Q: Statement: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the Central
Government?
Arguments:
I. No. The political party in power should have the freedom to decide the number of
ministers to be appointed.
II. Yes. The number of ministers should be restricted to a certain percentage of the total number of seats in the parliament to avoid unnecessary expenditure.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, there should be some norms regarding the number of ministers in the Government, as
more number of ministers would unnecessarily add to the Government expenditure. So,
argument II holds strong; Also, giving liberty to the party in power could promote extension of
unreasonable favour to some people at the cost of government funds. So, argument I does not
hold.
Q: Statement: Should foreign films be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They depict an alien culture which adversely affects our values.
II. No. Foreign films are of a high artistic standard.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, foreign films depict the alien culture but this only helps in learning more. So,
argument I does not hold. Also, the reason stated in argument II is not strong enough in
contradicting the ban. So, it also does not hold.
Q: Statement: Is buying things on instalments profitable to the customer?
Arguments:
I. Yes. He has to pay less.
II. No, paying instalments upsets the family budget.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: In buying things on instalments, a customer has to pay more as the interest is also included.
So, argument I does not hold. Moreover, one who buys an item on instalments maintains his
future budget accordingly as he is well acquainted with when and how much he has to pay,
beforehand. So, argument II is also not valid.
Q: Statement: Should Doordarshan be given autonomous status?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will help Doordarshan to have fair and impartial coverage of all important
events.
II. No. The coverage of events will be decided by a few who may not have healthy
outlook.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, the autonomous status of the Doordarshan will be a step towards giving it
independence for an impartial coverage. Autonomous status does not mean that the coverage
will be decided by a few. So, only argument I holds.
Q: Statement: Should adult education programme be given priority over compulsory education
programme?
Arguments:
I. No. It will also help in success of compulsory education programme.
II. Yes. It will help to eliminate the adult illiteracy.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, argument I gives a reason in support of the statement and so it does not hold strong
against it. The adult education programme needs to be given priority because it shall eliminate
adult illiteracy and thus help in further spread of education. So, only argument II is strong
enough.
Q: Statement: Should new universities be established in India?
Arguments:
I. No. We have still not achieved the target for literacy.
II. No. We will have to face the problem of unemployed but highly qualified people.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Both I and II are strong
Solution: Clearly, instead of improving upon higher education, increasing the literacy rate should be
heeded first. So, argument I holds. Also, more number of universities will produce more
degree holders with the number of jobs remaining the same, thus increasing unemployment.
So, argument II also holds strong.
Q: Statement: Should non-vegetarian food be totally banned in our country?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It is expensive and therefore it is beyond the means of most people in our
country.
II. No. Nothing should be banned in a democratic country like ours.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, restriction on the diet of people will be denying them their basic human right. So, only
argument II holds.
Q: Statement: Should a total ban be put on trapping wild animals?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Trappers are making a lot of money;
II. No. Bans on hunting and trapping are not effective.
A. Only argument I is strong
B. Only argument II is strong
C. Either I or II is strong
D. Neither I nor II is strong
Solution: Clearly, ban is necessary to protect our natural environment. So, none of the arguments is
strong enough.