The correct answer is: Only argument II is strong.
Argument I is weak because it does not provide a strong reason why unauthorized structures should not be demolished. The fact that people live in these structures does not mean that they should not be demolished. There are other ways to provide housing for these people, such as building public housing or providing subsidies for them to rent or buy homes in the private market.
Argument II is strong because it provides a good reason why unauthorized structures should be demolished. Demolishing these structures will send a clear message to the public that unauthorized construction will not be tolerated. This may discourage people from constructing unauthorized buildings in the future.
Here are some additional details about each argument:
- Argument I: This argument is weak because it does not provide a strong reason why unauthorized structures should not be demolished. The fact that people live in these structures does not mean that they should not be demolished. There are other ways to provide housing for these people, such as building public housing or providing subsidies for them to rent or buy homes in the private market.
- Argument II: This argument is strong because it provides a good reason why unauthorized structures should be demolished. Demolishing these structures will send a clear message to the public that unauthorized construction will not be tolerated. This may discourage people from constructing unauthorized buildings in the future.
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions.