0% found this document useful (0 votes)
142 views2 pages

Arguments Basics 2

The document discusses several examples throughout history where individuals refused orders from higher authorities due to principles of legality and justice. It notes that while exceptional figures disobey in extraordinary circumstances, the rule of law typically relies on bureaucrats carrying out ordinary duties within the established norms of their offices.

Uploaded by

Astha K
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
142 views2 pages

Arguments Basics 2

The document discusses several examples throughout history where individuals refused orders from higher authorities due to principles of legality and justice. It notes that while exceptional figures disobey in extraordinary circumstances, the rule of law typically relies on bureaucrats carrying out ordinary duties within the established norms of their offices.

Uploaded by

Astha K
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 2

1.

If government refuses to grant rights to the people it governs, and repeatedly shows itself deaf
to the people's wishes, what exact recourse do those people have except either to acquiesce, or
to become tumultuous according to the government's interpretation of the word? It's easy to
tell people to show up at the ballot box and make their voices heard by voting, but some of
the most violent actions in history were sparked by the struggle for voting rights in the first
place. People don't engage in collective action because democracy has been effective; they
engage in it because it has ceased to be responsive to its citizens. In 1992, Hunt found that
when authorities in Los Angeles told people to quiet down, go back home, and use their
voting power to push for the changes they desired, people's responses were along the lines of:
'That's what we have been doing. And nothing has changed.

2. Socrates, while serving on the Athenian Council, sought to prevent it from making an illegal
decision. Martin Luther, when a council convened by the Emperor Charles V in 1521 told him
to recant, is said to have declared: 'Here I stand; I can do no other.' The United States'
attorney general Elliot Richardson and the deputy attorney general William D Ruckelshaus
both chose to resign in 1973 rather than obey President Richard Nixon's order to fire the
special prosecutor investigating Watergate. More recently, the acting attorney general Sally
Yates was fired after she announced that the US Department of Justice would not cooperate in
enforcing President Donald Trump's executive order against Muslim immigrants. They all
said no. Each of them, for reasons of principle, opposed an order from a higher authority (or
sought to prevent its issuance). They are exceptional figures, in extraordinary circumstances.
Yet most of the time, the rule of law is more mundane: it depends on officials carrying out
their ordinary duties within the purposes of the offices they hold, and on citizens obeying
them. That is to say, the rule of law relies upon obedience by bureaucrats, and obedience of
bureaucrats - but crucially, within the established norms of the state.

3. Identify the argument and its assumptions/Premise/Conclusion in each of the following


passage.
A. Thefts in Delhi has almost doubled. As per the data obtained through RTI by Praja
Foundation from Delhi Police, the highest number of cases registered is of theft, with 75,728
cases in 2017-18, which is an increase of 82 per cent from the previous year, 2016-17.
B. "The ban on liquor is a deterrent and consumption of liquor in Bihar is in the public interest
and appreciated by a large number of people especially women whose families are hard done
by the consumption of liquor which drains family incomes, entails debts and is ruinous to
health."
C. It is being argued that in order to benefit under CAA, a Hindu will have to prove that s/he is a
national of Pakistan, Afghanistan or Bangladesh and that s/he entered India on/before
December 31, 2014. On this basis, it is being said that someone who applied in the NRC and
was rejected will not then be able to avail the benefit of applying for citizenship under CAA.
This is a misleading argument because an illegal migrant can never 'prove' that s/he entered
India illegally. Imagine the universe of documents that can prove a person's entry into a
country - visas, immigration stamps on passport and air/train/bus tickets. None of these are
available in the case of an illegal migrant. In fact, the very definition of exempted persons
under the MHA notification of September 7, 2015 is persons who entered into India "without
valid documents including passport or other travel documents" prior to December 31, 2014.

4. Over the past 6 years, most of the students in Tupac city have regularly attended colleges in
neighbouring Mekong city to pursue their graduate degrees. However according to a recent
change in the education policies of Mekong city, the colleges in Mekong are expected to
increase their fees to almost the same level as those charged by Tupac city. Therefore, it can
be safely concluded that the colleges in Tupac will see a surge in the number of students
enrolling with them to pursue their graduate degrees.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A) The teachers at colleges in Mekong are generally considered better than those at colleges
in Tupac City.
B) Tupac city doesn’t have good quality colleges.
C) The low fees charged by the colleges at Mekong city is the primary reason why students
from Tupac move to these colleges.
D) Students who study at Tupac city do not perform better than those who study at Mekong
city.
E) Mekong city doesn’t have more colleges than Tupac city.

5. Eating unhygienic food always results in the case of stomach infection or food poisoning.
Dominic is currently suffering from food poisoning, so he must have eaten unhygienic food in
the last few days.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A) Eating unhygienic food will most definitely lead to food poisoning.
B) Dominic doesn’t have weak immune system that makes him prone to food poisoning.
C) Dominic can identify the difference between hygienic and unhygienic food.
D) Eating unhygienic food is the only way to get food poisoning.
E) Unhygienic food contains pathogens that lead to food poisoning.

6. In the year since the city of London imposed strict air pollution regulations on local industry,
the number of bird species seen in and around London has increased dramatically. Similarly,
air pollution rules should be imposed in other major cities.
Each of the following is an assumption made in the argument EXCEPT –
A) In most major cities, air pollution problems are caused almost entirely by local
industry.
B) Air pollution regulations on the industry have a significant impact on the quality
of the air.
C) The air pollution problem of other major cities is basically similar to those once
suffered by London.
D) An increase in the number of bird species in and around a city is desirable.
E) The increased sightings of bird species in and around London reflect an actual
increase in the number of species in the area.

You might also like