Question

In making a decision about an important question, it is desirable to be able to distinguish between 'strong' arguments and 'weak' arguments. 'Strong' arguments must be both important and directly related to the question. 'Weak' arguments may not be directly related to the question and may be of minor importance or may be related to the trivial aspects of the question. The question below is followed by three arguments numbered I, II, and ill. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.

Statement

• Should there be a limit on drawing groundwater for irrigation purposes in India?

Arguments

1. No, irrigation is of prime importance for food production in India and it is heavily dependent on groundwater in many parts of the country.
2. Yes, water tables have gone down to alarmingly low levels in some parts of the country where irrigation is primarily dependent on groundwater, which may lead to serious environmental consequences.
3. Yes, India just cannot afford to draw groundwater any further as the international agencies have cautioned India against it.

Options

• I and II are strong

• II and Ill are strong

• I and Ill are strong

• All are strong

Answer 1

I and II are strong

Explanation:

The argument I am strong as it addresses the problem of food scarcity. Argument II is strong as the environment is a very important issue. Argument III is weak as 'the caution' part is neither convincing nor mature.