Statement and Argument
- Statements:
Should class IV children have Board examination?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This will motivate the children to study and get higher marks, and thus more knowledge can be imbibed at a younger age.
II. No. The children will be forced to study and won't enjoy the process.
III. Yes. In today's competitive would the children need to be prepared right from the beginning to face such difficult examinations.
IV. No. This will add pressure on tender aged children and leave very little time or them to play.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
Young children of class IV ought to be taught the basic fundamentals of subjects in a gradual process via practical examples and practice in a playful manner. They need not be made to study through compulsion and their age is not such as to bear the tension and their age is not such as to bear the tension and burden of examinations. So, both II and IV hold strong. However, facing examinations at this stage shall prepare them to tackle the competitions in later life. So, III also hold. However, holding examinations cannot motivate such young and immature students, neither is it a way to make them learn more. So, i does not holds strong.
Correct Option: C
Young children of class IV ought to be taught the basic fundamentals of subjects in a gradual process via practical examples and practice in a playful manner. They need not be made to study through compulsion and their age is not such as to bear the tension and their age is not such as to bear the tension and burden of examinations. So, both II and IV hold strong. However, facing examinations at this stage shall prepare them to tackle the competitions in later life. So, III also hold. However, holding examinations cannot motivate such young and immature students, neither is it a way to make them learn more. So, i does not holds strong.
- Statements:
Should there be reservation of jobs in the organizations in the private sector also as in the public sector undertakings in India?
Arguments:
I. 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.
II. No. The private sector does not get any government assistance and therefore they should not be saddled with such policies.
III. No. Nowhere else in the world such a practice is being followed.
IV. No. the management of the private sector undertaking would not agree to such compulsions.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
The reservation of jobs in the private sector too would surely increase opportunities for weaker sections 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.
Correct Option: A
The reservation of jobs in the private sector too would surely increase opportunities for weaker sections 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 all the youngsters below 21 years of age be disallowed room going to a beer bar?
Argument:
I. No. it is not correct to prevent matured youngsters above 18 years of age who can vote, from having fun.
II. Yes. The entry fees to such pubs should also be hiked.
III. No. There is no such curb in western countries
IV.Yes. This will help in preventing youngsters from getting into company and imbibing bad habits
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
Clearly, our constitution considers youngsters above 18 years of age, mature enough to exercise their decisive power in Government by voting. This implies that such individuals can also judge what is good or bad for them. Thus, argument I holds strong. However, at such places, youngsters may be lead astray by certain indecent guys and swayed from the right path into bad indulgences. So, IV also holds strong. Hiking the entry fees is no way to disallow them, and also the idea of imitating the western countries holds no relevance. So, neither II nor III holds strong.
Correct Option: D
Clearly, our constitution considers youngsters above 18 years of age, mature enough to exercise their decisive power in Government by voting. This implies that such individuals can also judge what is good or bad for them. Thus, argument I holds strong. However, at such places, youngsters may be lead astray by certain indecent guys and swayed from the right path into bad indulgences. So, IV also holds strong. Hiking the entry fees is no way to disallow them, and also the idea of imitating the western countries holds no relevance. So, neither II nor III holds strong.
- Statement:
Should the consumption of aerated drinks be banned in India?
Arguments:
I. Yes. This is the only way to reduce the risk of exposing people to some diseases
II. No. Each individual should have right to choose what he wants.
III. No. There is no confirmed evidence that such products have adverse effect on human body.
IV. Yes. It is banned inn many other countries also.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
The use of 'only' in I makes it invalid. Also, it is the duty of the government to save its citizens from intakes of any harmful products, even if they like them. So, II does not hold strong. Besides, a product must not be banned unless ll its harmful effect have been proved. So, III hold strong. Lastly, we cannot blindly follow the decisions taken by other countries. So, IV also does not hold.
Correct Option: C
The use of 'only' in I makes it invalid. Also, it is the duty of the government to save its citizens from intakes of any harmful products, even if they like them. So, II does not hold strong. Besides, a product must not be banned unless ll its harmful effect have been proved. So, III hold strong. Lastly, we cannot blindly follow the decisions taken by other countries. So, IV also does not hold.
- 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 freedom to function on its own.
III. Yes. This will enable to have standardized education for all the students
IV. Yes. only then the quality of education would be improved.
-
View Hint View Answer Discuss in Forum
Clearly, the government can pool up resources to run such institutes, if that can benefit the citizens. So, I does not hold strong. II does not provide any convincing reason. Also, it is not obligatory that government control over the institute would ensure better education than that at present. So, both III and IV also do not hold.
Correct Option: A
Clearly, the government can pool up resources to run such institutes, if that can benefit the citizens. So, I does not hold strong. II does not provide any convincing reason. Also, it is not obligatory that government control over the institute would ensure better education than that at present. So, both III and IV also do not hold.
