In the absence of such a ceiling, the companies would be involved in a mutual competition of salaries, in a bid to attract the most competent professionals. So, argument I holds. Also, the prospects of increase in salary would encourage the officials to perform better in the interest of the company they serve, which would otherwise not be so if a ceiling is imposed. So, argument II also holds strong.
Family planning is an essential step to curb population growth. So, argument I holds strong. Also, family planning being against the tenets of some of the Indian religions, it is not necessary to make it compulsory. Instead, it can be enforced by creating public awareness of the benefits of family planning. So, argument II also holds.
Clearly, besides interview, there can be other modes of written examination to judge candidates' motives. So argument II is not strong enough. However, the interview is a subjective assessment without doubt. So, argument I holds.
An organization like UNO is meant to maintain peace all over and will always serve to prevent conflicts between countries. So, its role never ends. So, argument I does not hold. Also, lack of such an organization may in future lead to increased mutual conflicts and international wars, on account of lack of a common platform for mutual discussions. So, argument II holds.
Clearly, imposing ban on fashionable dresses will be a restriction on the personal choice and hence the right to freedom of an individual. So, only argument II is strong.
Religion binds people together through the name of God and human values. But at the same time it may create differences and ill-will among people. So, either of the arguments holds strong.
Both the arguments are strong enough. The conditions have to be agreed to, in order to save the life of the victims, though actually they ought not to be agreed to, as they encourage the sinister activities of the kidnappers.
It is not necessary that any practice which has been in vogue for a long time is right and it must be continued. So, argument I is not strong. Also, a practice must be continued or discontinued in view of its merits/demerits and not on grounds of the expenditure or procedures it entails. The policy of transfer is generally practised to do away with corruption, which is absolutely essential. So, argument II also does not hold.
Clearly, a world government cannot eliminate tensions among nations because it will also have the ruling group and the opposition group. Further, the more powerful and diplomatic shall rule the world to their interests. So, only argument II holds.
Clearly, after being in strict discipline and following a formal dress code of the school for so many years, the students must be granted some liberty in college life, as they have to take on the responsibilities of life, next. Besides, schools adopt uniforms to take care of the security of the child - an aspect which doesn't matter much in the colleges. So, argument II holds strong. Also, the environment of the college depends on the students' dedication and etiquettes and not on their uniforms. So, argument I is vague.
Exam Wise
Subject Wise
View Answer
Discuss in forum
Workspace
Report
