Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

In the question, a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should 2-wheelers be exempted from the proposed Delhi ODD-EVEN scheme (vehicles with a license plate ending in an odd number would drive on the Delhi roads on one day and with a licence plate ending in an even number would be driven on the other day)? Arguments: I: No, 2-wheelers cause more pollution than cars. II: Yes, 2-wheelers are used by the lower middle-class people.

In the question, a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should 2-wheelers be exempted from the proposed Delhi ODD-EVEN scheme (vehicles with a license plate ending in an odd number would drive on the Delhi roads on one day and with a licence plate ending in an even number would be driven on the other day)? Arguments: I: No, 2-wheelers cause more pollution than cars. II: Yes, 2-wheelers are used by the lower middle-class people. Correct Answer Only argument I is strong

Argument I is strong.

If 2-wheelers causes more pollution than cars, not exempting them would be unfair and would defeat the very purpose, reducing pollution, for which the ODD-EVEN scheme would be introduced, noting that the number of 2-wheelers in the Delhi roads are more than the 4-wheelers. The Argument I is strong.

Using public transport is more affordable than using 2-wheelers. Not exempting the 2-wheelers from the proposed ODD-EVEN scheme would force the 2-wheelers users to use public transport and would save them money, decrease pollution and traffic jam. So, the argument II is weak.

Related Questions

In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should local train tickets be subsidized? Argument I : No, in an environment where locals trains are overcrowded, subsidy will worsen the situation. Argument II : Yes, Local trains reduce number of vehicles on the road, thus reducing pollution, reduce costs and travel time.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should the sale of alcohol near highways be banned? Argument I: No, people should have the freedom to decide as it is their fundamental right. Argument II: Yes, 90% of road accidents involve drivers who are under influence of alcohol.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments I and II. You have to consider the statement True even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given argument, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should Indian government Implant Air purifiers in all cities to curb air pollution. Arguments I: Yes, because in most of the Indian cities the PPM is above 200 which comes in category of “Extremely Dangerous” category. II: No, because this is not the permanent solution to curb air pollution
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: Since English is one of the official languages of India, should all schools be made English medium? Arguments: Yes. It would teach people the global language. It is important that people learn the language that has become a status symbol in this country. No. More than half the population does not speak English and it would only make learning in schools more difficult for students.
Question: In the question, a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should Indian cricket team accept the invitation for a tournament hosted in Pakistan given the hostile situation in the host country? Argument 1: Yes. Politics should not affect sportsmen spirit. Argument 2: No. Safety of the players should not be undermined.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be atvariance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement : Should sale of alcohol near highways be banned? Argument I : No, people should have freedom to decide as it is their fundamental right.
Argument II : Yes, 90% of road accidents involve drivers who are under influence of alcohol.
Question: In the question, a statement is given followed by two arguments, numbered 1 and 2. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should admissions to higher educational institutions be compulsorily based on merit? Argument 1: No. This would be unfair to the weaker students. Argument 2: Yes. This would improve the quality of work put in by students. 
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: Should the Indian Government withdraw the subsidies on LPG cylinders considering a portion of the population can afford to buy unsubsidised cylinders? Arguments: Yes. Subsidising cylinders leads to its misuse. By not giving subsidies on cylinders, the Government can save a part of its income and spend it on other more productive uses. No. Withdrawing subsidies on cylinders would make them too expensive for the poor and the middle class income groups and they would eventually turn to unsustainable means for household uses leading to pollution and ill health.
In the question, a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should the privatization of every government bank be promoted? Argument 1: Yes. That would reduce the administrative burden on the government. Argument 2: No. That would weaken the financial condition of government banks.
In the question a statement is given, followed by two arguments, I and II. You have to consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given arguments, if any, is a strong argument. Statement: Should eating Paan at public places be made punishable? Argument I: Yes, people eat Paan and spit and makes public places dirty.  Argument II: No, Indians love Paan.