<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Strengthening\u2013Weakening Statements and Strong\u2013Weak Arguments are two of the most common critical reasoning question types in the RBI Grade B Phase 1 exam, under the Reasoning section. These questions are based on arguments, and candidates who understand them get an edge. In strengthening\u2013weakening questions, you are asked to find which option makes the argument stronger or weaker. In strong\u2013weak argument questions, you must decide whether a given reason is strong or weak in support of an action. These topics help boost reasoning scores and increase confidence in logical thinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Click Here to Check PIB Sutra & Master Current Affairs<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Many students struggle with these topics because they try to use their personal opinions or don\u2019t understand how arguments work. These simple tips will help you approach such questions smartly and solve them with ease.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Know that an argument includes a claim and the reason behind it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Look for how the options affect the argument\u2019s strength.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A strong argument is logical and relevant to the issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Weak arguments are often vague, emotional, or off-topic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regular practice helps in spotting logic errors quickly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Directions:<\/strong> In the question given below, a passage\/statement is given followed by three statements which may or may not strengthen\/weaken the assertion made in the passage. Answer the questions as per the individual direction given.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the effects of global warming worsen due to increasing carbon emissions, throwing a sun screen around the globe could be a possible solution in a last-ditch attempt at fending off disaster. The proposition includes lacing our stratosphere with additional reflective sulphate aerosols to keep out exactly as much sun rays as we need for a recovery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Which of the following, if true, would strengthen the argument made in the given paragraph? 2. The UNFCCC has found that sulphate aerosols remain in the atmosphere for only a short amount of time, and therefore their cooling is localised and temporary. Ans: D<\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution:<\/strong> The passage talks about injecting reflective sulphate aerosols in the stratosphere to control global warming. It tells us how the aerosol layer in the atmosphere will reflect exactly as much sun rays as we need for recovering from the effects of global warming. 1 tells us how these aerosols would not interfere with our weather pattern, ocean currents and marine life. 3 tells us how diffused sunlight due to sulphate aerosols could increase carbon absorption by terrestrial plants and hence help in controlling global warming. Both 1 and 3 are correct. Thus, D is the right answer. In India, annual rate of speed limit violations in states with strict traffic violation laws were about 50 percent higher than the eleven states where strict traffic violations laws have never been passed. Thus one way to reduce speed limit violations is to repeal strict traffic violation laws. Ans: (d)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: <\/strong>(d) is the right answer. The premise tells us that there are more speed limit violations in states where there are strict traffic violation laws than the ones where these laws were not passed. The conclusion drawn from this data is that we should repeal these laws in order to reduce the incidents of speed limit violations in the states which have passed these laws. D tells us that less than half of the individuals who reside in states without strict traffic violation laws own a vehicle. This seriously weakens the above conclusion since it brings into question the data on which the conclusion is based. If less people own vehicles then it is likely that less number of people would violate the speed limits. The data does not provide us with actual numbers, it merely tells us that the percentage by which speed limit violations in states that have strict laws is higher than those states which do not have these laws. A study conducted by LANCET aimed at studying children’s television-watching habits during the lockdown found that children aged 7-12 who watched more than 20 hours of television per week performed worse in school than children of the same age who watched fewer than 20 hours of television per week. Therefore, parents of children aged 7-12 should not allow their children to watch more than 20 horse of television per week b) The LANCET study also found that children who watched more than 20 hours of television fared poorly on measures of physical fitness. Ans: (d)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: <\/strong>(d) is the right answer. It tells us that the study accurately represents the children across the country and it takes into account the diverse background to which they may belong. In rural areas, one of the major issues is the rise in absenteeism of students. Experts believe that poor attendance is a byproduct of lack of inspiration. Thus, there is a need to change the mindset of the students in order to improve their attendance. Schools should focus on policies that improve students\u2019 learning at school rather than making stricter attendance policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Which of the following, if true, would most effectively weaken the experts’ argument? Ans: (b)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution:<\/strong> (b) is the right answer. The premise tells us that the author believes that low attendance is caused by lack of motivation. However, B tells us that interest in academics results from time spent in class. Thus, it changes the cause and effect relationship between the two events. It seriously weakens the argument above. The other options are simply irrelevant to the premise of the argument.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Directions: Each question given below consists of a statement, followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which is a ‘weak’ argument.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Statement: Should developed countries bear greater financial liability for combating global warming than developing countries? Ans: E<\/p>\n\n\n\n Solution: <\/strong>Both I and II are strong arguments. 1 justifies the claim that developed countries should be made to bear greater financial liability for combating global warming, on the premise that they have played a greater role in causing global warming than developing countries have. II justifies the claim on the basis that developed countries have more capital to successfully achieve this goal. Thus, E is the right answer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As we discussed above, after you understand the logic behind the arguments, you will solve these questions confidently. <\/p>\n\n\n\n To summarize, you need to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In short, a clear understanding and regular practice will help you make strengthening\u2013weakening, and argument questions your strength in the RBI Grade B exam. <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"PracticeMock](\"https:\/\/www.practicemock.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/SM_PIB_Sutra_041122-1-1.png\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nEasy Tips to Master Strengthening & Weakening Questions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Tip 1: Understand What an Argument Means<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Tip 2: Spot the Strengthener or Weakener<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Tip 3: Know What Makes an Argument Strong<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Tip 4: Identify a Weak Argument Quickly<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Tip 5: Practice and Analyze Carefully<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Practice Questions on Strengthening-Weakening Statements<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
1. The aerosols would not meddle much with our weather patterns, ocean currents and marine life as they would be far up in the sky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
3. Sulphate aerosols diffuse sunlight which leads to increased productivity by increasing the light availability to a larger fraction of the canopy and therefore enhance terrestrial carbon uptake.
a) Only 3
b) Only 1 and 2
c) Only 2 and 3
d) Only 1 and 3
e) All 1, 2 and 3<\/p>\n\n\n\n
2 does not favour the argument as it tells us how the cooling effect of sulphate aerosols is localised and temporary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?
a) In states with strict traffic violation laws, few individuals are fined for violating such laws.
b) In states without strict traffic violation laws, many individuals have never gone to a driving school.
c) The annual rate of speed limit violations is lower in states with strict traffic violation laws than in states without such laws.
d) Less than half of the individuals who reside in states without strict traffic violation laws own a vehicle.
e) None of the above<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A and B are incorrect as it is unrelated to the argument. C is incorrect as it contradicts the data given in the premise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Which of the following, if true, would be best to strengthen the argument above?
a) Another study has found that limiting exposure to gadgets may increase children\u2019s reading scores significantly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
c) The television shows that are popular among the 7-12 year olds are of little educational value.
d) The study considered children belonging to different backgrounds and was representative of the children across the country.
e) None of the above<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A is incorrect as it talks about gadgets while the passage talks about television.
B is incorrect because the passage talks about academic performance and not physical fitness.
C is incorrect because it adds nothing to the argument that parents should limit the number of hours their children spend watching television.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
a) Students can seek inspiration from their parents at home.
b) The amount of interest in learning that a student develops is determined by the amount of time he\/she spends in the classroom.
c) Students should behave more responsibly in the classroom.
d) Motivation is an important determinant of academic success.
e) None of the above<\/p>\n\n\n\nPractice Questions on Strong-weak Arguments<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
I. Yes because all countries emit greenhouse gases responsible for global warming, but developed countries emit significantly greater quantities than others.
II. Yes, because developed countries have more capital to achieve this objective than developing countries do.
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<\/p>\n\n\n\nTakeaway<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
![\"How](\"https:\/\/www.practicemock.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Regulatory-Banner.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n