A statement is followed by two arguments I and II. Choose which of the argument/s is/are strong : Statement : Should all diesel engines be replaced by electric engines in trains ? Arguments : I. Yes, diesel engine causes a lot of pollution. II. No, India does not produce enough electricity to fulfil even the domestic needs.

Correct — option (4), Only argument I is strong.

An argument is strong when it is directly related to the question and gives a significant reason that stands on facts. It is weak when it is beside the point, trivial, or rests on a doubtful or sweeping claim.

Argument I says Yes, because a diesel engine causes a lot of pollution. That reason goes straight to the proposal: replacing diesel engines with electric engines takes that exhaust off the trains. It is relevant and significant, so argument I is strong.

Argument II says No, because India does not produce enough electricity to fulfil even the domestic needs. The word "even" makes this a sweeping claim, and the record does not bear it out.

The Central Electricity Authority's Load Generation Balance Report 2023-24 (March 2023) put energy not supplied in 2022-23 at 0.5 per cent of requirement, and said the gap "was generally due to factors other than inadequacy of power availability in the country". So argument II is weak.

That makes the answer Only argument I is strong.

The idea to remember: an argument is only as strong as its premise; test a sweeping "not even enough" claim against the facts.

Why the others are wrong

• (1)
  Neither argument I nor argument II is strong. — Option (1) rightly rejects argument II but also rejects argument I.

  Argument I is not a vague slogan. Pollution from diesel engines is a direct and significant reason for replacing them, which is exactly what makes an argument strong. Rejecting it treats a relevant benefit as if it were beside the point.

• (2)
  Both of the arguments are strong. — Option (2) accepts argument I, rightly, but also accepts argument II.

  Argument II rests on the claim that India cannot meet even its domestic electricity needs. The CEA's figures for 2022-23 show a marginal gap that it said was generally due to factors other than inadequacy of power availability, so the premise does not hold and the argument is weak.

• (3)
  Only argument II is strong. — Option (3) reverses the two arguments.

  It takes the objection built on a sweeping claim about electricity as strong, and discards the pollution argument, which is relevant and significant. Judged by relevance and by whether the reason stands on facts, argument I passes and argument II does not.

In statement-and-argument reasoning, a policy question is followed by arguments for and against. Each argument is judged on its own merit, not on whether one agrees with its side.

A strong argument is directly related to the question, touches a significant aspect of it, and is consistent with facts.

An argument is weak when it is irrelevant, trivial, or depends on a doubtful or exaggerated claim. Words such as "all", "never" or "even" can turn an ordinary concern into a sweeping claim that the facts must then support.

Key facts

• A strong argument is directly related to the question and gives a significant, fact-based reason; a weak one is irrelevant, trivial or rests on a doubtful claim.
• CEA, Load Generation Balance Report 2023-24: 2022-23 energy requirement 1,515,300 MU, energy supplied 1,507,372 MU, a 0.5 per cent gap.
• The CEA said the 2022-23 demand-supply gap was generally due to factors other than inadequacy of power availability in the country.
• Economic Survey 2022-23: 30,446 route km of railway were electrified in 2014-22, against 4,698 route km in the previous eight years.
• Economic Survey 2022-23: Indian Railways has announced its intention to achieve net zero carbon emission by 2030.

Common traps

• A practical-sounding objection is not strong if its premise is doubtful. Check "India does not produce enough electricity" against the CEA's figures before accepting it.
• One word can make a claim sweeping. "Not enough to fulfil even the domestic needs" says far more than "supply sometimes falls short".
• Strength does not depend on the side taken. Here the Yes is strong and the No weak; in another statement the No can be the strong one.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  A statement is followed by two arguments I and II. Choose which of the argument/s is/are strong : Statement : Should all government offices keep their files in electronic form instead of paper? Arguments : I. Yes, it will save paper and make records quicker to search. II. No, some employees will need training to use computers.

  • (a)Neither argument I nor argument II is strong.
  • (b)Both of the arguments are strong.
  • (c)Only argument II is strong.
  • (d)Only argument I is strong.
  Answer(4) — I gives significant benefits directly tied to electronic files, so it is strong. II names a hurdle that training can remove, not a reason against the change, so it is weak. Option (1) rejects I, option (2) accepts II, and option (3) reverses the two.
• practice — not a real PYQ

  A statement is followed by two arguments I and II. Choose which of the argument/s is/are strong : Statement : Should students be allowed to use calculators in all mathematics examinations? Arguments : I. Yes, all other countries allow calculators in examinations. II. No, it will weaken students' practice of basic calculation.

  • (a)Neither argument I nor argument II is strong.
  • (b)Both of the arguments are strong.
  • (c)Only argument II is strong.
  • (d)Only argument I is strong.
  Answer(3) — I rests on imitation and a sweeping claim about "all other countries", so it is weak. II is directly related to what mathematics examinations test and is significant, so it is strong. Option (1) rejects II, option (2) accepts I, and option (4) reverses the two.