It is definitely a confusing topic but the way you have taught makes it simple and to think in the right direction.....Your gentle voice again made me to hear the complete video. Thank you Sir 👍
Such questions should be banned from asking in exams ? Statement 1 : Yes , these are irrevelent and debatable they can't have any absolute answers , every human mind interpret the things differently unless they are facts Statement 2: No; such kind of questions help in decision making power hence should be made compulsory
Amazingly u made I try easy. I put what u said in my understanding- While analysing argument one should think "can the contrary to this happen". If yes then it is a weak arg. If the substantiation is not given in arg then it is a weak arg Containingng the words may, might will make arg weak. Question the arg - is this based on emotion. If yes it is weak arg
1st time I have seen such trick ,how to solve logical Reasoning ...thank you sir for efforts ...and nicely u have explained it.... I hope that many students will make their dreams in reality... through this step...Thank u ..
@@CareerRideOfficialI have a question that in question number 6 , 20:14 you have said that 1 is strong argument but the argument is not related to the statement then how it became strong argument, please help me with this doubt sir.
Thanks for writing in, Priscillah. Every feedback from our viewers is very important to us. Please subscribe for more career related videos and stay connected :)
lol.. the second line of the first argument clearly says that no state has authority to takes someone's life (which is an instruction from supreme authority even though it is not mentioned but it is a fact)
Question 3, 14.55 why can't the question be taken as 'first statement being an advantage and the second being a disadvantage, this way the answer is C'
These questions are like my wife and mother in law...when i think its a strong argument, its a weak one, when i think its a weak argument, its a strong one...when my wife says no, its mean yes, when her mom says yes, for me its maybe....
yeah bro , first argument is linked to security , development , art 21 right to internet etc its strong argument and 2 nd was weak as without satellite how development occurs , we not lived in isolated world or other planet
Thanks fr a wonderful explanation Sir.my reasoning part is cleard ad free frm fear oly bcz of u.great job well done.keep motivating by lots of practice
This is my starting for competitive exams and I really clear so many things ...so thank u so much sir...if u provide any classes or course please update me on this ....
25:51 According to india bix argument 1st is strong Statement: Should Government close down loss-making public sector enterprises? Arguments: 1)No. All employees will lose their jobs, security and earning, what would they do? 2)Yes. In a competitive world the rule is 'survival of the fittest'. Only argument I is strong Only argument II is strong Either I or II is strong Neither I nor II is strong Both I and II are strong Explanation: Closing down public-sector enterprises will definitely throw the engaged persons out of employment. So, argument I holds. Also, closing down is no solution for a loss-making enterprise. Rather, its causes of failure should be studied, analyzed and the essential reforms implemented. Even if this does not work out, the enterprise may be privatized. So, argument II is vague,
i mean this has to be the most confusing topic. like you said we have to use our common sense. in basic computer question we said it is important for future where as we dicarded space exploration as weak when every article says it is the need of the hour and huanity cannot survive in future without extending our horizon. secondly there is no evidence capital punishments decreases crime, its very common to find countries with higher frequency of capital punishments having higher crime rates eg. afghanistan and also historicaly in medieval and ancient time capital punishments were quite common but still had more crime rate than modern times. im confused how much of logic and common sense do we have to put in. thanks tho youve been very helpful made me a master in conclusion and cause and effect
Sir ji we cant assume your look as your voice , we fell love with you , we are eager to see you ... Our only hope is always you when it comes to logical reasoning .... Stay blessed always .... Love from Kashmir .....🤗
Oh my god, completely confusing, for each question you r giving new rules and different different explanation. Confused a lot. Please in this same topic, solve more 20 questions.
This makes total sense considering these questions are used to test candidates during job applications. Employers do not want to hire people who base decisions on emotions.
Ok Thanks Sir , You cleared my doubts on all logical reasoning (conclusion/assumption/coa/arguement) , this video series is fantastic but sometimes your answers are contradicting to rules
Similar question to No. 10 Here in your explanation option 2 is strong but when I gave the test online it says no 2 is week. I'm totally confused. Statement: Should Government close down loss-making public sector enterprises? Arguments: 1. No. All employees will lose their jobs, security and earning, what would they do? 2. Yes. In a competitive world the rule is 'survival of the fittest'. A. Only argument I is strong B. Only argument II is strong C. Either I or II is strong D. Neither I nor II is strong E. Both I and II are strong Answer: Option A Explanation: Closing down public-sector enterprises will definitely throw the engaged persons out of employment. So, argument 1 holds. Also, closing down is no solution for a loss-making enterprise. Rather, its causes of failure should be studied, analyzed and the essential reforms implemented. Even if this does not work out, the enterprise may be privatized. So, argument II is vague.
Balajikiran Manne As well as there should be some change in management policies and governance , Closing them downn is a bit too much of a extreme measure.
Thank you soo much for your support and guidance your content turned out to be very helpful for me and i have finally made it to Christ University's ncr campus delhi
Sir, there is a problem in que no 10 in that que argument 1. No, all employes will lose there jobs But it is said that if public sector is loss making then it is said that gov is doing something good for people I toto public sector motto is not to earn profit
Sir Q7 the ans should be either 1 or 2 because both the points are strong. The 1st point is also strong because the statement is asking for relax fdi and having fdi is enough to get competition and technology there's no need to give more relaxation because it really effects domestic trader's
For Indian Cricket should there be different captains for different formats of game? Argument 1: Yes, different formats need different mindset and planning Argument 2: No, one and the same captain will do Sir what will be the answer for this
For the "basic computer knowledge" question you consider the real life scenario that computer is needed in today's era by yourself but for the next "space mission" question you didn't use you gk that space mission will help in connectivity. So when should we use our GK of real life and when to just follow the statement blindly????
Sir, in question number 4, why can we not mark option(c)? Because the coming of the private sector would either bring about development or would lead to exploitation... Hence I thought this was an advantage/disadvantage question and thought option(c) looks correct. Kindly clarify.
the second argument cannot be considered a disadvantage until or unless it is a strong argument. In this case we cannot conclude that private sector will lead to exploitation ( it may or may not ). its not an actual fact or universal truth rather a vague statement so thats why second argument is weak. I hope it helps😇
thank u sir...your videos on logical reasoning are very helpful...very few content on logical reasoning is available at youtube nd most of it is not that much understandable ...the one you are providing is very apt nd to the points ....thanks for that sir..muje laga ki i should thank you ..soo
Statement: Should Government close down loss-making public sector enterprises? Arguments: No. All employees will lose their jobs, security and earning, what would they do? Yes. In a competitive world the rule is 'survival of the fittest'. Other site's are showing a different answer in this question
Q11. even though its not directly saying advantage or disadvantage , both the arguments are doing in opposite directions so why aren't we choosing Either 1 or 2?
Q 9) space missions are important as colonization of space is the going to be a real thing in future .....how is it a weak argument. It stands with country's reputation and technological advancement??????
Your way of explanation is too good .sir I think no need to read any book for understand concept .just u rs video is enough .just we go through books for the purpose of practice not for concept thanks lot sir
Thanks for the kind words, Ashwini. For online practice of questions, you can follow this link on our website: www.careerride.com/online-aptitude-test.aspx
In ques no 10 i think 1st one is strong argument because government have to take responsibility or take care of all the employers who are working in public sector that is why it is government he cant remove employers if it is in private sector then 2nd one will be strong.....
Sir in question no. 6....it is not the 1st fundamental right in constitution ...although it is a FR under article 21 but in absolute statement it is wrong...please suggest right answer while clearing my doubt. Thanks
It's very confusing. Question 10 is in a book from McGraw hills publication of reasoning where the given answer is neither statement 1 nor statement 2.
Sir you explained questions number 5 that if both statment go in opp direction whether they are strong we should Mark option I or II is strong. I have a problem in my book as follows - STATEMENT : Should a blanket ban be put on hunting of wild animals? ARGUMENT : I. Yes. The natural food chain is disrupted. II. No. It provides a cheap source of protein to the poor. So it means tha ans should either I or II. But the ans given is - both arguments are strong. So sir please explain this question humble request.
in Qs 6, the first argument isn't even that much related to the given argument, it is indirectly related to it, so why have we considered it to be a strong argument?
@@divyatej.a1553 Yes correct and this is the reason that accuracy in this section goes down different things comes up if we read the sentence 3-4 times But I things does matter what field if it is beneficial for our country and for people living in our country that makes the argument strong But your point is right too
