Statement & Arguments MCQs for UPSC Prelims

42 practice questions on Statement & Arguments from the Logical Reasoning section of the UPSC Prelims syllabus. 42 come with a written explanation and 1 are actual previous year questions. Try the sample set below - the answer stays hidden until you ask for it.

1 Easy 28 Medium 13 Hard 1 from past papers

Sample questions

Q1
Previous year question easy

Consider the following statement: "We shall go either for a picnic or for trekking". Which of the following, if true, would falsify this claim?

  1. A We go for a picnic but not for trekking
  2. B Activities such as picnic and trekking are encouraged by the health authorities
  3. C We go for trekking and not for picnic
  4. D We do not go either for picnic or for trekking
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: D - We do not go either for picnic or for trekking

The claim is an inclusive 'either/or': at least one of picnic or trekking will happen. It is falsified only when neither happens. Option (d) states exactly that neither activity takes place, so it makes the claim false. Options (a) and (c) each satisfy the claim (one of the two does happen), so they do not falsify it. Option (b) is irrelevant to whether the trip happens.

Q2
hard

Statement: Should public examinations be conducted entirely online in all schools? Arguments: (I) Yes, online examinations reduce paper use and speed up result processing. (II) No, many schools in remote areas lack reliable electricity and internet connectivity. Which of the arguments is/are strong?

  1. A Both I and II are strong.
  2. B Only I is strong.
  3. C Only II is strong.
  4. D Neither I nor II is strong.
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Both I and II are strong.

A strong argument is both relevant to the issue and addresses a substantial, real aspect of it. Argument I points to genuine benefits (less paper, faster results) directly tied to going online, so it is strong. Argument II raises a serious practical barrier, the lack of electricity and connectivity in remote schools, which directly affects feasibility of conducting all exams online, so it too is strong. Since both engage the core practical merits and risks of the proposal, both are strong; selecting only one ignores a substantive point, and 'neither' dismisses two relevant considerations.

Q3
medium

Statement: 'Should public libraries charge a membership fee?' Argument I: Yes, the revenue can maintain and expand library collections. Argument II: No, a fee defeats the very purpose of a public library, which is free access to knowledge for all. Which argument(s) is/are strong?

  1. A Both I and II are strong
  2. B Only I is strong
  3. C Only II is strong
  4. D Neither is strong
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Both I and II are strong

A strong argument is relevant and addresses the core issue. Argument I gives a concrete benefit (revenue for upkeep and expansion) directly tied to the question. Argument II raises the foundational principle of universal free access, which is central to the idea of a 'public' library. Both engage the real merits, so both are strong.

Q4
medium

Statement: 'Should the use of single-use plastic bags be completely banned in the country?' Arguments: I. Yes, because such plastics are non-biodegradable and cause serious long-term environmental harm. II. No, because plastic bags are convenient and cheap for shopkeepers and customers. Which of the arguments is/are strong?

  1. A Only argument I is strong
  2. B Only argument II is strong
  3. C Both arguments I and II are strong
  4. D Neither argument I nor II is strong
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Only argument I is strong

A strong argument is both relevant to the issue and weighty in its consequences. Argument I addresses a serious, substantive consequence - non-biodegradable plastics causing long-term environmental harm - which is a major public-interest reason directly relevant to a ban. So it is strong. Argument II appeals only to convenience and low cost, which is a minor, short-term consideration that does not outweigh long-term environmental damage and is therefore a weak argument. Hence only Argument I is strong.

Q5
medium

Statement: 'To improve road safety, helmets should be made compulsory for all two-wheeler riders.' Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen this argument?

  1. A Statistics show that head injuries are the leading cause of death in two-wheeler accidents, and helmets sharply reduce such injuries.
  2. B Helmets are available in a wide range of colours and designs.
  3. C Many riders find helmets uncomfortable in hot weather.
  4. D The cost of a good helmet is more than a day's wage for some riders.
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Statistics show that head injuries are the leading cause of death in two-wheeler accidents, and helmets sharply reduce such injuries.

An argument is strengthened by evidence linking the proposed action to the stated goal. Data showing head injuries are the chief cause of fatalities and that helmets sharply reduce them directly supports compulsion for road safety. Colour and design are irrelevant to safety. Discomfort and cost are objections that weaken, not strengthen, the case for compulsion.

Q6
medium

Statement: 'Should public libraries charge a small annual membership fee?' Argument: 'No, because access to knowledge should not depend on a person's ability to pay.' How would you evaluate this argument?

  1. A It is a strong argument, as it addresses the core public-good purpose of libraries.
  2. B It is a weak argument, because libraries should always be free of any rule.
  3. C It is a weak argument, because it discusses an unrelated matter.
  4. D It is a strong argument, because fees always reduce reading habits.
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - It is a strong argument, as it addresses the core public-good purpose of libraries.

A strong argument is relevant and rests on a substantial, reasoned ground. Equitable access to knowledge regardless of paying capacity is directly relevant to the public-good role of libraries, making the argument strong. The other options either over-generalise ('always free of rule', 'fees always reduce reading') or wrongly call the relevant argument unrelated.

Q7
medium

Statement: Should public libraries charge a nominal membership fee instead of offering free access? Arguments: I. Yes, a fee would generate revenue to maintain and expand collections. II. No, a fee would deter low-income readers, defeating the equalising purpose of a public library. Which argument(s) is/are strong?

  1. A Both I and II are strong
  2. B Only I is strong
  3. C Only II is strong
  4. D Neither is strong
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Both I and II are strong

A strong argument is relevant and addresses a substantive consequence of the proposal. Argument I directly connects the fee to a concrete operational benefit (revenue for maintenance and expansion), which is germane and weighty. Argument II directly addresses the core social mission of public libraries, namely equitable access, and identifies a real adverse effect on low-income readers. Both engage the central trade-off rather than being trivial or tangential, so both are strong.

Q8
medium

Statement: A city corporation announces that all public parks will close at 6 p.m. instead of 9 p.m. to save on electricity and security costs. Which of the following, if true, is the STRONGEST argument AGAINST this decision?

  1. A Many working residents can use the parks only after 6 p.m., so the change effectively denies them access to public recreation.
  2. B Some other cities also close their parks early.
  3. C Electricity tariffs may rise in the future.
  4. D A few residents prefer to walk in the parks in the early morning.
Show answer and explanation

Correct answer: A - Many working residents can use the parks only after 6 p.m., so the change effectively denies them access to public recreation.

A strong argument against must directly attack the merit of the decision and show a substantial harm it causes. Denying working residents, who can use parks only in the evening, access to public recreation is a direct, weighty objection to closing at 6 p.m. 'Other cities also close early' is an irrelevant appeal to practice and does not address harm here. 'Tariffs may rise' is speculative and actually supports closing early to save costs. 'A few prefer mornings' is weak (only a few) and unaffected by an evening closure. Hence the first option is the strongest argument against.

Practice all 42 Statement & Arguments questions free

Timed practice, instant scoring, and explanations for every question. Free forever - no card, no catch.

Start practicing I am a teacher - create a test

More Logical Reasoning topics

Logical Deductions 171 Puzzles & Arrangements 100 Ranking & Ordering 90 Coding-Decoding 89 Number & Letter Series 83 Counting & Combinatorial Reasoning 77 Analogy & Classification 67 Blood Relations 67 Syllogism 67 Statement & Conclusions 63 Direction Sense 62 Venn Diagrams 62 Seating Arrangement 49 Statement & Assumptions 46 Cubes & Dice 45