Exercise: Statement And Argument

Questions for: Statement And Argument

Statement: Should there be reservation of jobs in the organizations in the private sector also as in the public sector undertakings in India?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. This would give more opportunities of development to the weaker sections of the society and thus help reduce the gap between the affluent and the downtrodden in India.
  2. No. The private sector does not get any government assistance and therefore they should not be saddled with such policies.
  3. No. Nowhere else in the world such a practice is being followed.
  4. No. The management of the private sector undertaking would not agree to such compulsions.

A:
Only I is strong
B:
Only I and II are strong
C:
Only I, II and IV are strong
D:
Only I and IV are strong
Answer: A
The reservation of jobs in the private sector too would surely increase opportunities for weaker sections to improve their economic plight. Thus, argument I is strong enough. Also, private sector companies work on a good profit margin and they can and will have to accommodate such a policy if implemented. So, neither II nor IV holds strong. Further, just imitating other countries holds no relevance. So, argument III also does not hold.
📖
📝
💬
👁️

Statement: Should admission to all professional courses be made on the basis of past academic performance rather than through entrance tests?

Arguments:

  1. Yes. It will be beneficial for those candidates who are unable to bear the expenses of entrance tests.
  2. Yes. Many deserving candidates securing high marks in their qualifying academic examinations do not perform well on such entrance tests.
  3. No. The standard of examinations and assessment conducted by different Boards and universities are not comparable and hence there is a need to conduct entrance tests to calibrate them on a common yardstick.

A:
Only I and II are strong
B:
Only II and III are strong
C:
Only I and III are strong
D:
Only III is strong
Answer: D
Clearly, a policy to select deserving candidates cannot be abolished just because of the expenditure it entails. So, argument I does not hold. Also, students who are intelligent enough to secure good marks in academic exams have no reason not to perform well in entrance tests. So, II also does not hold. Further, the students passed out from different universities are assessed on different patterns and hence a common entrance test would put the candidates to uniform test and assessment. So, only III holds strong.
📖
📝
💬
👁️

Statement: Should seniority be the only criterion for the promotion?

Arguments:

  1. No. It would be an injustice to those juniors who are more deserving and suitable for higher positions than their senior counterparts.
  2. Yes. Otherwise senior employees do feel humiliated.
  3. Yes. Senior employees are more experienced and must be rewarded for the same.

A:
None is strong
B:
Only I is strong
C:
Only I and III are strong
D:
Only I and II are strong
Answer: B
In an organization, what matters most is productivity and to ensure productivity, the organization needs to have effective managers and innovative, devoted and hard-working employees. Thus, the capability of the individual should be the only criterion for promotion. So, only argument I holds strong, while II and III do not.
📖
📝
💬
👁️

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:

  1. No. Nobody should be allowed to end his/her life at his/her will as this goes against the basic tenets of humanity.
  2. Yes. Patients undergoing terrible suffering and having absolutely no chance of recovery should be liberated from suffering through mercy death.
  3. No. Even mercy death is a sort of killing and killing can never be legalized.

A:
None is strong
B:
Only I and II are strong
C:
Only II and III are strong
D:
Only I and III are strong
Answer: E
Clearly, mercy death will serve as a 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.
📖
📝
💬
👁️

Statement: Should children be prevented completely from watching television?

Arguments:

  1. No. We get vital information regarding education through television.
  2. Yes. It hampers the study of children.
  3. Yes. Young children are misguided by certain programmes featuring sex and violence.
  4. No. This is the only way to educate the masses.

A:
Only I, II and III are strong
B:
Only I is strong
C:
Only I, II and IV are strong
D:
Only I and II are strong
Answer: B
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.
📖
📝
💬
👁️
Ad Slot (Above Pagination)
Quiz