Question:

Given below is a statement followed by two arguments. Read carefully and decide which of the arguments strongly support the statement.

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.

Show Hint

Test the word all in the second argument. If you can name one great leader who never led a students' union, that argument is finished.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
  • Argument (i) is strong.
  • Argument (ii) is strong.
  • Both (i) and (ii) are strong.
  • Neither (i) nor (ii) is strong.
Show Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The proposal is to abolish students' unions in colleges and universities. Each argument has to be judged on whether it gives a sound reason tied to this proposal.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Watch for two common defects. One is a sweeping claim built on the word all, which collapses the moment a single counter example appears. The other is an appeal that does not actually address the proposal. An argument free of both defects and pointing to a real effect is strong.

Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
Argument (i) says students' unions pull students away from academic and career development. Union work means campaigns, elections, agitations and meetings, and all of it eats into study time. Campus politics also brings disruption and strikes that cost teaching days. Since the whole reason a student is on campus is to study, an argument saying the union works against that purpose speaks directly to the proposal and names a real effect. It is strong.
Argument (ii) says all great leaders have been students' union leaders. The claim is factually false. Many great leaders in India and elsewhere never held any students' union post, and a single counter example destroys a claim framed with all. Even setting that aside, the argument only shows that some union leaders later became prominent. It does not show that unions helped the ordinary student, and it says nothing about whether unions should continue. The reasoning is both false and beside the point, so it is weak.
Only argument (i) is left standing.

Step 4: Why the other options fail:
Option (B) accepts a sweeping claim that is untrue.
Option (C) needs both to be strong, and (ii) fails on facts and on relevance.
Option (D) rejects (i) although the loss of study time is a direct and real consequence.

Step 5: Final Answer:
Argument (i) alone is strong, so the answer is option (A).
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top CLAT Logical Reasoning Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Statements and Arguments Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Questions

View More Questions