Statement: Should children be legally made responsible to take care of their parents during their old age? Arguments: I.Yes. Such matter can only be solved by legal means. II.Yes. Only this will bring some relief to poor parents.
Taking care of the parents is a moral duty of the children and cannot be thrust upon them legally, nor such a compulsion can ensure good care of the old people. So, none of the arguments holds strong.
Statement: Should the prestigious people who have committed crime unknowingly, be met with special treatment? Arguments: I.Yes. The prestigious people do not commit crime intentionally. II.No. It is our policy that everybody is equal before the law.
The Constitution of India has laid down the doctrine of 'equality before the law'. So, argument II holds strong. Also, we cannot judge the intentions of a person behind committing a crime, So, argument I is vague.
Statement: Should there be reservation in Government jobs for candidates from single child family? Arguments: I.No. This is not advisable as the jobs should be offered to only deserving candidates without any reservation for a particular group. II.Yes. This will help reduce the growing population in India as the parents will be encouraged to adopt single child norm.
The Government has already made provisions for reservation of jobs for the economically backward sections, which is a must. So, abolishing the practice of reservation altogether has no meaning. Thus, argument I is vague. Also, more reservations would lead to non-recruitment of many more deserving candidates. Besides, such a reservation, if implemented, will cater to the job requirements of only a small section of population and not a major part of it. So, argument II also does not hold strong.
Statement: Can pollution be controlled? Arguments: I.Yes. If everyone realizes the hazards it may create and cooperates to get rid of it, pollution may be controlled. II.No. The crowded highways, factories and industries and an ever-growing population eager to acquire more and more land for constructing houses are beyond control.
The control of pollution, on one hand, seems to be impossible because of the ever-growing needs and the disconcern of the people but, on the other hand, the control is possible by a joint effort. So, either of the arguments will hold strong.
Statement: Should higher education be completely stopped for some time? Arguments: I.No. It will hamper the country's future progress. II.Yes. It will reduce the educated unemployment.
Clearly, higher education is not the cause of unemployment. In fact, it has created greater job opportunities. So, argument II is vague. Also, higher education promotes the country's development. So, argument I holds.
Statement: Should the railways in India be privatized in a phased manner like other public sector enterprises? Arguments: I.Yes. This is the only way to bring in competitiveness and provide better services to the public. II.No. This will pose a threat to the national security of our country as multinationals will enter into the fray.
Privatization would no doubt lead to better services. But saying that this is the 'only way' is wrong. So, argument I does not hold. Argument II also seems to be vague.
Answer & Explanation
View Answer
Workspace
Discussion
