Directions: In making decisions about important questions, it is desirable to…
2025
Directions: 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 question below is 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 India also implement the one-child policy?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Increasing population has caused too many problems.
II. No. A single child feels lonely.
- A.
Only argument I is strong
- B.
Only argument II is strong
- C.
Either argument I or II is strong
- D.
Both I and II are strong
Attempted by 4 students.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: A
Concept: An argument counts as “strong” only when it satisfies two conditions together — it addresses a matter of real, general importance connected to the issue, and it is directly relevant to the specific course of action being weighed, not a trivial, personal, or merely hypothetical aside.
Application: Argument I ties the proposed policy to overpopulation, a widely recognised, substantial national problem that is directly relevant to why such a policy would even be considered — it satisfies both the importance and relevance tests. Argument II objects on the ground that an only child feels lonely, which is a subjective, personal consequence for an individual family rather than a weighty, general consideration bearing on national policy — it fails the importance test.
“Only argument II is strong” fails because a personal feeling of loneliness does not meet the importance test that a strong argument requires.
“Either argument I or II is strong” fails because strength is not interchangeable between the two arguments — each must independently clear the importance-and-relevance bar on its own terms, so it cannot simply be a case of any one of them qualifying in place of the other.
“Both I and II are strong” fails because being strong requires BOTH arguments to independently clear the importance-and-relevance bar, and the loneliness objection does not clear it.
Cross-check: Removing the overpopulation link from argument I would leave no substantial reason for the policy at all, confirming it is doing real argumentative work; removing the loneliness point from argument II would not weaken any national-level case against the policy, confirming it never was more than a minor, personal aside.
Hence, only argument I is a strong argument.