mundasingh123 wrote:Geva why not 2).
2) It says the govt implements only those proposals which are crucial for the well being of the people.then cant we conclude from the Ministry's proposal that , the service in the rural areas is crucial to the well being of the people.
4)In 4,does nt this go against the first line of the stimulus which says , govt service is compulsory only in case of national crisis.
If 4 is the right answer then the first line of the stimulus is not exclusive
Note that the argument's conclusion is that the proposal should not be implemented - so the argument's position is that the situation in the rural areas does NOT constitute a national crisis. We are requested to go against the argument's position and support the ministry - so our job is to show that the situation in the rural areas DOEs constitute a national crisis.
B simply does not do that - it provides a generic statement that the govt should intervene in cases of life and death, but by itself does not say that the rural situation constitutes such a case.
D does something to convince us that the rural situation is a matter of life and death, which may constitute a national crisis - which is why D supports the ministry;s proposal.
I think the mistake you're making is confusing a conclusion (government should not implement the proposal) with a premise. We don't know that the rural situation is NOT a national crisis - whether it is so or not is actually the point of the debate. Before rushing to the statements, stop and consider what you need to do - try to come up with a prediction of what the right answer should do, the look for that answer.
