Question

In the following question, a statement is given followed by some arguments. Study the statement carefully and mark the correct alternative.
Statement : Should people with educational qualification higher than the optimum requirements be debarred from seeking jobs ?
Arguments :
I. No, it will further aggravate the problem of educated unemployment.
II. Yes, it creates insecurities among employees and affects the work adversely.
III. No, this goes against the basic rights of the individuals.
IV. Yes, this will increase productivity.

• A. Argument I is strong
• B. Argument II is strong
• C. Argument III is strong
• D. All arguments are strong

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

To analyze the statement and the given arguments, we need to evaluate each on its own merit considering logical reasoning principles. The statement asks if individuals with higher educational qualifications than required should be debarred from seeking jobs. Let's consider each argument:

Argument I: "No, it will further aggravate the problem of educated unemployment." This argument is weak because debarment might not directly lead to an increase in unemployment; people may seek jobs matching their credentials or opportunities elsewhere. 

Argument II: "Yes, it creates insecurities among employees and affects the work adversely." This argument is weak as it lacks a direct cause-effect relationship; insecurity and work environment are influenced by multiple factors, not solely by educational qualifications of individuals.

Argument III: "No, this goes against the basic rights of the individuals." This argument is strong. It upholds the principle of individual rights and freedom of employment, a fundamental human right. Debarring individuals based on qualifications alone contravenes these rights.

Argument IV: "Yes, this will increase productivity." This argument is weak. There is no assurance higher productivity results from debarring overqualified candidates, productivity hinges on skills, motivation, organizational culture, not merely qualification levels.

Analyzing these arguments, only Argument III effectively addresses the core ethical and rights-based implications of the initial statement. The correct alternative is therefore Argument III is strong.