Statement: Should there be a world government? Arguments: I.Yes. It will help in eliminating tensions among the nations. II.No. Then, only the developed countries will dominate in the government.
Clearly, a world government cannot eliminate tensions among nations because it will also have the ruling group and the opposition group. Further, the more powerful and diplomatic shall rule the world to their interests. So, only argument II holds.
Statement: Should there be students union in college/university? Arguments: I.No. This will create a political atmosphere in the campus. II.Yes, it is very necessary Students are future political leaders.
The students union formation shall be a step towards giving to students the basic education in the field of politics. However, it shall create the same political atmosphere in the campus. Thus, both the arguments hold strong.
Statement: Should the practice of transfers of clerical cadre employees from government offices of one city to those of another be stopped? Arguments: I.No. Transfer of employees is a routine administrative matter and we must continue it. II.Yes. It involves lot of governmental expenditure and inconvenience too many compared to the benefits it yields.
It is not necessary that any practice which has been in vogue for a long time is right and it must be continued. So, argument I is not strong. Also, a practice must be continued or discontinued in view of its merits/demerits and not on grounds of the expenditure or procedures it entails. The policy of transfer is generally practised to do away with corruption, which is absolutely essential. So, argument II also does not hold.
Statement: Should India give away Kashmir to Pakistan? Arguments: I.No. Kashmir is a beautiful state. It earns a lot of foreign exchange for India. II.Yes. This would help settle conflicts.
Clearly, India cannot part with a state that is a major foreign exchange earner to it. So, argument I holds strong. Further, giving away a piece of land unconditionally and unreasonably is no solution to settle disputes. So, argument II is vague.
Statement: Is paying ransom or agreeing to the conditions of kidnappers of political figures, a proper course of action? Arguments: I.Yes. The victims must be saved at all cost. II.No. It encourages the kidnappers to continue their sinister activities.
Both the arguments are strong enough. The conditions have to be agreed to, in order to save the life of the victims, though actually they ought not to be agreed to, as they encourage the sinister activities of the kidnappers.
Statement: Should colleges be given the status of a university in India? Arguments: I.Yes. Colleges are in a better position to assess the student's performance and therefore the degrees will be more valid. II.No. It is Utopian to think that there will not be nepotism and corruption in awarding degrees by colleges.
Clearly, at the college level, all the students are assessed according to their performance in the University Exams and not on the basis of any criteria of a more intimate dealings with the students. So, argument I is vague. Also, at this level the awarding of degrees is impartial and simply based on his performance. So, argument II also does not hold.
Answer & Explanation
View Answer
Workspace
Discussion
