Join 60,000+ competitive exam aspirants
or with email
Your Cart
SubtotalтВ╣0
TotalтВ╣0
Examoogle тАв User тАв info@examoogle.com тАв EE-2024-8821
Chapter 1 of 12 тАв Page 1 of 248ЁЯФТ Protected PDF тАв Watermarked
Join 60,000+ competitive exam aspirants
Statement: Should the government make the study of environmental science compulsory at the undergraduate level? Arguments: I. Yes, it will create awareness among the youth about climate change. II. No, it will increase the academic burden on students who are already struggling with core subjects.
Only argument I is strong
Only argument II is strong
Both I and II are strong
Neither I nor II is strong
Only argument I is strong
Evaluate arguments based on social necessity versus practical feasibility; an argument is strong only if it addresses the core issue without resorting to personal opinion or weak excuses.
Evaluate arguments based on social necessity versus practical feasibility; an argument is strong only if it addresses the core issue without resorting to personal opinion or weak excuses.
Analyze Argument I
Argument I states that compulsory environmental science creates awareness about climate change. This addresses a global, urgent, and long-term societal need, making it a strong argument because it focuses on a positive, impactful outcome for the nation.
Analyze Argument II
Argument II claims it increases the academic burden on struggling students. This is a weak argument because curriculum changes are standard in education systems for developmental progress, and complaining about 'academic burden' is a subjective grievance that does not invalidate the necessity of the subject.
B: Argument II is weak as it represents a subjective challenge rather than a valid critique of the policy's objective. C: Both cannot be strong because II is a weak, non-substantive argument. D: Neither is incorrect because I is a strong, socially relevant argument.
A is correct because Argument I addresses a critical, widespread societal need (climate change awareness), while Argument II is a weak, subjective concern regarding academic pressure.
In Statement-Argument questions, always reject arguments that suggest the status quo should remain simply because change causes 'burden' or 'inconvenience'; focus on whether the argument supports the greater good.