Directions : Following question consists of a statement followed by four arguments I, II, III and IV. You have to decide which of the arguments is a STRONG arguments and which is a WEAK Argument. Statement : Should the consumption of aerated drinks be banned in India? Arguments : I. Yes. This is the only way to reduce the risk of exposing people to some diseases. II. No. Each individual should have right to choose what he wants. III. No. There is no confirmed evidence that such products have adverse effects on human body. IV. Yes. It is banned in many other countries also.

[amp_mcq option1=”Only I is strong” option2=”Only I and II are strong” option3=”Only III is strong” option4=”Only I and IV are strong E. All are strong” correct=”option2″]

The correct answer is: Only I and II are strong.

Argument I is strong because it is based on the evidence that aerated drinks have adverse effects on human health. Argument II is strong because it is based on the principle of individual liberty. Arguments III and IV are weak because they are based on the following fallacies:

• Argument III is based on the fallacy of appeal to ignorance. The fact that there is no confirmed evidence that aerated drinks have adverse effects on human health does not mean that they do not have such effects.
• Argument IV is based on the fallacy of appeal to popularity. The fact that aerated drinks are banned in many other countries does not mean that they should be banned in India.

In conclusion, only arguments I and II are strong.