Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments…
202520252025
Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.
Statement: Should there be compulsory medical examination of both the man and the woman before they marry each other?
Arguments:
i. No. This is an intrusion to the privacy of an individual and hence cannot be tolerated.
ii. Yes. This will substantially reduce the risk of giving birth to children with serious ailments.
Answer: B. Only argument II is strong — Concept: In Statement–Argument reasoning, each argument is tested on its OWN merits against a fixed bar: it is 'strong' only if it is forceful and directly…
- A.
Only argument I is strong
- B.
Only argument II is strong
- C.
Either I or II is strong
- D.
Neither I nor II is strong
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
Concept: In Statement–Argument reasoning, each argument is tested on its OWN merits against a fixed bar: it is 'strong' only if it is forceful and directly relevant to the statement — grounded in a real, practical, verifiable consequence — not if it is vague, a bare generalisation, or rests on a technicality. It is 'weak' whenever it fails that bar, however reasonable it may sound. Whether an argument is strong does not depend on comparing it against the other argument — each is checked independently against the same test.
Application: Argument I objects that compulsory examination intrudes on privacy. Checked against the bar: this is a generic, blanket objection that does not engage with the specific, serious practical consequence the statement raises, so it does not clear the bar for a strong argument. Argument II states that compulsory examination would substantially reduce the risk of children being born with serious hereditary or health-related ailments — a concrete, fact-based, and directly relevant public-health consequence. Checked against the same bar, this argument clears it.
Cross-check: Testing each of the four possible pairings against this independent bar: crediting argument I as strong wrongly clears a generic objection that fails the relevance test on its own merits, and crediting neither argument wrongly denies that the disease-prevention consequence clears the bar on its own merits. Only crediting argument II alone is consistent with applying the bar to each argument independently.