Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardStatement and Arguments

Statement: Should the state government mandate automated AI-driven third-party audits for all public procurement contracts exceeding ₹10 crore prior to final financial disbursement?

Arguments:
I. Yes; algorithmic evaluation of procurement data quickly flags suspicious vendor bidding patterns and artificial price inflation without subjective bias, thereby significantly reducing leakage of public funds.
II. No; introducing automated auditing will completely eliminate the decision-making authority of executive administrative officers, rendering senior civil servants entirely redundant in public governance.

Which of the arguments given above is/are strong?

  1. Only argument I is strongAnswer
  2. B
    Only argument II is strong
  3. C
    Neither argument I nor argument II is strong
  4. D
    Both argument I and argument II are strong

Answer

Only argument I is strong
The correct answer highlights that only the first argument is strong. Argument I provides a clear, logical, and practical justification for policy adoption by showing how automated checks detect vendor collusions and reduce fund leakage without subjective bias. In contrast, Argument II is weak because it relies on an extreme and unrealistic administrative assumption—claiming that adopting an auditing system will completely abolish official executive authority and render civil servants entirely redundant.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate Argument I for direct relevance, logical validity, and practical impact.
Argument I logically connects automated algorithmic audits to detecting cartelization and price inflation, presenting a strong and realistic policy benefit.
A strong argument must address the core issue with sound reasoning and realistic outcomes.
2
Evaluate Argument II for logical fallacies or extreme assertions.
Argument II claims that automated audits will completely strip administrative authority and make civil servants redundant, which is an unsupported, extreme exaggeration.
Arguments based on extreme predictions or panic-driven administrative claims are logically weak.
3
Combine the evaluations to identify the correct choice.
Argument I is strong and Argument II is weak, leading to the conclusion that only the first argument holds.
Strict State PSC standards require rejecting arguments that rely on hyperbole while accepting those with clear policy rationale.

Key Concept

Evaluation of Strong and Weak Arguments in Administrative Policy
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic