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.
21.
Statement: Should all the students graduating in any discipline desirous of pursuing post-graduation of the subjects of their choice be allowed to enrol in the post-graduate courses?
Arguments:
Yes. The students are the best judge of their capabilities and there should not be restrictions for joining post-graduate courses.
No. The students need to study relevant subjects in graduate courses to enrol in post-graduate courses and the students must fulfil such conditions.
No. There are not enough institutes offering post-graduate courses which can accommodate all the graduates desirous of seeking post-graduate education of their own choice.
Only argument II is strong. The students cannot be enrolled in the courses just on the basis of their interests, but their compatibility with the same also matters. So, I does not hold. Besides, lack of institutes is no criteria to deny post-graduate courses to students. So, argument III also does not hold. II provides a genuine reason and thus holds strong.
Statement: Should we impart sex education in schools?
Arguments:
Yes. All the progressive nations do so.
No. We cannot impart it in co-educational schools.
Yes. It would certainly help in eradicating the existing misunderstanding and make the younger generation physically and mentally healthier.
It will destroy the moral fibre and the highly esteemed value system which we have inherited from our forefathers.
Only II and III are strong. Clearly, the pursuance of a policy in India cannot be based on the pretext that it is followed in other countries because every country has its own environment and situations. So, argument I is vague. Also, imparting sex education in co-educational schools where boys and girls study together, could spoil the atmosphere there and hinder the studies. So, argument II is strong. However, sex education in schools can help students remove their misconceptions and doubts at a stage, when they would otherwise hesitate to discuss the same with others. Also, sex forms an integral part of the future life of the students and knowledge regarding the same, is nothing degenerative and shameful. So, argument III holds strong, while IV does not.
Statement: Should coal engines be replaced by electric engines in trains?
Arguments:
Yes. Coal engines cause a lot of pollution.
Yes. Electric engines are good on performance, easy to operate and low on maintenance.
No. India does not produce enough electricity to fulfil its domestic needs also.
Clearly, electric engines shall be smoke-free and thus not cause pollution as the coal engines. They also run at higher speeds and perform better. Thus, both I and II hold strong. Argument III does not provide a convincing reason and hence does not hold strong.
Statement: Should all those who are convicted for heinous crimes like murder or rape, beyond all reasonable doubts be given capital punishment or death penalty?
Arguments:
No. The death penalty should be given only in very rare and exceptional cases.
Yes. This is the only way to punish such people who take others' lives or indulge in inhuman activities.
Yes. Such severe punishments only will make people refrain from such heinous acts and the society will be safer.
No. Those who are repentant for the crime they committed should be given a chance to improve and lead a normal life.
Clearly, a person committing a heinous crime like murder or rape should be so punished as to set an example for others not to attempt such acts in future. So, argument III holds strong. Argument I is vague while the use of the word 'only' in argument II makes it weak. Also, it cannot be assured whether a criminal is really repentant of his acts or not, he may also exhibit so just to get rid of punishment. So, argument IV also does not hold.
Statement: Should all the profit making public sector units be sold to private companies?
Arguments:
Yes. This will help the government to augment its resources for implementing the development programmes.
No. The private companies will not be able to run these units effectively.
Yes. There will be a significant improvement in the quality of services.
No. There would not be job security for the employees at all the levels.
The government cannot sell off public sector units just to pool up funds for development. Besides, if it does so, these units shall be handed over to private companies which are fully equipped to run these units effectively. So, neither I nor II holds strong. Privatization shall surely ensure better services, but private companies adopt hire and fire policy and they are free to terminate the services of any employee as and when they wish to. Thus, both III and IV hold strong.
