Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by three or four arguments numbered I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is/are 'strong' arguments) and which is/are 'weak' arguments) and accordingly choose your answer from the alternatives given below each question.
11.
Statement: Should the system of Lok Adalats and mobile courts be encouraged in India?
Arguments:
Yes. It helps to grant speedy justice to the masses.
Yes. The dispensing of minor cases at this level would reduce the burden on the higher courts.
No. These courts are usually partial in justice.
Courts are meant to judge impartially. So, argument III is vague. The system of local courts shall speed up justice by providing easy approach and simplified procedures, and thus ease the burden of the higher courts. So, I as well as II holds strong.
Statement: Should India acquire/manufacture the latest nuclear weapons?
Arguments:
Yes. The enemies of India are improving their weapons continuously and it becomes imperative to protect the sovereignty and integrity of the country.
No. Instead the money should be diverted to development activities.
No. The international community will isolate Indians and this will bring a setback to Indian economy.
No. It will be against our policy of maintaining world peace.
Clearly, in the blind race for attaining nuclear powers, acquiring nuclear weapons is an inevitability to protect the country from the threat of nuclear powers. So, argument I holds strong. Also, defence of the country is as important as internal development. So, II does not hold. Argument III seems to be vague. Also, India intends to acquire nuclear weapons for self-defence and not aggression. So, argument IV also does not hold.
Statement: Should there be a complete ban on manufacture and use of firecrackers?
Arguments:
No. This will render thousands of workers jobless.
Yes. The firecracker manufacturers use child labour to a large extent.
Yes. This will be a concrete step to reduce noise and air pollution.
No. Use of firecrackers makes certain special occasions more lively and joyful.
Clearly, banning a product would surely render jobless the large number of workers involved in manufacturing it. Besides, firecrackers on burning produce explosive sounds and immense poisonous fumes, which cause both air and noise pollution. So, both arguments I and HI hold. However, to stop child labour, it is not necessary to close down the industry but strict laws against child abuse should be enforced and legal actions taken. Similarly, there are many other ways to make parties boisterous and special events enjoyable. Hence, II as well as IV does not hold strong.
Statement: Should "literacy" be the minimum criterion for becoming a voter in India?
Arguments:
No. Mere literacy is no guarantee of political maturity of an individual.
Yes. Illiterate people are less likely to make politically wiser decisions of voting for a right candidate or party.
No. Voting is the constitutional right of every citizen.
Clearly, illiterate people lack will power and maturity in thoughts. They may easily be misled into false convictions or lured into temptations to vote for a particular group. So, argument II holds. However, a person is literate does not mean that he is conscious of all political movements, which requires practical awareness of everyday events. Thus, I also holds strong. Besides, Constitution has extended the right to vote equally to all its citizens. Hence, III also holds.
Statement: Should there be only few banks in place of numerous smaller banks in India?
Arguments:
Yes. This will help secure the investor's money as these big banks will be able to withstand intermittent market related shocks.
No. A large number of people will lose their jobs as after the merger many employees will be redundant.
Yes. This will help consolidate the entire banking industry and will lead to healthy competition.
The security of the investor's money is not related to the size of the bank. Besides even after consolidation, the number of investors, their amounts and hence the duties shall remain the same and so no employees will be redundant. Reducing the number of smaller banks will also not affect the mutual competition among the banks. Thus, none of the arguments holds strong.
