Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

  1. None is strong
  2. All except III and II are strong
  3. All except II and I are strong
  4. Only II is strong
  5. All are strong
5 views

1 Answers

Option 2 : All except III and II are strong

The correct answer is option 2, i.e. All except III and II are strong. i.e., only I is strong.

We first make sure to read the statement carefully and then see what immediate inferences can be drawn based on our first reading. The next step is to look at the arguments given in the options, analyze them and see if they seem relevant with respect to the information/data provided to us. Finally, it is very important to study the question closely.

Following the aforementioned steps we must analyze the given statement and the corresponding question closely. Argument (I) captures the essence of the above statement in the most appropriate manner and explains the reason for the downfall of Nano by stating reasons that consumers are becoming value-conscious and the car also had a tendency to catch fire.

Argument (II) is irrelevant and can be eliminated as it compares Nano with motorbike and trucks and states that growth is picking up in every segment but does not explain the reason for the death of Nano. Based on similar grounds, we can reject argument (III) also (hint: comparison with autonomous vehicles).

Thus, the correct answer is option 2.
5 views

Related Questions

In the question below, a statement is given followed by three courses of actions numbered I, II and III. On the basis of the information given, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the suggested course of action logically follow (s) for pursuing. Statement: Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk have agreed to pay a total of $40 million and make a series of concessions to settle a government lawsuit alleging Musk duped investors with misleading statements about a proposed buyout of the company. The settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission allows Musk to remain CEO of the electric car company but requires him to relinquish his role as chairman for at least three years.  Courses of action: I. Tesla must hire an independent chairman to oversee the company, something that should please a number of shareholders who have criticised Tesla's board for being too beholden to Musk.  II. The deal could remove one cloud that hangs over Tesla. Investors fretted about the company's ability to cope without Musk, a charismatic entrepreneur whose penchant for coming up with revolutionary ideas has drawn comparisons to one of Silicon Valley's most revered visionaries, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.  III. Besides paying a fine and stripping Musk of his chairman's title, Tesla also must appoint two more directors who have no ties to the company or its management. Musk will be allowed to remain on the board.?
1 Answers 6 Views
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 banks provide special loans to farmers Arguments: I. Yes, as with that amount the farmer would be able to afford modern equipment’s which will increase his earnings. II. No, because people may take advantage of this, even those who can afford to pay may not.?
1 Answers 4 Views
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.?
1 Answers 5 Views
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 it be necessary to give paid maternity leave Arguments: Yes. Paid maternity leave gives time to women to get used to the physical and psychological changes after pregnancy. It allows women to balance work and home together without choosing one over the other. No. Paid maternity leave gives undue advantage to women who get paid without working. It is also not good for business as the company pays for workers who are not contributing anything to it.?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: As part of an effort to address the rising cases of divorces in the country, China's Jiangsu province has introduced a voluntary 'divorce test' for couples planning to end their marriage. Couples who score above 60 may be able to save their marriage, the civil affairs bureau said. Around 34 lakh Chinese couples filed for divorce in 2017. Is this sort of a decision/ test legitimate Arguments: I. Yes, it is a valid decision and will give couples a chance to save their relationship. II. No, if a couple has decided to end their relationship, such a test won’t be beneficial. III. Yes, there is no harm in giving the test, if they want to separate their ways they can. But there might be a ray of hope that they decide to rethink their decision.?
1 Answers 4 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: The domestic equity market has become supervolatile  and converted the psychology of every market participant into fear. Greed and fear continue to alternate in the market, like the two sides of a coin. To a seasoned player, there seems to be nothing new as such instances of panic-selling often occur time and again. Why Arguments: I. Since demonetisation, herd mentality had jacked up financials, banks and NBFC stocks to great heights on the pretext of financial inclusion and formalisation of the economy. This caused the financials gain disproportionate share in Nifty50 at 35 per cent of the free float market capitalisation, which was unheard of in the past.  II. The domestic market seems to be deeply oversold and can rebound on any good news. The Nifty50 has taken long-term support at the three-year trend line, which makes a case for the correction to near its end. III. Investors, therefore, should not panic and sell off shares. Instead they should do the reverse and gather the courage to pump in more money into the market by picking quality stocks or investing in ETFs for more stable returns. ?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments, is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: Over the past five decades, term deposits in banks have emerged as the primary instrument of financial savings for the average Indian after former premier Indira Gandhi embarked on a mission to nationalise the lenders - 14 in the first tranche - on a rainy afternoon in July 1969. Coming with an unsaid sovereign guarantee of sorts, fixed deposits (FDs) seemingly offered investors liquidity - and safety - as nationalisation sought, in part, to arrest the 40-odd bank failures a year.  Now, however, deposits must burnish their allure to retain leadership status in an increasingly crowded financial marketplace that offers choice. Why Arguments: I. If FDs are giving 7.5% and the effective tax rate is 10%, one gets close to 5-5.2% return. Similarly, in the case of FMP, if the rate is 7.5%, effective taxation comes to 10%, one gets 6.75%. It is higher than the effective returns on bank deposits.  II. People are becoming aware of more asset classes that offer better returns, and the quest for such assets became more pronounced after interest rates fell substantially over the past four years.  III. Savers are looking at mutual funds and provident funds for the higher return. ?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: The imposition of Governor’s rule in Jammu and Kashmir will not affect operations in the state, according to Army Chief General, even as security forces are looking at higher intensity of operations against terrorists, to force them to ‘hibernate’. These operations will be based on greater level of intelligence from the J&K Police, as compared to what was being generated during the suspension of operations for the holy month of Ramzan. A challenge, however, for the security forces still remains the recruitment of local terrorists. Why Arguments: I. Meanwhile, data shared by security forces reveal that there are about 210 terrorists currently operating in Kashmir, mainly in the South. Out of this, 65 per cent are locals and the remaining are foreign terrorists.  II. In South Kashmir itself, the maximum number of terrorists belong to the HizbulMujahideen, while some are from the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. III. When a local terrorist is killed during an operation, at his funeral more locals are willing to join terrorism. It is a mob mentality.?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: India has constituted a group to study the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) policy of India. The group will evaluate the SEZ policy and suggest measures to cater to the needs of exporters in the present economic scenario. This comes after the United States challenged India’s entire set of export subsidy programs in the WTO. Why is the United States unhappy with India Arguments: I. Under the TIES, in 2017-18, exports recorded a growth of about 10 percent to USD 303 billion. II. According to them, India’s export subsidies do not let the developers of India have full freedom of subcontracting, importing without license, etc. III. According to them, India appears to be providing subsidies through various export promotion programs, SEZs, etc. which is harming their companies.?
1 Answers 5 Views
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by three arguments numbered I, II and III. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are ‘strong’ arguments and which is/are ‘weak’ arguments and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question. Statement: As a trade war looms, one of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s biggest weapons could be boycotts of American brands by his country’s legion of consumers. But Xi would also be risking collateral damage at home, The China operations of all-American brands ranging from Coca-Cola Co. and McDonald’s Corp. to Walt Disney Co. are co-owned by state-backed Chinese firms.  Which among the following arguments support the above statement in the best possible manner Arguments: I. One of Coke’s main China partners is government-backed COFCO Corp., Shanghai Disneyland is part owned by a local consortium, and McDonald’s franchisee in the country is controlled by state-backed conglomerate Citic Ltd. and private-equity firm Citic Capital Holdings.  II. Even when Chinese companies don’t have direct ownership links with U.S. brands, boycotts or other non-tariff retaliation would hit the local partners of those American companies. III. The number of big clean wins in terms of striking against the other guy (American brands) - without accidentally punching your own guy (Chinese firms) in the face - is extremely large.?
1 Answers 5 Views