100+ Questions of Analyzing Arguments Reasoning | Logical Reasoning 

Analyzing Argument questions plays a very important role in the quantitative aptitude section of competitive exams such as CAT, GATE, and UPSC. These questions assess a candidate’s ability to break down and assess persuasive discussions. It is important to identify the main points and conclusions in an argument for a systematic analysis.

To prepare for these questions, it is recommended to start by solving practice problems. This blog provides an overview of the basics of Analyzing Arguments Reasoning problems, the types of questions that have appeared in past exams, and tips on how to approach them. By understanding these fundamentals, you can strengthen your foundation and confidently tackle Analyzing Arguments questions during your exam preparation.

What is Analyzing Arguments Reasoning? What are Analyzing Arguments Reasoning Problems?

Analyzing arguments and reasoning means carefully looking at statements or ideas to figure out if they make sense. It’s like being a detective for thoughts! Imagine you have a conversation or read something, and you want to know if the ideas are logical and if the conclusions are based on good reasons. This skill helps you make smart decisions and understand things better.

There are challenges where you practice checking the strength and sense of different viewpoints. The problems might give you a statement or a few statements and ask if they are logical. You could be asked to find hidden assumptions, discover mistakes in the thinking, or decide if there’s enough proof for a conclusion.

For example, a problem might talk about a new rule and ask what assumptions are being made. Another problem could show two ideas that disagree, and you need to say which one has better proof. These exercises help you become good at thinking critically, finding errors in logic, and making wise judgments in everyday situations.

100 Analysing Arguments Reasoning Logical Reasoning

Analysing arguments, reasoning questions and answers section helps the candidates understand how arguments are formed by focusing on assumptions. These ideas or assumptions are the ideas the speaker or writer accepts as true without clearly stating them. The following questions help in identifying the hidden assumptions, developing stronger critical thinking skills and improving the ability of the candidate to analyse reasoning in competitive exams. 

Questions 1–20: Identifying Assumptions

Instructions: Read each argument carefully. Identify what the argument assumes to be true for its conclusion to make sense. After each question, a correct and explained answer is provided to help students understand the reasoning clearly.

1. Argument: We should hire more police officers because crime rates are increasing.

Question: What assumption does this argument make?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes that hiring more police officers will reduce crime rates. It assumes a direct cause-and-effect relationship between police presence and crime reduction.

2. Argument: Since vitamin C prevents colds, everyone should take vitamin C supplements daily.

Question: What is the underlying assumption?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes vitamin C definitively prevents colds and that supplements are as effective as natural sources. It also assumes daily intake has no harmful side effects.

3. Argument: This restaurant must be good because it’s always crowded.

Question: What assumption is being made?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes popularity means quality. It ignores other possible reasons such as low prices, location, or limited alternatives.

4. Argument: Students who study abroad become more independent, so we should encourage all students to study abroad.

Question: Identify the hidden assumption.

Correct Answer: The argument assumes all students can afford to study abroad and that independence is beneficial and suitable for everyone.

5. Argument: The new policy reduced accidents by 30%, so it should be implemented nationwide.

Question: What does this assume?

Correct Answer: It assumes the results from one setting apply everywhere and that the policy has no negative effects that outweigh the benefits.

6. Argument: Online education is inferior because students perform worse on standardised tests.

Question: What assumption underlies this conclusion?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes standardised test scores are the best or only way to measure learning quality and educational success.

7. Argument: We need stricter gun laws because countries with strict gun laws have lower murder rates.

Question: What is assumed here?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes correlation equals causation. It ignores cultural, social, and economic differences between countries.

8. Argument: Employee productivity has increased since we introduced flexible working hours, so flexibility causes productivity.

Question: What assumption is problematic?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes no other factors influenced productivity, such as new technology, management changes, or economic conditions.

9. Argument: Organic food is healthier, so everyone should buy organic.

Question: What is being assumed?

Correct Answer: It assumes organic food is proven to be healthier, affordable for everyone, and widely available.

10. Argument: The company’s profits fell after the CEO resigned, so the resignation caused the decline.

Question: What flawed assumption is made?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes timing alone proves causation, ignoring market trends or other business factors.

11. Argument: Children today are less creative because they spend too much time on screens.

Question: What assumption needs examination?

Correct Answer: It assumes creativity can be accurately compared across generations and that screen time is the main cause rather than education or social changes.

12. Argument: This candidate has an MBA from a top school, so she’ll be an excellent manager.

Question: What is assumed?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes academic qualifications automatically lead to strong management skills, ignoring experience and interpersonal abilities.

13. Argument: Traffic congestion has worsened since the new shopping mall opened, so the mall is responsible.

Question: What assumption is made?

Correct Answer: It assumes no other factors such as population growth, road conditions, or nearby developments caused the congestion.

14. Argument: Alternative medicine must work because people have used it for thousands of years.

Question: What does this assume?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes long-term use proves effectiveness, ignoring tradition, placebo effects, or lack of scientific testing.

15. Argument: We should cut taxes to stimulate economic growth, as this worked in the 1980s.

Question: What assumption is problematic?

Correct Answer: It assumes today’s economy is similar to the 1980s and that tax cuts alone caused growth during that time.

16. Argument: This painting is valuable because it’s by a famous artist.

Question: What is the underlying assumption?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes an artist’s fame alone determines value, regardless of the artwork’s quality or importance.

17. Argument: Meditation reduces stress in clinical trials, so it will help everyone manage daily stress.

Question: What is assumed?

Correct Answer: It assumes trial results apply to real-life situations and that everyone responds to meditation in the same way.

18. Argument: Since unemployment fell during the mayor’s term, she deserves credit for economic improvement.

Question: What assumption is made?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes the mayor’s actions caused the decline, ignoring national or global economic influences.

19. Argument: Private schools produce better students than public schools, proven by higher test scores.

Question: What is assumed?

Correct Answer: It assumes test scores measure overall success and ignores factors like student background, funding, and parental involvement.

20. Argument: We must ban this book because it contains offensive content.

Question: What assumption underlies this argument?

Correct Answer: The argument assumes offensive content justifies censorship and that readers cannot judge or interpret content responsibly on their own.

Questions 21–40: Strengthening and Weakening Arguments

Instructions: Read each argument carefully. Decide whether the given statement strengthens or weakens the argument by supporting it with evidence or exposing its limitations.

21. Argument: Electric vehicles will solve urban air pollution.

Question: Which statement weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Electricity generation in most urban areas relies heavily on coal-fired power plants, merely shifting pollution from tailpipes to smokestacks.

22. Argument: Remote work increases productivity.

Question: Which fact strengthens this argument?

Correct Answer: A comprehensive study of 10,000 workers across 50 companies showed 22% productivity gains when working remotely, controlling for job type and experience.

23. Argument: Raising the minimum wage will hurt small businesses.

Question: What weakens this claim?

Correct Answer: Data from cities that raised minimum wage shows small business revenue increased due to greater local spending power, offsetting wage costs.

24. Argument: Social media causes depression in teenagers.

Question: What strengthens this argument?

Correct Answer: Longitudinal studies tracking teenagers over five years found depression rates increased proportionally with daily social media use, even controlling for other factors.

25. Argument: Nuclear energy is too dangerous for widespread use.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Per kilowatt-hour produced, nuclear energy has caused fewer deaths than any fossil fuel source, including solar and wind when accounting for manufacturing accidents.

26. Argument: Homework improves student academic performance.

Question: What weakens this claim?

Correct Answer: Countries with the highest international test scores, like Finland, assign minimal homework, while high-homework countries show no correlation with better outcomes.

27. Argument: Artificial intelligence will eliminate most jobs within 20 years.

Question: What weakens this prediction?

Correct Answer: Historical technological revolutions eliminated specific jobs but created more new jobs than they destroyed, with net employment increasing.

28. Argument: Plastic bag bans reduce environmental damage.

Question: What strengthens this argument?

Correct Answer: Coastal areas that banned plastic bags saw 60% reduction in marine plastic pollution within two years, with no increase in other pollution types.

29. Argument: Genetically modified crops are necessary to feed the world’s growing population.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Global food production already exceeds requirements; distribution, waste, and access are the real challenges, not production capacity.

30. Argument: Early childhood education programs yield long-term economic benefits.

Question: What strengthens this claim?

Correct Answer: Forty-year follow-up studies show participants earned 25% more, used fewer social services, and paid more in taxes.

31. Argument: Cryptocurrency will replace traditional banking.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer:  Cryptocurrency uses high energy, processes fewer transactions than banks, and lacks consumer protections.

32. Argument: Vegetarian diets are healthier than diets including meat.

Question: What strengthens this argument?

Correct Answer: A meta-analysis of 96 studies found vegetarians had lower risks of heart disease and cancer.

33. Argument: Standardised testing should be eliminated because it causes student anxiety.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Students report similar or greater anxiety from subjective grading and unclear evaluation criteria.

34. Argument: Space exploration is a waste of money that should be spent on Earth’s problems.

Question: What weakens this claim?

Correct Answer: Space spending is only 0.5% of the budget, and its technologies have generated returns exceeding 700% of investment.

35. Argument: Renewable energy cannot meet all our energy needs.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Studies show solar, wind, and storage technologies could meet 100% of energy needs at competitive costs.

36. Argument: Bilingual education programs harm student performance.

Question: What weakens this claim?

Correct Answer: Long-term studies show bilingual students outperform monolingual peers in primary language skills.

37. Argument: Capital punishment deters serious crime.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: States without capital punishment have lower murder rates, and executions do not reduce crime.

38. Argument: Self-driving cars will be safer than human drivers.

Question: What strengthens this argument?

Correct Answer: Human error causes 94% of serious crashes, while automated systems avoid distraction and fatigue.

39. Argument: High housing prices indicate a city’s economic success.

Question: What weakens this claim?

Correct Answer: High prices may reflect poor planning and restricted supply, pushing workers out and harming growth.

40. Argument: Corporate tax cuts stimulate economic growth and job creation.

Question: What weakens this argument?

Correct Answer: Evidence shows companies used tax savings for stock buybacks rather than hiring or investment.

Questions 41–60: Logical Fallacies

Instructions: In this section, students will learn to identify logical fallacies, which are common errors in reasoning that weaken arguments. Read each statement carefully and determine the type of fallacy used. The correct answer after each question explains why the reasoning is flawed.

41. Statement: Everyone is buying this phone, so it must be the best.

Question: What fallacy is this?

Correct Answer: Bandwagon fallacy (argumentum ad populum). It assumes something is good or correct simply because many people believe or use it.

42. Statement: You can’t trust his economic advice because he’s never been wealthy.

Question: Identify the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Ad hominem fallacy. The argument attacks the person instead of addressing the validity of the advice.

43. Statement: Either we ban all cars from the city centre or do nothing about pollution.

Question: What fallacy is present?

Correct Answer: False dilemma (false dichotomy). It presents only two extreme options while ignoring other possible solutions.

44. Statement: I’ve met two engineers who were boring, so all engineers must be boring.

Question: Name this fallacy.

Correct Answer: Hasty generalisation. A broad conclusion is drawn from a very small and unrepresentative sample.

45. Statement: This cure has never been proven ineffective, so it must work.

Question: What logical error is this?

Correct Answer: Appeal to ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantiam). It assumes something is true simply because it has not been proven false.

46. Statement: We have always done it this way, so we shouldn’t change.

Question: Identify the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Appeal to tradition. It assumes a practice is correct or best just because it has existed for a long time.

47. Statement: If we allow students to redo tests, soon they’ll want to redo everything in life.

Question: What fallacy is this?

Correct Answer: Slippery slope fallacy. It claims a minor action will inevitably lead to extreme outcomes without evidence.

48. Statement: My professor says this economic theory is correct, so it must be.

Question: Name the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Appeal to authority (argumentum ad verecundiam). It accepts a claim as true solely because an authority figure supports it.

49. Statement: You claim I wasted money, but you spent $50 on coffee last month.

Question: What fallacy is present?

Correct Answer: Tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy). It avoids addressing the criticism by pointing out similar behaviour in the critic.

50. Statement: This medicine is natural, so it must be safe.

Question: Identify the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Appeal to nature fallacy. It assumes that natural things are always safe or beneficial.

51. Statement: No one has proven God doesn’t exist, so God must exist.

Question: What logical error is this?

Correct Answer: Burden of proof fallacy combined with appeal to ignorance. It shifts the responsibility of proof to those who doubt the claim.

52. Statement: The team lost because I forgot to wear my lucky socks.

Question: Name this fallacy.

Correct Answer: Post hoc ergo propter hoc (false cause). It assumes that because one event followed another, the first caused the second.

53. Statement: Reducing poverty is important, but what about national security?

Question: What fallacy is this?

Correct Answer: Red herring. It introduces an unrelated issue to distract from the original argument.

54. Statement: That politician wants healthcare reform, just like the communists did.

Question: Identify the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Guilt by association. It discredits an idea by linking it to an unpopular group rather than evaluating the idea itself.

55. Statement: These statistics show I’m right, I surveyed my friends.

Question: What’s the problem here?

Correct Answer: Selection bias or sampling fallacy. The sample used is too narrow and unrepresentative to support a general claim.

56. Statement: You are either with us or against us.

Question: Name this fallacy.

Correct Answer: False dichotomy combined with black-and-white thinking. It removes all middle ground or alternative viewpoints.

57. Statement: This diet works because the book sold millions of copies.

Question: What fallacy is present?

Correct Answer: Bandwagon fallacy or appeal to popularity. It confuses popularity with truth or effectiveness.

58. Statement: My opponent wants to cut military spending, so he must hate our troops.

Question: Identify the fallacy.

Correct Answer: Straw man fallacy. It distorts the opponent’s position to make it easier to attack.

59. Statement: This 1000-year-old remedy must work because it’s stood the test of time.

Question: What fallacy is this?

Correct Answer: Appeal to antiquity or tradition. It assumes age alone proves effectiveness or validity.

60. Statement: If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?

Question: What logical error is present?

Correct Answer: Straw man fallacy combined with misunderstanding. It misrepresents evolutionary theory, which states humans and monkeys share a common ancestor.

Questions 61–80: Drawing Conclusions

Instructions: The drawing conclusions section helps students practise drawing logical conclusions from given premises, data, or information. Read each situation carefully and decide what can be reasonably and logically concluded without making assumptions or overgeneralising. The correct answer after each question explains the reasoning clearly.

61. Premises: All doctors are highly educated. Some highly educated people are poor communicators.

Question: What can be concluded?

Correct Answer: Some doctors might be poor communicators. We cannot conclude that all or most doctors are poor communicators. The premises only allow the possibility, not certainty.

62. Data: Company sales increased 20% after hiring a marketing consultant. The industry grew 25% during the same period.

Question: What conclusion is supported?

Correct Answer: The company actually underperformed compared to the industry average. This suggests the consultant’s impact may have been neutral or even negative.

63. Premises: No vegetarians eat meat. All people who eat meat consume animal products.

Question: What follows logically?

Correct Answer: Vegetarians do not consume meat-based animal products. However, they may still consume other animal products such as dairy or eggs.

64. Information: Students in small classes scored 12% higher than those in large classes. Small classes cost 40% more per student.

Question: What can be reasonably concluded?

Correct Answer: Smaller classes are associated with better performance, but they are more expensive. Any decision must balance academic benefits with financial constraints.

65. Data: Eighty percent of successful entrepreneurs failed at least once before succeeding.

Question: What can we conclude?

Correct Answer: Failure is common among successful entrepreneurs. However, failure does not guarantee future success, nor does it cause success by itself.

66. Premises: All squares are rectangles. This shape is not a square.

Question: What conclusion is valid?

Correct Answer: We cannot determine whether the shape is a rectangle. It could be a non-square rectangle or a completely different shape.

67. Information: Crime rates fell 15% in neighbourhoods with community policing. These neighbourhoods also had higher median incomes.

Question: What’s a reasonable conclusion?

Correct Answer: Community policing is associated with lower crime rates, but income may be a confounding factor. More evidence is needed to establish causation.

68. Premises: Most politicians make promises they don’t keep. Sarah is a politician.

Question: What logically follows?

Correct Answer: Sarah will probably make promises she doesn’t keep. This is a probability-based conclusion, not a certainty.

69. Data: Countries with high chocolate consumption have more Nobel Prize winners per capita.

Question: What can be concluded?

Correct Answer: There is a correlation, but no causal relationship can be established. Other factors like wealth and education likely influence both.

70. Information: The vaccine was 95% effective in clinical trials and given to 10 million people with minimal side effects.

Question: What conclusion is supported?

Correct Answer: The vaccine is safe and effective for most people. Rare side effects may still occur, and real-world effectiveness can vary.

71. Premises: All mammals are warm-blooded. Whales are warm-blooded.

Question: Can we conclude whales are mammals?

Correct Answer: No. This is the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Being warm-blooded alone does not prove an animal is a mammal.

72. Data: Employee satisfaction increased after flexible hours were introduced. Productivity stayed the same.

Question: What can be concluded?

Correct Answer: Flexible hours improved satisfaction without reducing productivity. Long-term effects may still require further study.

73. Information: Ninety percent of car accidents occur within 25 miles of home.

Question: What conclusion is valid?

Correct Answer: People drive more frequently near home. This does not mean driving near home is more dangerous per mile driven.

74. Premises: No honest politicians accept bribes. Some politicians accept bribes.

Question: What follows?

Correct Answer: Some politicians are not honest. This is a valid logical conclusion.

75. Data: Students who ate breakfast scored higher on morning tests than those who didn’t.

Question: What can reasonably be concluded?

Correct Answer: Breakfast is associated with better performance, but it does not prove causation. Other factors may contribute.

76. Information: The medicine reduced symptoms in 70% of patients. The placebo reduced symptoms in 45%.

Question: What conclusion is supported?

Correct Answer: The medicine has a real effect beyond placebo, though it does not work for everyone.

77. Premises: Successful startups pivot when their original idea fails. Our startup’s original idea failed.

Question: What can be concluded?

Correct Answer: Pivoting may increase chances of success, but it does not guarantee success.

78. Data: Air quality improved after new regulations. Vehicle use also declined.

Question: What’s a reasonable conclusion?

Correct Answer: The regulations likely helped improve air quality, but reduced vehicle use may also have contributed.

79. Information: Countries with universal healthcare spend less and achieve better health outcomes than the US.

Question: What can be concluded?

Correct Answer: The US healthcare system appears less cost-effective by these measures. Contextual and cultural differences must still be considered.

80. Premises: If it rains, the ground gets wet. The ground is wet.

Question: Can we conclude it rained?

Correct Answer: No. This is the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Other causes could explain the wet ground.

Questions 81–100: Complex Argument Analysis

Instructions: The complex argument analysis section focuses on in-depth evaluation of complex arguments. Students are required to analyse not just what an argument claims, but how well it is supported, what assumptions it makes, and where its reasoning may be weak or incomplete. Each answer highlights strengths, weaknesses, and areas needing deeper evidence or balance.

81. Argument: We should ban violent video games because studies show young people who play them exhibit more aggressive behaviour. Critics say millions play without becoming violent, but even a small increase in aggression justifies the ban given gaming’s popularity.

Question: Analyse this argument’s strengths and weaknesses.

Correct Answer:

Strengths: The argument cites research, acknowledges counterarguments, and considers the scale of impact due to widespread gaming.

Weaknesses: It assumes correlation equals causation, ignores freedom of expression concerns, does not prove real-world violence results, and applies the precautionary principle without weighing social and cultural costs.

82. Argument: Artificial intelligence will either save humanity or destroy it through uncontrolled superintelligence. We must therefore invest heavily in AI safety research now.

Question: Evaluate the reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Issues: The argument presents a false dichotomy, appeals to fear, and assumes superintelligence is inevitable and imminent.

Strengths: It highlights real potential risks and promotes proactive planning.

Improvement: Stronger reasoning would acknowledge uncertainty, support timelines with evidence, and compare AI safety to other research priorities.

83. Argument: Traditional education is failing. Test scores are stagnating, students are disengaged, and employers say graduates lack skills. Radical reform is needed.

Question: Assess this argument.

Correct Answer:

Strengths: Uses multiple evidence sources and offers specific reforms.

Weaknesses: Stagnation does not equal failure, causation is not established, alternative factors are ignored, and proposed solutions lack large-scale evidence. Comparative data and pilot results are missing.

84. Argument: Climate scientists were wrong before. Models now disagree, so costly policies should be avoided.

Question: Analyse the logic.

Correct Answer:

Flaws:
Misrepresents scientific history, treats uncertainty as ignorance, and ignores risk management principles.

Techniques Used:
Cherry-picking and false equivalence between past and current science.

85. Argument: Our diversity initiative failed, so we should focus only on merit-based hiring.

Question: Evaluate this reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Issues: Assumes current hiring is merit-based, creates a false dichotomy, ignores implementation flaws, and overlooks evidence linking diversity to performance.

Missing Data: Application pools, hiring ratios, retention rates, and industry comparisons.

86. Argument: Free speech means social media should not moderate content beyond legal limits.

Question: Assess the argument’s validity.

Correct Answer:

Strengths: Emphasises individual freedom and counterspeech.

Weaknesses: Ignores algorithms, coordinated disinformation, unequal access, and platform responsibility.

Historical Context: Harmful ideas often spread faster than corrections.

87. Argument: The gender wage gap exists because of women’s choices, not discrimination.

Question: Analyse this reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Flaws: Treats choices as free from social pressure, ignores pay gaps within identical roles, and overlooks discrimination evidence.

Missing: Promotion data, hiring audits, and historical context.

88. Argument: Ancient structures require alien or advanced technology explanations.

Question: Evaluate this claim.

Correct Answer:

Flaws:
Appeal to ignorance, false premise, dismissal of archaeological evidence, and underestimation of human capability.

Technique:
Demands extraordinary explanations without necessity.

89. Argument: UBI pilots succeeded, so UBI should be implemented nationally.

Question: Assess this reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Strengths:
Uses evidence and identifies benefits.

Weaknesses:
Pilots are temporary and small-scale, funding and inflation risks are ignored, and poverty is oversimplified.

Need:
Long-term trials and economic modelling.

90. Argument: Promoting two-parent families will reduce crime more than economic policies.

Question: Analyse the logical chain.

Correct Answer:

Issues:
Confuses correlation with causation, ignores third variables, and oversimplifies solutions.

Better View:
Economic stability and family support interact; poverty reduction improves both outcomes.

91. Argument: Pharmaceutical companies suppress cures to protect profits.

Question: Evaluate this conspiratorial reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Flaws:
Assumes large-scale secrecy, ignores competition incentives, overlooks eradicated diseases, and dismisses regulatory standards.

Alternative Explanation:
Many natural remedies lack scientific validation.

92. Argument: College athletes should be paid as employees.

Question:

Assess both sides.

Correct Answer:

For Payment:
Value creation, compensation imbalance, selective amateurism.

Against:
Title IX impact, competitive balance, academic mission.

Conclusion:
Argument highlights inequality but lacks implementation detail.

93. Argument: Historical statues should remain with added context.

Question: Evaluate this reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Flaws:
Confuses commemoration with history, ignores motives behind statue placement, treats public spaces as museums.

Nuance:
Relocation preserves history without honouring controversial figures.

94. Argument: AI language models are fundamentally unreliable.

Question: Analyse this assessment.

Correct Answer:

Valid Concerns: 
Bias, hallucinations, limited transparency.

Oversimplifications:
Ignores appropriate use cases, improvements, and comparison with human error.

Balanced View:
Use with verification and task alignment.

95. Argument: Mindfulness in schools violates the separation of church and state.

Question: Assess the constitutional argument.

Correct Answer:

Weaknesses:
Ignores secular implementation, therapeutic purpose, and parallels like yoga.

Conclusion:
Religious origin alone does not make secular use unconstitutional.

96. Argument: Authoritarian systems are more effective than democracies.

Question: Critically evaluate this claim.

Correct Answer:

Flaws:
Selection bias, ignores failures and long-term costs, assumes benevolence persists.

Counterpoints:
Democracies self-correct, protect rights, and foster innovation.

Core Issue:
Efficiency does not equal effectiveness.

97. Argument: Gene editing should advance rapidly because progress is inevitable.

Question: Analyse this reasoning.

Correct Answer:

Flaws: Appeal to futility, false dilemma, race-to-bottom logic.

Better Approach: Regulated progress, international cooperation, and ethical distinction between therapy and enhancement.

98. Argument: Eyewitness testimony should be excluded from courts.

Question: Evaluate this proposal.

Correct Answer:

Valid Concerns:
Memory unreliability and wrongful convictions.

Oversimplification:
Some testimony is accurate, and other evidence is also flawed.

Better Solution:
Reform procedures rather than total exclusion.

99. Argument: The gender pay gap proves discrimination is the sole cause.

Question: Assess this causal claim.

Correct Answer:

Partial Validity:
Discrimination is proven through audit studies.

Oversimplification:
Ignores work patterns, negotiation, and structural expectations.

Conclusion:
Multiple interacting factors explain the gap.

100. Argument: Science cannot explain values or meaning, so other ways of knowing are needed.

Question: Analyse this philosophical argument.

Correct Answer:

Valid Distinction:
Science explains facts, not values.

Complication:
Other ways of knowing must be clearly defined and evaluated by domain.

Conclusion:
Different domains require different approaches, but not all approaches are equal for all questions.

Explore: Legal Reasoning Questions for Law Aspirants

Tips to Solve Analyzing Arguments Reasoning Questions 

In order to master Analyzing Arguments and Reasoning Questions, the following approaches should be considered:

1. Identify Key Premises: Pinpoint the underlying assumptions and premises supporting the argument to assess its foundation.
2. Evaluate Relevance: Assess the relevance of each premise to the conclusion, focusing on logical connections between them.
3. Spot Logical Fallacies: Be vigilant for common fallacies like circular reasoning or false cause, as they weaken the argument.
4. Consider Counterarguments: Explore potential counterarguments to strengthen your analytical skills and challenge the argument’s validity.
5. Assess Overall Coherence: Ensure the argument maintains a coherent structure and that each step logically leads to the conclusion.

20 + Analyzing Arguments Reasoning Questions and Answers 

Download the 20 + Analyzing Arguments Reasoning Questions and Answers here in this PDF below.

Also Read: Questions of Letter and Symbol Series with Answers

FAQs

RELATED POSTS

45+ Questions of Letter and Symbol Series with Answers	Blood Relation Reasoning Questions | Verbal Reasoning
Series Completion Reasoning | Verbal Reasoning |	Types of Reasoning Questions in Competitive Exams
Questions of Direction Sense Test Reasoning | Verbal Reasoning	20+ Questions of Arithmetic Reasoning | Verbal Reasoning

This was all about “ 100+ Questions of Analyzing Arguments Reasoning”.  For more such informative blogs, check out our Study Material Section, or you can learn more about us by visiting our  Indian exams page.