Reasoning MCQ-5

DIRECTIONS (Q.1-5): 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 two arguments’ numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a “strong” argument and which is a “weak” argument. 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.
1. Statement: Should the number of holidays given to Govt employees be reduced to only five in a year?
Arguments: I. Yes, such holidays subsequently reduce working hours, thus adversely affecting the economy of the nation.
II. No, employees require intermittent rest from hectic work schedule.

(A) if only argument I is strong.
(B) if only argument II is strong.
(C) if either argument I or II is strong.
(D) if neither argument I nor II is strong.
(E) if both arguments I and II are strong.

Explnation:– I is strong as growth of the economy is desirable. II is not strong because Saturdays and Sundays are meant for this very “intermittent rest”. This purpose is not served by holidays.
2. Statement: Should all correspondence courses at graduate level be stopped?
Arguments: I. No, correspondence courses help needy students to pursue studies and earn at the same time.
II. Yes, quality education is not possible without teachers and classrooms.

(A) if only argument I is strong.
(B) if only argument II is strong.
(C) if either argument I or II is strong.
(D) if neither argument I nor II is strong.
(E) if both arguments I and II are strong.

Explnation:– I is strong because it is desirable to help the needy students. II is also strong because compromising on quality takes away from the purpose of education.
3. Statement: Should only nuclear power be used to generate electricity?
Arguments: I. Yes, this will help reduce air pollution to a great extent.
II. No, radioactive material used in nuclear plants is unsafe for large-scale use.

(A) if only argument I is strong.
(B) if only argument II is strong.
(C) if either argument I or II is strong.
(D) if neither argument I nor II is strong.
(E) if both arguments I and II are strong.

Explnation:– I is weak because it gives undue weightage to nuclear power. Hydel power etc. also help reduce air pollution. II is strong because safety is very important criterion.
4. Statement: Should the Govt remove all the slums in major cities?
Arguments: I. Yes, slums are a nuisance to the people living in big cities.
II. No, inhabitants of slums are also citizens of the country and they contribute towards the growth of the nation.

(A) if only argument I is strong.
(B) if only argument II is strong.
(C) if either argument I or II is strong.
(D) if neither argument I nor II is strong.
(E) if both arguments I and II are strong.

Explnation:– I is weak because it lacks in substance. Merely calling something “a nuisance” is simplistic. II is weak because it wrongly assumes that those people can’t contribute to the nation otherwise.
5. Statement: Should cricket replace hockey as the national sport of India?
Arguments: I. Yes, the performance of the hockey team has been dismal for the last few years.
II. No, cricket is the national sport of Australia and no two countries must have the same national sport.

(A) if only argument I is strong.
(B) if only argument II is strong.
(C) if either argument I or II is strong.
(D) if neither argument I nor II is strong.
(E) if both arguments I and II are strong.

Explnation:– I is strong because performance should definitely be a criterion for “national sport” status. II is irrelevant: one fails to see the harm in two nations sharing a national sport. Besides, if every nation decided to have a different national sport, we would run out of sports as there would be just too many countries.