Q1. Should banks stop issuing paper passbooks to savings account holders? Arguments: I. Yes. Passbooks are an old-fashioned way of recording transactions. II. No. Many elderly and rural account holders do not use smartphones or internet banking and rely on passbooks to verify their transactions.Correct Option 2 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because calling something "old-fashioned" is not a reason to discontinue it. Age alone says nothing about usefulness, cost or harm. Argument II is strong because it points to a real, significant consequence: elderly and rural customers who lack smartphones or internet access would lose their only practical way of checking their transactions. Hence, option 2.Q2. Should public parks be kept open to visitors 24 hours a day? Arguments: I. Yes. Some people enjoy walking in parks late at night. II. No. Parks have traditionally been closed at night in most cities.Correct Option 4 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because the personal preference of "some people" is too trivial to justify a city-wide policy change, and it ignores issues such as safety, lighting and maintenance. Argument II is weak because it appeals only to tradition. Something having always been done a certain way is not a reason to continue it. Neither argument addresses a significant consequence of the policy. Hence, option 4.Q3. Should the government replace fertiliser subsidies with direct cash transfers to farmers? Arguments: I. Yes. Cash transfers let farmers spend according to their actual needs, instead of being nudged towards excessive use of subsidised fertiliser. II. No. Some farmers may spend the cash on non-farm needs, which could reduce the use of essential inputs and lower crop output.Correct Option 5 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because it identifies a real benefit: cash transfers give farmers flexibility and remove the incentive to overuse cheap subsidised fertiliser, which harms soil health. Argument II is also strong because it identifies a real risk: untied cash may be diverted to non-farm needs, reducing the use of essential inputs and hurting crop output and food supply. Both arguments are relevant to the policy and point to significant consequences. Hence, option 5.Q4. Should cities ban e-scooters from footpaths? Arguments: I. Yes. Fast-moving scooters on crowded footpaths endanger pedestrians who cannot step aside quickly. II. No. Roads are already overcrowded with larger vehicles, making them unsafe for e-scooter riders.Correct Option 1 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because it points to a direct and serious safety risk to pedestrians, including the elderly, children and others who cannot move aside quickly. Argument II is weak because the danger riders face on roads does not justify transferring that danger to pedestrians on footpaths. The real remedy for unsafe roads is better road infrastructure, such as dedicated lanes, not allowing scooters onto footpaths. Hence, option 1.Q5. Should cities require all new apartment buildings to install rainwater-harvesting systems? Arguments: I. Yes. Harvested rainwater recharges groundwater and reduces dependence on costly tanker water in water-scarce cities. II. No. The additional installation cost would be passed on to buyers, raising flat prices and making housing less affordable for middle-income families.Correct Option 5 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because groundwater recharge and lower dependence on expensive tanker water are significant benefits for water-scarce cities. Argument II is also strong because the mandate's cost would be passed on to buyers, making housing less affordable for middle-income families. Both arguments are relevant and describe real, significant consequences of the policy. Hence, option 5.Q6. Should the government require food-delivery companies to provide accident insurance to their delivery riders? Arguments: I. Yes. Riders face a high risk of accidents, and lack the safety nets that regular employees enjoy. II. No. Requiring accident insurance will increase delivery costs for customers.Correct Option 1 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because it identifies a serious need: riders are highly exposed to accidents and lack the protections that regular employees have, so insurance addresses a real welfare gap. Argument II is weak because a marginal rise in delivery charges is minor compared with protecting riders' lives and livelihoods. It does not show that the added cost would be significant enough to outweigh the benefit. Hence, option 1.Q7. Should the government declare Sunday a compulsory holiday for all shops and markets? Arguments: I. Yes. Shopkeepers could use the day for recreational activities. II. No. Many people have grown used to shopping on Sundays.Correct Option 4 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because recreation for shopkeepers is too trivial a reason to force every shop and market to close. Shopkeepers can already choose a weekly day off. Argument II is weak because it rests only on habit. People being used to something does not show that changing it would cause significant harm, since they could shop on other days. Hence, option 4.Q8. Should airlines be required to compensate passengers for flight delays of more than three hours? Arguments: I. Yes. Airlines earn large revenues every year. II. No. Delays are a normal part of air travel. III. Yes. Passengers bear real financial losses because of a long delay for which they are not responsible.Correct Option 5 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because an airline's ability to pay is not a reason why it should pay. Compensation must be justified by responsibility, not wealth. Argument II is weak because the fact that delays are common does not mean passengers should bear their costs, and the question concerns unusually long delays of more than three hours. Argument III is strong because it links compensation to real financial losses that passengers suffer through no fault of their own. Hence, option 5.Q9. Should the government make rooftop solar panels mandatory on all new commercial buildings? Arguments: I. Yes. Rooftop solar reduces a building's dependence on grid electricity and cuts its energy bills over the long run. II. No. The high upfront cost could be prohibitive for small developers, and the payback period may exceed the time they plan to hold the property. III. Yes. Several celebrities have installed solar panels on their homes.Correct Option 3 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because lower grid dependence and long-term savings on energy bills are significant benefits. Argument II is strong because it raises a real financial burden: small developers may not be able to afford the upfront cost and may not stay long enough to recover it. Argument III is weak because what celebrities do on their own homes is irrelevant to whether a mandate on commercial buildings is sound policy. Hence, option 3.Q10. Should the government begin delivering essential medicines to remote hill villages by drone? Arguments: I. Yes. Drones can deliver emergency medicines in minutes to villages that stay cut off by landslides and floods for days, which can save lives. II. Yes. Temperature-sensitive vaccines spoil during long journeys on rough roads, and faster drone delivery can reduce such wastage. III. No. Without trained operators and repair facilities in the villages, the drones may soon become unusable, wasting public funds.Correct Option 1 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because rapid delivery of emergency medicines to villages cut off for days can save lives. Argument II is strong because cutting the spoilage of temperature-sensitive vaccines is a concrete public-health and financial benefit. Argument III is also strong because it raises a practical concern: without trained operators and repair facilities, the drones may quickly become unusable and waste public money. All three arguments are relevant and significant. Hence, option 1.Q11. Should companies be allowed to track employees' keystrokes on work laptops? Arguments: I. No. Employees dislike being watched while they work. II. No. Keystroke counts measure activity rather than output and may unfairly penalise employees whose work involves reading, thinking or meetings. III. Yes. Monitoring can help companies detect unauthorised copying of confidential files and respond quickly to data breaches.Correct Option 2 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because it rests only on employees' dislike. Personal discomfort, without any concrete harm, is not a strong reason against a workplace policy. Argument II is strong because it shows a real flaw: keystroke counts measure activity rather than output and can unfairly penalise employees whose work involves reading, thinking or meetings. Argument III is strong because detecting data theft and responding quickly to breaches is a significant business benefit. Hence, option 2.Q12. Should cities introduce congestion charges for private vehicles entering the central business district? Arguments: I. Yes. Charging for road space discourages unnecessary trips, reducing traffic jams and vehicle emissions in the city centre. II. Yes. The revenue collected can be used to improve bus and metro services, giving commuters an alternative to driving. III. No. Low-income workers who must drive because of night shifts or poor public-transport links would bear a disproportionately heavy burden. IV. No. Drivers dislike paying to use roads they have always used free of charge.Correct Option 2 … Explanation: Argument I is strong because less congestion and lower emissions are significant benefits of the charge. Argument II is strong because reinvesting the revenue in public transport gives commuters a real alternative to driving. Argument III is strong because it points to an unfair burden on low-income workers who have no practical alternative to driving. Argument IV is weak because it rests only on dislike and habit. Not wanting to pay for something that used to be free is not a substantive objection. Hence, option 2.Q13. Should trading in cryptocurrencies be banned? Arguments: I. Yes. Cryptocurrencies exist only in digital form and have no physical notes or coins. II. Yes. Extreme price swings have wiped out the savings of many small investors who did not understand the risks. III. Yes. Anonymous transactions make it easier to launder money and fund illegal activities, and regulators find these hard to trace. IV. No. A blanket ban would push trading to unregulated offshore platforms, leaving investors with even less protection and regulators with less visibility.Correct Option 3 … Explanation: Argument I is weak because existing only in digital form is not a reason to ban anything. Most bank money is also digital. Argument II is strong because heavy losses to small, uninformed investors are a serious harm. Argument III is strong because money laundering and terror financing that regulators cannot easily trace are significant threats. Argument IV is strong because it shows a ban could backfire by driving trading offshore, leaving investors with even less protection and regulators with less visibility. Hence, option 3.Q14. A regional railway is considering a late-night train service between two cities 300 km apart. Planners argue that the service will be profitable because many people currently travel between the cities overnight by taxi, a costly option. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the planners' argument?Correct Option 2 … Explanation: The planners assume that existing overnight taxi travellers will actually move to the train, creating enough paying demand. A survey showing that most of them would switch at the planned fare directly supports this assumption. Option 1 concerns operational infrastructure, not demand or profitability. Option 3 is irrelevant information about locomotives in other countries. Option 4 slightly weakens the argument, or is at best irrelevant to night travel. Option 5 refers to history, which says nothing about future profitability. Hence, option 2.Q15. The panchayat of a vegetable-growing village has built a community cold-storage facility. Panchayat leaders argue that it will raise farmers' incomes, since farmers who are currently forced to sell perishable vegetables immediately after harvest will now be able to store them and sell later. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the leaders' argument?Correct Option 4 … Explanation: Storing produce and selling it later raises incomes only if later prices are higher than prices at harvest. Option 4 confirms that prices rise substantially within a month, which validates the key assumption. Option 1 introduces a possible operational difficulty, which, if anything, weakens the argument. Option 2 concerns crops outside the scope of the argument. Option 3 explains how the facility was funded, not whether it will raise incomes. Option 5 states that similar facilities exist elsewhere but says nothing about their effect on incomes. Hence, option 4.Q16. A school board plans to replace printed textbooks with pre-loaded tablets carrying digital textbooks. Board members argue that, over the next five years, the switch will lower the board's total spending on learning materials. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the board members' argument?Correct Option 3 … Explanation: The argument is about lower total spending over five years. If tablets last the full five years and content updates are free, the board avoids replacement and recurring content costs, which supports the cost-saving claim. Option 1 concerns popularity, not cost. Option 2 describes educational features, not spending. Option 4 raises a health concern unrelated to cost. Option 5 adds a training cost, which slightly weakens the argument. Hence, option 3.Q17. A city government plans to replace all its diesel auto-rickshaws with electric ones. Officials argue that this will significantly reduce the city's air pollution. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the officials' argument?Correct Option 5 … Explanation: The officials claim a significant reduction in air pollution. If auto-rickshaws contribute only a small fraction of the city's pollution, replacing them cannot significantly reduce it, which directly undermines the conclusion. Option 1 concerns noise, not air pollution. Option 2 concerns funding the transition. Option 3 is an operational limitation unrelated to pollution levels. Option 4 states that other cities have adopted electric rickshaws without saying anything about the results. Hence, option 5.Q18. A district administration plans to merge small village schools with larger schools in nearby towns. Officials argue that this will improve students' learning outcomes because larger schools have better facilities and more specialised teachers. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the officials' argument?Correct Option 1 … Explanation: Better facilities improve learning only for students who actually attend. If similar mergers led many girls to drop out because the journeys were unsafe, learning outcomes for a significant group would worsen, which undermines the claim. Option 2 supports the merger, if anything. Option 3 strengthens the facilities claim. Option 4 can be read as a reason for merging and does not weaken the argument. Option 5 is neutral or supportive, since teachers remain available. Hence, option 1.Q19. A farmers' collective in a drought-prone region urges its members to switch from paddy to millets. The collective argues that this will increase farmers' profits because millets need much less water and fertiliser than paddy, which lowers farmers' costs. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the collective's argument?Correct Option 4 … Explanation: Profit depends on both costs and revenue. The collective considers only lower costs. If millets yield less and sell at much lower prices, the fall in revenue could outweigh the savings, so profits may not rise. Option 1 concerns nutrition, not profit. Option 2 concerns tradition and says nothing about profitability. Option 3 shows that seed costs are similar, which neither weakens nor strengthens the cost argument. Option 5 may increase demand for millets and so slightly strengthens the argument. Hence, option 4.Q20. After a coastal town began planting mangroves along its shoreline, the damage caused by cyclone-driven storm surges declined over the next ten years. Town officials concluded that the mangrove plantation caused the decline in damage. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the officials' conclusion?Correct Option 2 … Explanation: The decline in damage could be explained by weaker or fewer cyclones after the plantation began. If cyclones of similar intensity and frequency struck both before and after, this alternative cause is ruled out, which strengthens the causal link to the mangroves. Option 1 concerns where the saplings came from, which is irrelevant. Option 3 concerns tourism, which is unrelated to storm damage. Option 4 describes the planting process, not its effect. Option 5 offers an alternative explanation: less property and fewer people near the shore would reduce damage regardless of the mangroves. This weakens the conclusion. Hence, option 2.
