • Arguments:
  • I. Yes. The present stock of coal will not last long if we continue mining at the present rate.
  • II. No. We do not have an alternative energy source of sufficient quantity.
  • III. No. This will put millions of people at a disadvantage and their lives will get adversely affected and also the industry.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Though the reserves of coal are limited, yet stopping its use till alternate sources of energy have been discovered, is no solution to conserve it.

So, I is not strong. It is true that we haven't till date found a renewable source of energy which is available in plenty and can substitute coal.

So, II holds strong. Further, stopping coal mining would surely throw the engaged workers out of employment.

So, III also holds strong.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-9)  
  • Statement:
  • Should people with educational qualification higher than the optimum requirements be debarred from seeking jobs?
  • Arguments:
  • I. No. It will further aggravate the problem of educated unemployment.
  • II. Yes. It creates complexes among employees and affects the work adversely.
  • III. No. This goes against the basic rights of the individuals. IV. Yes. This will increase productivity.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

The issue discussed in the statement is nowhere related to increasing in unemployment, as the number of vacancies filled in will remain the same.

Also, in a working place, it is the performance of the individual that matters and that makes him more or less wanted, and not his educational qualifications.

So, neither I nor II holds strong. Besides, the needs of a job are laid down in the desired qualifications for the job. So, the recruitment of more qualified people cannot augment productivity.

Thus, IV also does not hold strong. However, it is the right of an individual to get the post for which he fulfils the eligibility criteria, whatever be his extra merits. Hence, argument III holds strong.

Directions:
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' argument(s) and which is/are 'weak' argument(s) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.

Q-10)  
  • Statement:
  • Should all those who are convicted for heinous crimes like murder or rape, beyond all reasonable doubts be given capital punishment or death penalty?
  • Arguments:
  • I. No. The death penalty should be given only in very rare and exceptional cases.
  • II. Yes. This is the only way to punish such people who take others' lives or indulge in inhuman activities.
  • III. Yes. Such severe punishments only will make people refrain from such heinous acts and the society will be safer.
  • IV. No. Those who are repentant for the crime they committed should be given a chance to improve and lead a normal life.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Clearly, a person committing a heinous crime like murder or rape should be so punished as to set an example for others not to attempt such acts in future.

So, argument III holds strong. The argument I is vague while the use of the word 'only’ in argument II makes it weak.

Also, it cannot be assured whether a criminal is really repentant of his acts or not, he may also exhibit so just to get rid of punishment.

So, argument IV also does not hold.

Directions:
Directions: 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 and
    (e) if both I and II are strong.

Q-11)  
  • Statement:
  • Should agriculture in rural India be mechanized?
  • Argument :
  • I. Yes. It would lead to higher production.
  • II. No. Many villagers would be left unemployed.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Clearly, mechanization would speed up the work and increase production. So, the argument I is strong enough.

Argument II is vague because mechanization will only eliminate wasteful employment, not create unemployment.

Directions:
Directions: 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 and
    (e) if both I and II are strong.

Q-12)  
  • Statement:
  • Should the educated unemployed youth be paid "unemployment allowance" by the Government?
  • Argument :
  • I. Yes. It will provide them some monetary help to either seek employment or to kickstart some 'self-employment' venture.
  • II. No. It will dampen their urge to do something to earn their livelihood and thus promote idleness among the unemployed youth.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Young people, who do not get employment due to a large number of applicants in all fields, must surely be given an allowance so that they can support themselves.

So, argument I is valid. However, such allowances would mar the spirit to work, in them and make them idle. So, argument II also holds.

Directions:
Directions: 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 and
    (e) if both I and II are strong.

Q-13)  
  • Statement:
  • Should all the practising doctors be brought under Government control so that they get a salary from the Government and treat patients free of cost?
  • Argument :
  • I. No. How can any country do such an undemocratic thing?
  • II. Yes. Despite many problems, it will certainly help minimize, if not eradicate, unethical medical practices.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

A doctor treating a patient individually can mislead the patient into wrong and unnecessary treatment for his personal gain. So, argument II holds strong.

Also, a policy beneficial to common people cannot be termed 'undemocratic’. So, I is vague.

Directions:
Directions: 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 and
    (e) if both I and II are strong.

Q-14)  
  • Statement:
  • Should there be more than one High Courts in each state in India?
  • Argument :
  • 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.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

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 do not hold.

Directions:
Directions: 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 and
    (e) if both I and II are strong.

Q-15)  
  • Statement:
  • Should India give away Kashmir to Pakistan?
  • Argument :
  • I. No. Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India.
  • II. Yes. This would help settle conflicts.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

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.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is 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.

Q-16)  
  • Statement:
  • Should there be a complete ban on the manufacture of firecrackers in India?
  • Argument :
  • I. No, this will render thousands of workers jobless.
  • II. Yes, the firecracker manufacturers use child labour to a large extent.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Both the arguments refer to the practical consequences of the action mentioned in the statement and hence, are strong.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is 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.

Q-17)  
  • Statement:
  • Should there be no examination up to Std IX in all the schools in India?
  • Argument :
  • I. No, students need to go through the process of giving examinations right from a young age.
  • II. Yes, this will help students to think laterally and achieve their creative pursuits.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Argument I is strong as school is the ground where we prepare for the future battles of life.

Argument II is strong as examinations kill our creativity, turning us all into mere clerks.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is 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.

Q-18)  
  • Statement:
  • Should graduation be made minimum educational qualification for entry-level jobs in any public sector organization?
  • Argument :
  • I. Yes, graduates always perform better than non-graduates by virtue of their higher level of education.
  • II. No, there are quite a few people who cannot afford to remain unemployed till the completion of graduation and are capable of performing equally well as the graduate candidates.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Argument I is not necessarily true. Hence, it is weak.

Argument II deviates from the core issue. Hence, it is also weak.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is 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.

Q-19)  
  • Statement:
  • Should the knowledge of Hindi languages be made compulsory for all the employees of public sector organizations?
  • Argument :
  • I. Yes, it is necessary for dealing with people from the educationally backward strata of society.
  • II. No, It is not necessary for every employee to have the knowledge of Hindi language.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Argument I is strong but Argument II is simplistic and hence, it is a weak argument.

Directions:
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments are those which are both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments are those which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. Each question below is 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.

Q-20)  
  • Statement:
  • Should it be made compulsory for all the private sector organizations to reserve quota for socially backward classes?
  • Argument :
  • I. No, the private sector should not be governed by the Government rules.
  • II. Yes, private sector organizations should also contribute to the upliftment of socially backward classes.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Explanation:

Argument I is not the right way. Thus, Argument I is weak.

Argument II is strong as the upliftment of socially backward classes is necessary.