Practice Logical Reasoning questions on Statement and Argument, covering strong and weak arguments, relevant reasoning, assumptions, supporting evidence, and evaluating whether an argument logically supports a given statement. Takes about 20–25 minutes and is useful for placement, TCS NQT, SSC, banking and MBA entrance exams.
Question 1
Statement: Should the internet be banned in schools?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Children will then use their time only for playing.
II. No. Students would lose access to a large source of knowledge.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Children will then use their time only for playing.
II. No. Students would lose access to a large source of knowledge.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, the internet is a large source of knowledge for students, so argument II is strong. Argument I is based on an unfair assumption that the children would only play. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 2
Statement: Should the use of plastic bags in shops be stopped?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Plastic bags harm the environment because they do not decompose.
II. No. Plastic bags are cheap.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Plastic bags harm the environment because they do not decompose.
II. No. Plastic bags are cheap.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, the harm that plastic bags cause to the environment is a strong reason to stop using them. The low price of the bags is not a strong reason to keep using them in spite of the harm. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 3
Statement: Should people be forbidden to keep pets in apartment buildings?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Pets are dirty animals.
II. No. Everyone should have whatever they like.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Pets are dirty animals.
II. No. Everyone should have whatever they like.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, argument I is a sweeping statement, because pets that are properly cared for are not dirty. Argument II is vague, since people cannot be given everything they like. So, neither argument is strong.
Question 4
Statement: Should all doctors trained in India be compelled to serve in India for ten years?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They must repay the motherland first and forget about money.
II. No. There are enough doctors; let them go where they want.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They must repay the motherland first and forget about money.
II. No. There are enough doctors; let them go where they want.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, argument I is emotional and gives no practical reason, and the statement that there are enough doctors in argument II is not supported by any facts. So, neither argument is strong.
Question 5
Statement: Should the school day be extended by one hour?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Teachers can complete the syllabus without hurry.
II. Yes. All students should be kept in school as long as possible.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Teachers can complete the syllabus without hurry.
II. Yes. All students should be kept in school as long as possible.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, more time would let the teachers complete the syllabus without hurry, so argument I is strong. Keeping students in school as long as possible is an extreme and unreasoned claim. So, argument II is weak.
Question 6
Statement: Should homework be abolished for students up to Std. IV?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Young children need time to play and rest.
II. No. Without practice at home, children will not develop the habit of study.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Young children need time to play and rest.
II. No. Without practice at home, children will not develop the habit of study.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, young children cannot be burdened with work, and they need time to play and rest. At the same time, they cannot be left free altogether, as they need practice to develop the habit of study. So, both the arguments are strong.
Question 7
Statement: Should farmers be encouraged to use solar pumps?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will reduce their expenditure on electricity or diesel.
II. Yes. It will help to save fuel and reduce pollution.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will reduce their expenditure on electricity or diesel.
II. Yes. It will help to save fuel and reduce pollution.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, solar pumps cut the cost of running a pump and also save fuel and reduce pollution. Both the arguments give valid reasons. So, both arguments are strong.
Question 8
Statement: Should women be encouraged to become entrepreneurs?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They will contribute to the growth of the economy.
II. Yes. It will provide employment to other people.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They will contribute to the growth of the economy.
II. Yes. It will provide employment to other people.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, women entrepreneurs add to the economy and also create jobs for others. Both the arguments give valid reasons. So, both arguments are strong.
Question 9
Statement: Should schools introduce a gardening class for children?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Children like to play in the mud.
II. Yes. It will teach children about plants and the value of the environment.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Children like to play in the mud.
II. Yes. It will teach children about plants and the value of the environment.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, learning about plants and the environment is a worthwhile aim for a school class. The reason that children like to play in the mud is not a sound reason for a class. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 10
Statement: Should small shops be allowed to open in residential areas?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Shopkeepers are hardworking.
II. Yes. People will be able to buy their daily needs near their homes.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Shopkeepers are hardworking.
II. Yes. People will be able to buy their daily needs near their homes.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Clearly, shops near homes are convenient for people, so argument II gives a valid reason. The reason that shopkeepers are hardworking is vague and has no connection with where shops should be opened. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 11
Statement: Should mobile phones be allowed inside school classrooms?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Phones give students instant access to useful learning resources.
II. No. Phones distract students and disturb the class.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Phones give students instant access to useful learning resources.
II. No. Phones distract students and disturb the class.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Both arguments give a valid reason: phones can help learning, and they can also distract. The two arguments point in opposite directions on the same issue, and a school can follow only one of them. So, either I or II is strong.
Question 12
Statement: Should India bid to host the Olympic Games?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Hosting the Games will improve sports facilities and bring in tourism.
II. No. Let us first provide playgrounds in every village.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Hosting the Games will improve sports facilities and bring in tourism.
II. No. Let us first provide playgrounds in every village.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Hosting the Games brings lasting sports facilities and tourism, so argument I is strong. Argument II only points to another need; one goal does not stop the other from being pursued, so it is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 13
Statement: Should the government ban expensive weddings?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Expensive weddings make some guests feel envious.
II. No. How a family spends its own lawful income is a matter of personal choice.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Expensive weddings make some guests feel envious.
II. No. How a family spends its own lawful income is a matter of personal choice.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
The feelings of some guests are not a sound reason for a ban, so argument I is weak. Spending one's own lawful money is a personal freedom that a ban would restrict, so argument II is strong. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 14
Statement: Should international health bodies such as the WHO be dissolved?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Many old diseases have been controlled, so such bodies have no role left.
II. No. Without such bodies, countries would find it hard to work together against new epidemics.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Many old diseases have been controlled, so such bodies have no role left.
II. No. Without such bodies, countries would find it hard to work together against new epidemics.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
New diseases keep appearing, so the work of such bodies never really ends; argument I is based on a wrong assumption and is weak. Argument II gives a real need for them, so it is strong. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 15
Statement: Should written examinations be dropped from the selection of candidates for government jobs?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Some candidates feel nervous in examinations.
II. No. A written examination is a fair and objective way to test a large number of candidates.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Some candidates feel nervous in examinations.
II. No. A written examination is a fair and objective way to test a large number of candidates.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Nervousness affects some candidates in any test, so it is not a strong reason to drop the examination; argument I is weak. Argument II gives the real purpose of the written test, so it is strong. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 16
Statement: Should there be a compulsory dress code for employees of software companies?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will make the office look more disciplined.
II. No. Employees will feel bored wearing the same clothes every day.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will make the office look more disciplined.
II. No. Employees will feel bored wearing the same clothes every day.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
How the office looks does not affect the quality of the work, so argument I is weak. A dress code does not mean the same clothes every day, and boredom is not a sound reason, so argument II is also weak. So, neither argument is strong.
Question 17
Statement: Should the government hold talks with protesting farmers to end their agitation?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Talks are the best way to understand their problems and reach a settlement.
II. No. The farmers may continue protesting even after the talks.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Talks are the best way to understand their problems and reach a settlement.
II. No. The farmers may continue protesting even after the talks.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Dialogue is the accepted way to settle such disputes, so argument I is strong. A mere possibility that protests may continue is no reason to refuse talks, so argument II is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 18
Statement: Should countries adopt a single common currency?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will make international trade simpler by removing currency exchange costs.
II. No. Each country would lose control over its own interest rates and money supply.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will make international trade simpler by removing currency exchange costs.
II. No. Each country would lose control over its own interest rates and money supply.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
A common currency does cut the cost and trouble of exchange in trade, so argument I is strong. It also takes away a country's control of its own money policy, which is a serious drawback, so argument II is strong too. The two points are both important to the decision. So, both arguments are strong.
Question 19
Statement: Should the practice of transferring bank officers every three years be stopped?
Arguments:
I. No. Transfers are a routine practice and must go on.
II. Yes. Transfers cost the bank money for travel and relocation.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. No. Transfers are a routine practice and must go on.
II. Yes. Transfers cost the bank money for travel and relocation.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
A practice should continue because of its merits, not because it is routine, so argument I is weak. The cost of transfers is small compared with their purpose of preventing officers from building local links that can lead to fraud, so argument II is also weak. So, neither argument is strong.
Question 20
Statement: Should doctors posted in remote tribal areas be given an extra allowance?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Such postings involve real hardship, and an allowance is needed to attract doctors there.
II. No. Life in tribal areas is simple and peaceful, so why pay extra?
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Such postings involve real hardship, and an allowance is needed to attract doctors there.
II. No. Life in tribal areas is simple and peaceful, so why pay extra?
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Remote postings lack facilities and are hard to fill, so an incentive is needed; argument I is strong. Argument II ignores these difficulties and is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 21
Statement: Should there be a limit on the number of candidates who can contest a municipal election in one ward?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Fewer candidates will help voters make a more informed choice.
II. No. In a democracy, every eligible citizen has the right to contest an election.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Fewer candidates will help voters make a more informed choice.
II. No. In a democracy, every eligible citizen has the right to contest an election.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
With fewer candidates voters can compare them properly, so argument I is strong. At the same time, every citizen who meets the legal conditions has a right to contest, so argument II is also strong. So, both arguments are strong.
Question 22
Statement: Should companies spend large amounts of money on advertising?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Advertising tells customers about products and helps increase sales.
II. No. Advertising is a waste of money.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Advertising tells customers about products and helps increase sales.
II. No. Advertising is a waste of money.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Advertising informs buyers and drives sales, so argument I is strong. Argument II is a sweeping claim with no reason given, so it is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 23
Statement: Should ministers be barred from running private businesses while they are in office?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They can then give their full time to public duty and avoid conflicts of interest.
II. No. Then nobody will want to become a minister.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. They can then give their full time to public duty and avoid conflicts of interest.
II. No. Then nobody will want to become a minister.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
A minister with a private business may face conflicts of interest and less time for public work, so argument I is strong. Argument II is an exaggeration; many people would still serve, so it is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 24
Statement: Should a hockey team take more than one goalkeeper on a foreign tour?
Arguments:
I. Yes. If the main goalkeeper is injured, another can take his or her place.
II. No. It will upset the balance of the squad.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. If the main goalkeeper is injured, another can take his or her place.
II. No. It will upset the balance of the squad.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
A reserve goalkeeper protects the team against injury, so argument I is strong. Argument II does not say how the balance would be upset, so it is vague and weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 25
Statement: Should parents save equally for the education of their daughters and sons?
Arguments:
I. No. Sons are better at studies than daughters.
II. Yes. Daughters and sons have an equal right to a good education.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. No. Sons are better at studies than daughters.
II. Yes. Daughters and sons have an equal right to a good education.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Argument I is a baseless generalisation, so it is weak. Argument II states a fair and accepted principle, so it is strong. So, only argument II is strong.
Question 26
Statement: Should single-use plastic cutlery be banned?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will reduce the plastic waste that ends up in landfills and oceans.
II. No. People will find it a little harder to eat at roadside stalls.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. It will reduce the plastic waste that ends up in landfills and oceans.
II. No. People will find it a little harder to eat at roadside stalls.
Which of the arguments is strong?
Explanation
Single-use plastic is a major source of lasting waste, so argument I is strong. A small inconvenience, for which reusable or paper alternatives exist, is not a strong reason against the ban, so argument II is weak. So, only argument I is strong.
Question 27
Statement: Should the government raise the tax on cigarettes?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Higher prices will discourage smoking, especially among young people.
II. Yes. The extra revenue can be spent on public health.
III. No. Smokers enjoy smoking, so cigarettes should stay cheap.
Which of the arguments are strong?
Arguments:
I. Yes. Higher prices will discourage smoking, especially among young people.
II. Yes. The extra revenue can be spent on public health.
III. No. Smokers enjoy smoking, so cigarettes should stay cheap.
Which of the arguments are strong?
Explanation
Higher prices are known to reduce smoking, especially among the young, so argument I is strong. Using the extra revenue for public health is a sound and related benefit, so argument II is strong. Argument III rests only on the pleasure of smokers and ignores the harm, so it is weak. So, only arguments I and II are strong.
Question 28
Statement: Road accidents in a city have fallen this year, even though the number of vehicles on its roads has gone up.
Arguments:
I. The traffic police have strictly enforced speed limits and helmet rules this year.
II. Many more people bought new cars this year.
III. Several dangerous junctions were redesigned and fitted with traffic signals.
Which of the arguments help to explain the statement?
Arguments:
I. The traffic police have strictly enforced speed limits and helmet rules this year.
II. Many more people bought new cars this year.
III. Several dangerous junctions were redesigned and fitted with traffic signals.
Which of the arguments help to explain the statement?
Explanation
Strict enforcement of speed and helmet rules directly reduces accidents, so argument I explains the fall. Safer junctions with signals also cut accidents, so argument III explains it too. Argument II only adds to the number of vehicles, which would be expected to raise accidents, so it does not explain the fall. So, only arguments I and III explain the statement.
