Consider the Assertion–I and Assertion–II and select the right code given…
2012
Consider the Assertion–I and Assertion–II and select the right code given below :
Assertion–I : Even Bank-lockers are not safe. Thieves can break them and take away your wealth. But thieves can not go to heaven. So you should keep your wealth in heaven.
Assertion–II : The difference of skin-colour of beings is because of the distance from the sun and not because of some permanent traits. Skin-colour is the result of body’s reaction to the sun and its rays.
Codes :
Answer: B. The assertion-I is an argument but the assertion-II is not. — Concept: an argument versus an explanation. An argument is a set of statements in which one or more statements (the premises) are put forward as grounds for…
- A.
Both the assertions-I and II are forms of argument.
- B.
The assertion-I is an argument but the assertion-II is not.
- C.
The assertion-II is an argument but the assertion-I is not.
- D.
Both the assertions are explanations of facts.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
Concept: an argument versus an explanation. An argument is a set of statements in which one or more statements (the premises) are put forward as grounds for accepting some other statement (the conclusion); its purpose is to establish a claim that is treated as open to dispute. An explanation starts from a fact that is already accepted as true and supplies its cause or reason; its purpose is to make that accepted fact intelligible, not to prove it. Whether the reasoning is strong, weak or plainly absurd does not change the classification — a bad inference is still an inference, and therefore still an argument.
Applying the test to each passage
The first assertion sets out three statements — bank lockers are not safe, thieves can break them, and thieves cannot go to heaven — and then draws the recommendation "So you should keep your wealth in heaven". The inference indicator "so" marks that recommendation as a conclusion and the three preceding statements as the grounds offered in its support, which is exactly the premise–conclusion structure of an argument.
That conclusion is obviously unacceptable, since wealth cannot be deposited in heaven. But soundness is a judgement about the quality of an argument, not about whether a passage is one, so the first assertion remains an argument.
The second assertion begins from a fact that nobody is being asked to accept as disputed — that the skin-colour of human beings differs — and then supplies its cause: distance from the sun, and the body’s reaction to the sun and its rays. The phrase "is because of" introduces a cause, not grounds offered for a claim.
Because no conclusion is being established, the second assertion makes an already-accepted fact intelligible instead of proving anything. It is an explanation of a fact, and therefore not an argument.
Cross-check with the signal words
Passage | What it does | Signal | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
Assertion–I (bank lockers / heaven) | Offers reasons for a recommendation | "So you should ..." | Argument |
Assertion–II (skin-colour / sun) | States the cause of an accepted fact | "is because of ..." | Explanation |
Hence the correct reading is that Assertion–I is an argument while Assertion–II is not an argument but an explanation of a fact.