Discussion Forum

The following question consist of a statement followed by three or four arguments I,II,III & IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a 'strong' argument and which is a 'weak' argument.

 Statement : Should all youngsters below 21 years of age be disallowed from going to a beer bar?

Arguments: I. No. It is not correct to prevent mature youngsters above 18 years of age who can vote, from having fun.

II. Yes. The entry fee to such pubs should also be hiked.

III. No. There is no such curb in western countries.

IV Yes. This will help in preventing youngsters from getting into bad company and imbibing bad habits.

Answer:

Explanation:

Clearly, our constitution considers youngsters above 18 years of age, mature enough to exercise their decisive power in Government by voting. This implies -that such individuals can also judge what is good or bad for them. Thus, argument I holds strong. However, at such places youngsters may be lead astray by certain indecent-guys and swayed from the right path into bad indulgences. So, IV also holds strong. Hiking the entry fees is no way to disallow them, and also the idea of imitating the western countries holds no relevance. so, neither II nor III holds strong.