Question:
Each question below is followed by arguments. Choose the most appropriate choice from the options given.
Question: Should there be a world Government?
Argument I: Yes, it will eliminate inter-state conflicts
Argument II: No, Rich and Powerful countries will dominate it
Each question below is followed by arguments. Choose the most appropriate choice from the options given.
Question: Should there be a world Government?
Argument I: Yes, it will eliminate inter-state conflicts
Argument II: No, Rich and Powerful countries will dominate it
Question: Should there be a world Government?
Argument I: Yes, it will eliminate inter-state conflicts
Argument II: No, Rich and Powerful countries will dominate it
Show Hint
Weigh each side by how much it would matter. The end of war between nations and rule by the strongest few are both large stakes.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
- Argument I is strong
- Argument II is strong
- Both the arguments are strong
- Both the arguments are weak
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We judge each argument on its own. A strong argument speaks to the issue and rests on a genuine and weighty consideration. A weak one is trivial, off the point, or unsupported.
Step 2: Understanding the concept:
A world government would mean a single political authority over all nations, replacing the present system of sovereign states dealing with one another through treaties and bodies like the United Nations. Both the promise and the danger of such a body are serious, so both sides of this debate can carry real weight.
Step 3: Testing Argument I:
Argument I says yes, a world government will eliminate inter state conflicts.
This is on the point and rests on something real. Wars between states happen because there is no authority above the states to settle their disputes and enforce the settlement. Each state is its own final judge, so a border dispute or a water dispute can end in war. A single government over all of them would supply the missing authority, turning what are now wars into internal disputes to be decided by law rather than by arms. The prospect of ending war between nations is about as substantial a benefit as an argument can offer. So Argument I is strong.
Step 4: Testing Argument II:
Argument II says no, rich and powerful countries will dominate it.
This is also on the point and also rests on something real. In practice, power inside international bodies follows economic and military strength. The permanent members of the UN Security Council hold a veto that no other country has, and voting power in bodies such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank tracks the size of a country's contribution. A single world government would concentrate far more power than any of these, so capture by the strong would leave weaker nations governed without any real voice. That is a serious objection. So Argument II is strong.
Step 5: Final Answer:
Both arguments are relevant and both rest on substantial considerations, so both are strong and the answer is option (C).
Why the other options fail:
(A) drops Argument II, but the risk of domination by the strong is a real and well evidenced danger.
(B) drops Argument I, but ending war between nations is a serious benefit.
(D) calls both weak, which cannot be right since each names a major consequence.
We judge each argument on its own. A strong argument speaks to the issue and rests on a genuine and weighty consideration. A weak one is trivial, off the point, or unsupported.
Step 2: Understanding the concept:
A world government would mean a single political authority over all nations, replacing the present system of sovereign states dealing with one another through treaties and bodies like the United Nations. Both the promise and the danger of such a body are serious, so both sides of this debate can carry real weight.
Step 3: Testing Argument I:
Argument I says yes, a world government will eliminate inter state conflicts.
This is on the point and rests on something real. Wars between states happen because there is no authority above the states to settle their disputes and enforce the settlement. Each state is its own final judge, so a border dispute or a water dispute can end in war. A single government over all of them would supply the missing authority, turning what are now wars into internal disputes to be decided by law rather than by arms. The prospect of ending war between nations is about as substantial a benefit as an argument can offer. So Argument I is strong.
Step 4: Testing Argument II:
Argument II says no, rich and powerful countries will dominate it.
This is also on the point and also rests on something real. In practice, power inside international bodies follows economic and military strength. The permanent members of the UN Security Council hold a veto that no other country has, and voting power in bodies such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank tracks the size of a country's contribution. A single world government would concentrate far more power than any of these, so capture by the strong would leave weaker nations governed without any real voice. That is a serious objection. So Argument II is strong.
Step 5: Final Answer:
Both arguments are relevant and both rest on substantial considerations, so both are strong and the answer is option (C).
Why the other options fail:
(A) drops Argument II, but the risk of domination by the strong is a real and well evidenced danger.
(B) drops Argument I, but ending war between nations is a serious benefit.
(D) calls both weak, which cannot be right since each names a major consequence.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Logical Reasoning Questions
- Words remain an enigma, their presence within human sphere is a unique mystery. They form the intricate tapestry that convinces us of our existence, blurring lines between fact and fiction. An engagement with words is the most captivating, enchanting, and sometimes daunting encounter with the world. A word, a symbolic entity formed from the ethereal, exists neither as animate nor inanimate, yet pulsates with life. It can emanate warmth or coldness, absorb emotions, or stand as dry as a rock. Words can provoke smiles and elicit joy. They are like glow-worms, momentarily dispelling the surrounding darkness and act as life-saving rafts amid the tumultuous ocean waves. Words grant us the ability to explore the universe, and “to see a world in a grain of sand.” as William Blake noted. They impart a semantic existence to the lifeless, and bestow aesthetic form upon the formless. Scriptures say the word is the world. I say the world within the word is the abode of faith.
- Students have been abuzz over how artificial intelligence tools can do their homework and programmers over how these can increase their productivity or take away their jobs. As much as digitization has transformed the country in recent years, there is a widespread feeling that at some point around the horizon, AI shall rejig everything in even more fundamental, fantastic, and frightening ways. This is why deciding how the coming changes should be regulated is very important. TRAI has made a strong case for an independent statutory authority to ensure the responsible development and use of AI in the country, a global agency along similar lines shall likely be pitched at the G20 leaders’ summit, and interestingly even American MNC Microsoft has floated a blueprint for AI governance in India. The great size and diversity of its “data points” make India of great interest to all developers of AI technologies.
But India is only at their receiving end, nowhere close to the US and China’s advances. Although lately, it is becoming obvious how much state censorship is encumbering China’s large language modeling, the country is still very much in the game with PhDs in fields related to AI, investments in AI chip hardware design, and domestic generative models like Wu Dao. The scientific accomplishments of India’s Chandrayaan mission have seen it being wooed for various international space collaborations. This promises spinoff technological benefits across Indian industry and is also geo-strategically useful. Likewise, it is only with sufficient AI prowess that India shall really get to play at the high table of global rulemaking for AI.
Knowing how much Indians’ future shall be shaped by generative AI needs matching efforts to create indigenous models. In this and at this stage, a proactive government role is key, rather than just waiting on some large corporation to do the needful. Missing this bus will after all be even more costly than missing the chip research one. Plus, GOI alone can push academia-industry collaborations with the necessary weight and urgency. This does not let other institutions off the hook. A US judge has rejected the copyright for an AI-generated artwork. Indian courts should start engaging with the broader issue of non-human agency rather than wait for precedence to be set elsewhere. Indian schools need to think beyond the ban-ChatGPT mindset. Let us lead instead of only being led.
[Extracted from “First, get the tech: Unless India develops domestic AI heft, it wouldn’t play any meaningful part in global regulatory efforts”, Times of India] - Imagine you have just been appointed as a consultant for a manufacturing company that is experiencing a decline in its production efficiency. The company produces a wide range of products, and the management is concerned about the overall output. Your task is to identify the root causes of this decline and recommend solutions.
As you begin your investigation, you gather information and observe the following:
• The company recently introduced a new production system that is more automated but requires highly specialized operators.
• The workforce has reported a lack of motivation and job satisfaction, which has led to increased absenteeism.
• There have been several breakdowns in the new machinery, leading to production delays and quality issues.
• The company’s competitors have adopted similar automation technologies and are experiencing increased productivity.
• Customer complaints about product quality have increased in recent months. - In a world where aspirations for upward mobility are fervent, the opportunities for achieving such dreams remain limited. When one generation falls short, the mantle of ambition passes to the next, embedding within it a heavy burden of responsibility. Failing to meet these expectations can lead to profound sorrow, and in the direst cases, even to suicide. It’s in this landscape that coaching institutes assume a significant role, cultivating an atmosphere of uncertainty among students and parents. A stark discrepancy emerges between preparation for board examinations and competitive tests, amplifying the inequalities that plague the education system. The coaching industry’s massive marketing campaigns further exacerbate the situation, with some strategies veering into ethical grey areas. The tests themselves, designed to be more challenging than standardised exams, set the stage for feelings of inadequacy and self-doubt when not conquered. Our educational system is tailored to gauge an individual’s merit through examinations. Eminent thinker Michael J Sandel dubs this system the “tyranny of merit”, a sentiment echoed by the Supreme Court of India. Upholding the OBC reservation judgment, the Court called for a deeper evaluation of the “idea of merit”, highlighting its nuanced nature. Merit as a concept remains shrouded in misunderstanding and often goes unexamined within school curriculum. Adapting to new living arrangements, sourcing nourishing meals, battling isolation, and grappling with commutes form the backdrop against, which education unfolds. For marginalised communities and gender minorities, these hurdles are often amplified. Social media algorithms exacerbate mental health concerns, sowing loneliness and impeding attention spans and creativity. Technology emerges as a potential equaliser in this landscape. Online platforms now offer preparation opportunities from the comfort of one’s home. Government-curated or market-driven content could usher in a new era of accessibility.
- The depreciation of an economy’s currency is not a matter of concern in itself. The decline in value against major currencies has to be viewed within a set of macroeconomic factors. The recent depreciation of the Indian rupee is a case in point. The rupee has been depreciating for a long time. What are of concern now are the rate at which the depreciation is occurring and the underlying factors causing the change. The Russia-Ukraine war has disrupted supply chains causing commodity prices to rise, leading to a worldwide hardening of inflationary trends. This, in turn, has caused major central banks to raise interest rates, forcing investors back to the safe haven of the US dollar. For India, these headwinds from the global economy have caused several problems. The rise in international prices, especially of crude oil, has led to a higher import bill and, hence, a greater demand for dollars. Higher interest rates in developed country markets have caused a significant outflow of portfolio investments from India, aggravating the already climbing demand for dollars from a rising import bill. By May 2022, foreign institutional investors had pulled out Rs. 1.50 lakh crore from Indian markets.
In the face of these pressures, the rupee, left to itself, would decline in value as the rupee-price of a dollar would increase substantially. One way the Reserve Bank of India could stem the tide would be to sell off dollars in the market to ease the supply situation. However, this would mean that while the value of the rupee could be contained, the nation’s foreign exchange kitty would start to erode further. The RBI has been doing exactly that. The challenge before the RBI is this: how much to let the rupee depreciate and how much to intervene to prop it up? Too much depreciation would raise domestic inflation rates as the rupee-price of imports, especially oil, would raise costs of production. It could trigger a rise in policy-controlled interest rates while closely monitoring inflationary expectations. The biggest challenge is to navigate unpredictable international economic shocks in the near future. The Indian economy’s health is not exactly at its best. Exports may not be able to take advantage of a falling rupee since international demand is expected to stagnate. India’s growth and employment situations are yet to stabilise to what they were about a decade ago. The RBI has difficult choices: controlling inflation versus stimulating growth and stabilising the rupee without severely diminishing the economy’s foreign exchange kitty.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Stiff test: Editorial on depreciation of rupee & challenges before RBI”, The Telegraph]
View More Questions
Top CLAT Statements and Arguments Questions
- Statement: Should the pay scale and conditions of service of government employees be made applicable to private sector employees? Arguments: i. No, this will develop inertia, inefficiency and would adversely affect spirit of competition.
ii. Yes, this will enhance dedication to work and institutional loyalty. Statement: Should a strong institution of ombudsman be created in India?
Arguments:
i. Yes, this will bring transparency and accountability in the administration.
ii. No, this will develop lack of initiative and flexibility in the administration.- Statement: Should internal assessment in colleges and universities be abolished?
Arguments:
i. Yes, this will eliminate the possibility of favouritism.
ii. No, teaching faculty will lose control over the students and this would adversely affect their academic growth.
Statement: Should military training be made compulsory for all college and university students?
Arguments:
i. Yes, this will develop in them a sense of punctuality and discipline.
ii. No, military training should be given only to those students who are physically fit.
Statement: Should students' union in colleges and universities be abolished?
Arguments:
i. Yes, it detracts students from academic and career development.
ii. No, all great leaders have been students' union leaders.
View More Questions
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions