Join 60,000+ competitive exam aspirants
Statement: 'The government should ban the use of single-use plastic to protect the marine ecosystem.' Argument I: Yes, marine life is suffering due to microplastics. Argument II: No, it will cause huge job losses in the plastic manufacturing sector. Decide which argument is strong.
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
A strong argument must directly address the central premise by presenting either a significant positive outcome or a substantial negative impact/challenge, regardless of whether you agree with the outcome.
A strong argument must directly address the central premise by presenting either a significant positive outcome or a substantial negative impact/challenge, regardless of whether you agree with the outcome.
Analyze Argument I
Argument I states that marine life is suffering due to microplastics. This is a strong argument because it highlights the fundamental reason behind the government's proposal, demonstrating a direct benefit to the ecosystem.
Analyze Argument II
Argument II highlights economic consequences, specifically job losses. This is a strong argument because it addresses a significant negative socioeconomic implication of the policy, which a government must consider before making a decision.
A: Wrong because it ignores the economic validity of the counter-argument. B: Wrong because it ignores the ecological justification of the primary argument. D: Wrong because both arguments are logically relevant to the policy decision.
C is correct because both arguments address significant aspectsтАФecological benefits and economic risksтАФmaking them both valid and strong points for consideration in policy-making.
In Statement-Argument questions, avoid letting your personal opinion influence you. Focus on whether the argument provides a relevant and logically sound justification for or against the statement.