Q:
The question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.
Statement:
Should women be allowed into combat arms if they meet all standards?
Arguments:
I. Yes, women have already proven competence in combat – they have already been exposed to combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it makes no sense to officially continue excluding them.
II. No, the average female is physically weaker than the average male.
Answer & Explanation
Answer: A) Only argument I is strong
Explanation: Argument I is strong as it gives a proper reason as to why women should be included in combat arms – because they have already worked in this area in Iraq and other places and so it makes sense to include them officially. Argument II is weak because it talks about a general scenario in comparing an average female with an average male.
However, what if a woman with exceptional athletic ability and toughness can meet and even exceed the standards currently set for male troops, on what basis should she be denied entry into combat arms? Therefore, option 1 is the correct answer.
View Answer
Report Error
Discuss
Aptitude and Reasoning
General Knowledge
Puzzles
Interviews
Technical
Certifications
Exams
Job
Roles
True or False
Exams
.jpg)
