Statement & Argument Questions and Answers
Home > Verbal Tests > Statement & Argument > Statement & Argument Questions
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.
Statement: Should fashionable dresses be banned?
Arguments:
1. Yes. Fashions keep changing and hence consumption of cloth increases.
2. No. Fashionable clothes are a person's self expression and therefore his/her fundamental right.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer: Option B
Explanation: Clearly, imposing ban on fashionable dresses will be a restriction on the personal choice and hence the right to freedom of an individual. So, only argument II is strong.
Statement: Should there be no place of interview in selection?
Arguments:
1. Yes, it is very subjective in assessment.
2. No. It is the only instrument to judge candidates' motives and personality.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer: Option A
Explanation: Clearly, besides interview, there can be other modes of written examination to judge candidates' motives. So argument II is not strong enough. However, the interview is a subjective assessment without doubt. So, argument I holds.
Statement: Should import duty on all the electronic goods be dispensed with?
Arguments:
1. No. This will considerably reduce the income of the government and will adversely affect the developmental activities.
2. No. The local manufacturers will not be able to compete with the foreign manufacturers who are technologically far superior.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer: Option B
Explanation: Abolishing the import duty on electronic goods shall reduce the costs of imported goods and adversely affect the sale of the domestic products, thus giving a setback to the Indian electronics industry. So, argument II holds strong. Argument I does not provide a convincing reason.
Statement: Should children be legally made responsible to take care of their parents during their old age?
Arguments:
1. Yes. Such matter can only be solved by legal means.
2. Yes. Only this will bring some relief to poor parents.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer: Option D
Explanation: Taking care of the parents is a moral duty of the children and cannot be thrust upon them legally, nor such a compulsion can ensure good care of the old people. So, none of the arguments holds strong.
Statement: Should higher education be completely stopped for some time?
Arguments:
1. No. It will hamper the country's future progress.
2. Yes. It will reduce the educated unemployment.
Answer & Explanation:
Answer: Option A
Explanation: 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.
Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9