Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

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 individuals/institutes having treasures of national significance like Nobel Prizes, hand them over to the Central Government for their safe custody? Arguments : I. Yes. The individuals or institutions do not have enough resources to protect them. II. No. These are the property of the individuals/institutions who win them and should be in their custody.

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 individuals/institutes having treasures of national significance like Nobel Prizes, hand them over to the Central Government for their safe custody? Arguments : I. Yes. The individuals or institutions do not have enough resources to protect them. II. No. These are the property of the individuals/institutions who win them and should be in their custody. Correct Answer Only argument II is strong

Answer: Option 2

Clearly, the awards are given for individual excellence and perfection. So, only argument II holds 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 individuals/institutes having treasures of national significance like Nobel Prizes, hand them over to the Central Government for their safe custody?

Arguments :
I. Yes. The individuals or institutions do not have enough resources to protect them.
II. No. These are the property of the individuals/institutions who win them and should be in their custody.
Should individuals/industries having treasures of national significance like nobel prizes, hand them over to central goverment for their safe custody? Arguments: 1. Yes. They d not have enough resources to protect them 2. No. These are the properties of Individuals /Industries who win them. So, they should be there int heir custody
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 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 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: Since the University of Delhi has a large number of outstation students, should the local students get priority admissions over the outstation students? Arguments: Yes. The locals do not want to share their resources with the outsiders. No. The admissions are on the basis of competition and better students deserve to get admissions first irrespective of the place they come from.
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 teachers be held responsible for the failure of students? Arguments: Yes. It is the job of the teachers to see that every student passes. If a student fails, it is because the teachers could not effectively do their job. No. A teacher’s job is to teach and not to make sure if the student passes. If a student fails, it is because he was not capable enough.
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 zoos be abolished? Arguments: I. Yes. Zoos keep animals in captivity and away from their natural habitat. II. No. Zoos save many species from extinction by keeping them safe. Furthermore, zoos provide employment to a large number of people and generate billions in annual economic activity.
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 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.