Join 60,000+ competitive exam aspirants
Statement: The government has decided to provide free electricity to farmers for irrigation. Arguments: I. This will increase the agricultural yield and help the economy. II. This will lead to a significant fiscal deficit and is not sustainable.
Only I is strong
Only II is strong
Both I and II are strong
Neither I nor II is strong
Both I and II are strong
Evaluate arguments based on two criteria: does it provide a logical benefit (Argument I) and does it highlight a realistic, significant drawback (Argument II)? If both are valid, select Both.
Evaluate arguments based on two criteria: does it provide a logical benefit (Argument I) and does it highlight a realistic, significant drawback (Argument II)? If both are valid, select Both.
Analyze Argument I
Argument I supports the government's decision by citing positive outcomes like increased agricultural yield and economic growth. This is a constructive perspective that justifies the policy's intent.
Analyze Argument II
Argument II challenges the decision by highlighting a critical negative impact: fiscal deficit and sustainability issues. This is a valid, logical concern regarding economic feasibility, making it a strong counter-argument.
Conclusion
Since both arguments address relevant aspects of the decision (one positive outcome and one economic constraint), both are considered strong in the context of the Statement-Argument reasoning format.
A: It ignores the valid economic concern in argument II. B: It ignores the valid developmental benefit mentioned in argument I. D: Both arguments are relevant and grounded in logical consequences of the policy, making them both strong.
C is correct because both arguments present valid, logical perspectives regarding the positive economic impact and the negative fiscal sustainability of the policy.
In Argument questions, look for whether the argument is 'strong' (relevant and logical) rather than whether you personally agree with it; always weigh both the pro and con sides.