Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

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

1 Answers

Option 4 : Only III is strong.

The correct answer is option 4, i.e. Only III 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 realize that the biggest challenge for security forces is the recruitment of local terrorist and the most appropriate argument in support of it is the influence which is on the ones who attend someone close’s funeral and also get a feeling to join terrorism. This is a general happening which occurs in most of the people who suffer from the pain of seeing their close ones on the death bed and it ignites a fury to join terrorism among the individuals. And as such incidents will keep on happening more and more terrorist will be born and this might prove fatal thereby, affecting the peace and destruction. As far as rest of the arguments are concerned both (I) and (II) do not specifically highlight the reason as to why the local recruitment will pose a problem for the security forces.

Thus, the correct answer is option 4.
5 views

Related Questions

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 government ban Cigarette industries Arguments: I. Yes, as it is very injurious for any person consuming them and causes cancer. II. No, forbidding them would mean that those people who work in cigarette industries would lose their jobs. ?
1 Answers 4 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: A moment of silence, please, for the world’s cheapest car, which had all but has died in India. It was almost 10 years old. The Nano’s death was confirmed by production numbers: Tata Motors Ltd. produced 1 unit in June, down from 275 in the same month last year. Exports were zero, versus 25 in June 2017. The company acknowledged that the car in its ‘present form cannot continue beyond 2019’. Why Arguments: I. The expiry of the ‘people’s car’, as Tata Motors branded it in 2008, holds lessons for automakers hoping to make it in India: While consumers may be value-conscious, cutting costs to the bone in pursuit of a gimmicky claim to fame is of no use if the end result is a second-rate vehicle with a tendency to catch fire.  II. The Nano’s failure to sell stands is in stark contrast to the rest of the Indian car market. From motorbikes to cars and trucks, growth in every segment is picking up.  III. This is a market where electric vehicles are non-existent and the chatter over fancy ideas such as future mobility and autonomous vehicles, which pervades the rest of the auto world, is muted.?
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
In each question below is given a statement numbered I, II and III. An assumption is something supposed or taken for granted. You have to consider the following assumption and decide which of the assumption is implicit in the statement. Statement: About a year ago, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had told the world that the signature of a chartered accountant on financial statements was, perhaps, more powerful than even one of his own. ‘Just like doctors don’t want people to be ill to get more business, chartered accountants, too, need to safeguard the society’s economic health. Your signature is more powerful than the PM’s, and the government also believes the accounts signed by you’, Modi had said.  Assumptions: I. The CA community, however, may not have woken up to the value of the initials they put on financial statements. Last year has been more of a challenge for the community’s reputation, with banking frauds, asset quality divergences and mid-term auditor resignations dominating the headlines.  II. There cannot be a situation where there will be 100% agreement on everything. You may have rules but still judgmental factors in credit, asset recognition come in. The approach is that as soon as the asset is stretched, banks have to recognise the problem.  III. But even basic logic just went out of the window and banks together kept dishing out loans to such companies even when their annual turnover was half of the total debt.?
1 Answers 5 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 usage of pesticides be reduced in growing crops Arguments: I. Yes, cause when humans intake them, it causes many harmful effects to the body if the amount of pesticides is more than a level. II. No, as it is used to control various pests and disease carriers.?
1 Answers 4 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