Question

Statement: Should there be a strict upper age limit for candidates appearing in government job examinations? Argument I: No, age has nothing to do with a person's ability to do a job. Argument II: Yes, it ensures a steady inflow of younger people into the workforce and gives fair opportunity across generations.

• A. Only argument I is strong
• B. Only argument II is strong
• C. Both arguments are strong
• D. Neither argument is strong

Hint:

Ask whether each argument gives a concrete, policy-relevant reason or just an unqualified sweeping statement.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Apply the same checklist - relevance to the policy plus a concrete, realistic basis rather than a sweeping generalisation.
Step 2: Argument I says "age has nothing to do with a person's ability to do a job." This is an unqualified, sweeping claim; many roles do involve age-related considerations for stamina or workforce planning, so stating it has "nothing to do" with ability ignores nuance and fails the realism check.
Step 3: Argument II gives a concrete workforce-planning benefit (steady inflow of younger workers) and a fairness rationale (opportunity across generations), both of which are specific, relevant considerations directly tied to whether an age limit should exist. It passes the checklist.
Step 4: Only argument II clears the checklist.
Correct option: (2) Only argument II is strong.