Critical Reasoning (CR)

Q. India offers reassuring evidence of the safety of GM products. Many farmers grow Bt-cotton carelessly without observing recommended safety measures. GM foods are also being consumed, even if unknowingly, as revealed by a CSE report. Yet, no deleterious fallout has been observed until now. The government should lift the ill-advised embargo on the approval of new GM seeds. If not put to the gainful use of farmers, consumers and biotech-based industries, the valuable biotechnological expertise acquired over years would go to waste.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the gist of the argument given above?

  1. There is sufficient proof of the safety of GM products available in India to remove suspicions of any harmful effects.
  2. The government should allow the use of new GM seeds as no detrimental effects of GM products being used in India have been seen.
  3. There will be no benefit derived from GM-related biotechnological expertise unless it is put to the gainful use of farmers, consumers and biotech-based industries.
  4. The ban imposed on the approval of new GM seeds by the government should be revoked.


Please Note: The answer to this question will be posted tomorrow morning as a comment below.

See our previous ‘Questions of the Day’:  

Verbal Question of the Day: 42

Verbal Question of the Day: 41


  1. Mayank Khanna

    The paragraph talks about the lack of knowledge in proper use of GM related goods .As a result people use it unknowingly and it can have really bad consequences. So it is needed that the proper knowledge needs to be imparted to concerned people.

    1- The point is not whether the gm product are harmful or not. It is need to provide knowledge about their use.
    2- The government should allow the use as it has no bad effects is a part of author’s view but not the main idea, it is a pre supposition
    4- The ban imposed should be removed is not the main idea and in first place ban is not put on them they are used but not properly.

    3- It talks about the proper use of these seeds based on the bio technical expertise gained put to use for welfare of farmers.

    1. TG.Prabhat

      The conclusion, Mayank, is always in the form of a suggestion, piece of advice, claim, rebuttal, opinion or plan of action. Premises are statements that collectively prove the conclusion- they include any data, beliefs or facts that support the conclusion. Asking ‘why’ or ‘how’ the conclusion is true would help identify the premises. Conversely, the statement that is not an answer to a ‘why’ or ‘how’ asked of any other statement will typically be the conclusion of an argument. A presupposition, on the other hand, is a fact that makes a premise true.
      Try applying these concepts to the argument in the question. Let me know if you have a doubt. 🙂

  2. TG.Prabhat

    The answer is option 2. It states the main point that the ban on new GM seeds should be removed along the one of the major premises that no harmful outcome from their use has been observed.

    1 is beyond the scope of the paragraph due to it mentioning ‘sufficient’ and ‘suspicions’.

    3 is an inference from the paragraph.

    4 states only the main point, so it’s less preferable than 2.

    Rahul, Ridhima, Abhipri, Soni and Pranshu- Well done! 🙂

    In case anyone has a doubt, write back to me.

    How many of you are Kunal Kamra’s fans?

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>