Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

A question is given on the basis of two arguments. Decide which of the arguments is/are strong with respect to the question. Question: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the central government? Argument: I. No. The political party in power should be given freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed. II. Yes. To avoid unnecessary expenditure, the number of ministers should be limited to some percentage of the total number of seats in Parliament.

A question is given on the basis of two arguments. Decide which of the arguments is/are strong with respect to the question. Question: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the central government? Argument: I. No. The political party in power should be given freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed. II. Yes. To avoid unnecessary expenditure, the number of ministers should be limited to some percentage of the total number of seats in Parliament. Correct Answer Both Arguments I and II are strong.

Logic: We have to analyze the question and then we need to conclude if the argument is strong as per the question.

"Question: Should there be a maximum limit for the number of ministers in the central government?"

Now we have to analyse the argument.

I. No. The political party in power should be given freedom to decide the number of ministers to be appointed.

Conclusion: This statement is strong. An increase in the number of ministers will provide the government with a better surrounding to execute any task very easily and properly.

II. Yes. To avoid unnecessary expenditure, the number of ministers should be limited to some percentage of the total number of seats in Parliament.

Conclusion: This statement is Strong. An increase in ministers will also result in more expenditure in form of salaries and other expenses.

As it can be seen that both of the statements are strong.

Therefore, the correct answer is "Both Arguments I and II are strong.".

Related Questions

Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument. 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.
Directions : Each of the following question consists of a statement followed by two arguments I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument.

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.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should the government provide shelter for the homeless? Arguments: I. Yes, the municipal government should take some responsibility of supporting people who aren’t in a position to support themselves. II. No, because the government should help these people to get back on their feet and become self-sufficient by providing job opportunities so that they will be capable of providing shelter for themselves.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between strong and weak arguments. Strong arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. Weak arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below are followed by two arguments each numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the two arguments is the strong argument and which is the weak argument. Statement: Can the Government provide housing facilities to the homeless? Arguments: Yes. The Government can do anything and the homeless cannot get homes without the help of the Government. No. The Government does not have enough resources to provide for the housing facilities for such a large number of people. Instead the Government should build homeless shelters.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should a limit be set on expenditure people can make on weddings? Arguments: I. Yes. Marriages are waste of money and time. II. No. Marriage is an individual’s personal affair and they should be allowed to spend how much they want to.  
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Is it advantageous to hold elections simultaneously for parliament and the state assemblies? Argument: I: Yes, this way ensures election expenditure is reduced. II: No, Parties are held accountable through frequent elections, which will lose it purpose through joint elections.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should government ban child labour? Arguments: I. Yes, because they are forced to work against their will. Lots of kids die because they work in dangerous environment. II Yes, because instead of making them work they should be educated as it is their basic right.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should government avoid coal and look for more conventional energy sources? Arguments: I. Yes. Burning of coal releases harmful pollutants. II. No. It is the cheapest form of electricity available for now.  
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should government promote small scale industries in rural areas? Arguments: I. Yes, because by doing that many people in rural areas can get employed. II. Yes, because small scale enterprise are more flexible.
In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between ‘strong’ arguments and ‘weak’ arguments. ‘Strong’ arguments are those, which are both important and directly related to the question. ‘Weak’ arguments are those, which are of minor importance and also may not be directly related to the question or may be related to a trivial aspect of the question. The questions below if followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments a ‘strong’ argument is and which a ‘weak’ argument is. Statement: Should fight for Cauvery river stop between the states? Arguments: I. Yes, because instead of fighting over it, the river should be saved and actions should be taken in cleaning up. II. No, because this fight is benefiting the political parties in many ways.