Prelims - Smart Questions Solving Technique - ELIMINATING SIMILAR OR OPPOSITE OPTIONS

The Eliminating Similar or Opposite Options technique helps when you find two options that are either closely similar or completely opposite to each other. In such cases, it’s highly likely that one of these options is the correct answer. UPSC often creates options that test whether you can differentiate between minor or major differences or detect outright contradictions. Let’s break down this method in detail with actual UPSC CSE Prelims questions.

Question: With reference to India's geography, consider the following statements:

• The Tropic of Cancer passes through eight Indian states.
• The Equator passes through India.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Step-by-Step Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The Tropic of Cancer passes through eight Indian states.

• How to Think About It: This is a fact-based statement. If you’ve studied Indian geography in detail, you might recall that the Tropic of Cancer (23.5° N latitude) does indeed pass through eight states: Gujarat, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Tripura, and Mizoram.
• If you have a clear memory of this fact, it becomes easier to judge this statement as correct. This suggests that Statement 1 is likely true.

Statement 2: The Equator passes through India.

• How to Think About It: India is located entirely in the Northern Hemisphere, with its southern tip at 8° N latitude (Kanyakumari). The Equator (0° latitude) does not come anywhere near India; it passes through countries closer to the equatorial region like Indonesia, Brazil, and Kenya.
• This is clearly an incorrect statement based on basic geographical knowledge.

Identifying the Opposite Nature of the Statements:

1.        Opposites: The two statements deal with very different latitudinal lines—the Tropic of Cancer and the Equator. One statement talks about a latitude that India is actually near (Tropic of Cancer), while the other talks about a latitude that is completely out of India's geographical location (Equator).

2.        How to Apply Opposition: Since one statement is true (1) and the other is clearly false (2), you can eliminate options that say both are true or both are false.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): Since one statement is true and the other is false, eliminate this.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This is incorrect because one statement is true (Tropic of Cancer passes through India).
• Options A and B (1 only or 2 only): Now, we can confidently say that Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false, so the correct answer must be A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

• Confusing the Tropic of Cancer with the Equator: Some students might confuse the two latitudinal lines, thinking that both might pass through India. This leads to the incorrect assumption that both statements are correct, causing them to choose C.
• Overlooking Basic Geography: Another common mistake is to overlook basic geographical concepts. Students might rush through the question without properly visualizing the global map and India's location, leading to wrong guesses.

Question: With reference to Fundamental Rights in India, consider the following statements:

• Fundamental Rights are absolute and cannot be restricted.
• The State can impose reasonable restrictions on Fundamental Rights.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Step-by-Step Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: Fundamental Rights are absolute and cannot be restricted.

• How to Think About It: The idea of Fundamental Rights being absolute is not accurate in the context of Indian constitutional law. While Fundamental Rights are indeed very important, they are not unrestricted or absolute. For example, the right to free speech is subject to reasonable restrictions such as public order, decency, and morality.
• This statement is an extreme claim, saying "cannot be restricted," which goes against the fundamental legal framework. This is false.

Statement 2: The State can impose reasonable restrictions on Fundamental Rights.

1.        How to Think About It: This is a well-established principle in Indian constitutional law. The Constitution allows for certain reasonable restrictions on Fundamental Rights, especially in the interest of public order, morality, sovereignty, etc. This is true, for instance, for freedom of speech, assembly, and other rights.

2.        This statement is factually correct, making Statement 2 true.

Identifying the Opposite Nature of the Statements:

1.        Opposites: Statement 1 says Fundamental Rights are absolute, while Statement 2 says reasonable restrictions can be imposed. These statements are in direct contradiction with each other, making it impossible for both to be true simultaneously.

2.        How to Apply Opposition: Given that the statements are opposites, one of them must be correct, and the other must be incorrect. The contradiction here helps you narrow down the options.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): Since the two statements are contradictory, this option must be eliminated because both cannot be true at the same time.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This is also incorrect because we know that Statement 2 is true (reasonable restrictions are allowed).
• Options A and B (1 only or 2 only): Since Statement 2 is true and Statement 1 is false, the correct answer must be B (2 only).

Final Answer: B (2 only).

Common Mistake:

• Thinking Fundamental Rights are Absolute: Some students might mistakenly believe that Fundamental Rights in India are absolute because they are enshrined in the Constitution. This can lead them to select A (1 only) or C (Both 1 and 2), both of which are incorrect.
• Ignoring the Concept of Reasonable Restrictions: Some students may overlook the legal concept of "reasonable restrictions" imposed on Fundamental Rights, causing confusion about which statement is correct.

Question: With reference to Indian Parliament, consider the following statements:

• A Money Bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha.
• The Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject a Money Bill.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Step-by-Step Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: A Money Bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha.

1.        How to Think About It: According to the Indian Constitution, a Money Bill can only be introduced in the Lok Sabha, not in the Rajya Sabha. This is a straightforward fact.

2.        Therefore, Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject a Money Bill.

• How to Think About It: The role of the Rajya Sabha with respect to Money Bills is limited. It can only make recommendations, which the Lok Sabha may choose to accept or reject. The Rajya Sabha cannot amend or reject a Money Bill outright. So, this statement is also correct.

Identifying Similarity in the Statements:

• Similar Nature: Both statements reinforce each other. They both describe the unique handling of Money Bills between the two Houses of Parliament. Since both statements are describing different aspects of the same fact, it’s highly likely that both statements are correct.

Elimination Process:

• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This can be eliminated because at least one of the statements (Statement 1) is clearly true.
• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): These can be eliminated because both statements are factually correct, not just one of them.
• Option C (Both 1 and 2): Since both statements are true, this is the correct answer.

Final Answer: C (Both 1 and 2).

Common Mistake:

• Assuming Rajya Sabha Has More Power Over Money Bills: Some students might incorrectly assume that the Rajya Sabha has more legislative power over Money Bills, leading them to eliminate Statement 2 and choose Option A (1 only), which would be incorrect.

Question: With reference to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), consider the following statements:

1.        The NHRC is a constitutional body.

2.        The NHRC can investigate complaints of human rights violations by both government and private actors.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Step-by-Step Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The NHRC is a constitutional body.

1.        How to Think About It: The NHRC is not a constitutional body. It is a statutory body established under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Therefore, Statement 1 is incorrect.

Statement 2: The NHRC can investigate complaints of human rights violations by both government and private actors.

• How to Think About It: The NHRC primarily investigates violations by public authorities, but it does not generally investigate private actors directly unless there is state involvement. This makes Statement 2 also incorrect.

Identifying Similarity in the Statements:

• Similar Nature: Both statements are incorrect. Statement 1 incorrectly categorizes the NHRC as a constitutional body, and Statement 2 incorrectly extends its investigative powers. Since both statements are false, you can confidently choose the option that reflects this.

Elimination Process:

• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): Since both statements are incorrect, these options can be eliminated.
• Option C (Both 1 and 2): This can be eliminated because both statements are wrong.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This is the correct answer since neither of the statements is true.

Final Answer: D (Neither 1 nor 2).

Common Mistake:

1.        Misunderstanding NHRC’s Status: Some students may think that the NHRC is a constitutional body, leading them to select A (1 only). This is a common misconception because of the NHRC's national importance.

Question: With reference to India's economic reforms, consider the following statements:

• The New Economic Policy of 1991 was focused on liberalization, privatization, and globalization.
• The New Economic Policy of 1991 introduced measures for greater state control over the economy.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Step-by-Step Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The New Economic Policy of 1991 was focused on liberalization, privatization, and globalization.

• How to Think About It: This statement is true. The New Economic Policy of 1991 introduced wide-ranging reforms aimed at opening up the economy to global markets and reducing state intervention.
• Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The New Economic Policy of 1991 introduced measures for greater state control over the economy.

• How to Think About It: This statement is false. The 1991 reforms were precisely about reducing state control, not increasing it. The government’s role in regulating the economy was significantly scaled back.
• Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Opposition Between the Statements:

• Opposite Nature: The statements are directly opposite in nature. One talks about reducing state control (Statement 1), while the other talks about increasing it (Statement 2). Since these are contradictory, only one can be true.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): Since the two statements are contradictory, this option can be eliminated.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 1 is clearly true.
• Options A and B (1 only or 2 only): Since Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false, the correct answer is A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

1.        Assuming State Control Was Part of the 1991 Reforms: Some students might incorrectly assume that the New Economic Policy included elements of increased state control, leading them to select C (Both 1 and 2).

Question: Consider the following statements regarding the Indian Constitution:

• The Directive Principles of State Policy are non-justiciable, while Fundamental Rights are justiciable.
• The Directive Principles of State Policy enjoy primacy over Fundamental Rights in cases of conflict between the two.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The Directive Principles of State Policy are non-justiciable, while Fundamental Rights are justiciable.

• How to Think About It: This is a factual statement. Directive Principles (DPSP) are non-justiciable, meaning they cannot be enforced in courts, while Fundamental Rights are justiciable, meaning they can be legally enforced. Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The Directive Principles of State Policy enjoy primacy over Fundamental Rights in cases of conflict between the two.

1.        How to Think About It: This is a tricky statement because, generally, Fundamental Rights take precedence over DPSP. However, in certain cases like the Minerva Mills case and Kesavananda Bharati case, the courts have recognized the importance of DPSP, but not giving them outright primacy over Fundamental Rights. Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Opposition Between the Statements:

• Opposite Nature: The two statements seem somewhat opposing in nature, as Statement 1 correctly identifies the justiciable nature of Fundamental Rights, while Statement 2 falsely claims that DPSP can override Fundamental Rights. These contrasting statements help narrow down the choices.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): Since one is true and the other is false, eliminate this option.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): Since Statement 1 is true, eliminate this option.
• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): Since we know that Statement 1 is correct and Statement 2 is incorrect, the answer must be A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

• Some students might confuse the fact that certain amendments have given more weight to DPSP and may select B (2 only), thinking that DPSP now enjoy primacy over Fundamental Rights, which is not true in the general case.

Question: With reference to India's biodiversity and climate zones, consider the following statements:

• The Western Ghats are a biodiversity hotspot.
• The Eastern Ghats have higher annual rainfall than the Western Ghats.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The Western Ghats are a biodiversity hotspot.

• How to Think About It: This is a well-known fact. The Western Ghats are recognized globally as one of the world’s biodiversity hotspots due to their rich variety of flora and fauna. Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The Eastern Ghats have higher annual rainfall than the Western Ghats.

1.        How to Think About It: The Western Ghats receive significantly more rainfall due to their proximity to the Western coast and their role in intercepting the Southwest monsoon. The Eastern Ghats are drier in comparison. Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Opposition Between the Statements:

• Opposite Nature: While Statement 1 is a true, factual statement, Statement 2 directly contradicts it by falsely claiming that the drier Eastern Ghats receive more rainfall. These contrasting statements make it clear that only one is true.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): This is eliminated because both statements cannot be correct.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 1 is definitely correct.
• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): Since we know Statement 1 is correct and Statement 2 is false, the answer must be A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

• Some students may not know about the rainfall patterns of the Eastern and Western Ghats and might incorrectly assume that the Eastern Ghats receive more rainfall, leading them to choose B (2 only) or C (Both 1 and 2).

Question: Consider the following statements about India's space program:

1.        The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) launched its first satellite, Aryabhata, in collaboration with NASA.

2.        The PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) is used by ISRO primarily for launching geostationary satellites.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: ISRO launched its first satellite, Aryabhata, in collaboration with NASA.

• How to Think About It: Aryabhata, India’s first satellite, was launched by the Soviet Union in 1975, not NASA. Hence, Statement 1 is incorrect.

Statement 2: The PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle) is used by ISRO primarily for launching geostationary satellites.

• How to Think About It: PSLV is mainly used for launching satellites into low Earth orbit or polar orbits, not geostationary orbits. GSLV (Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle) is used for geostationary satellites. Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Similarity in the Statements:

• Similar Nature: Both statements contain factual inaccuracies about ISRO’s history and technological capabilities. Since both statements are incorrect, we can eliminate options that suggest one or both are correct.

Elimination Process:

• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): These are incorrect because both statements are wrong.
• Option C (Both 1 and 2): This can also be eliminated because both statements are incorrect.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): Since neither statement is true, the correct answer is D (Neither 1 nor 2).

Final Answer: D (Neither 1 nor 2).

Common Mistake:

1.        Some students might confuse the launch of Aryabhata with other satellite programs involving NASA or misinterpret the role of PSLV, leading them to select A (1 only) or B (2 only).

Question: With reference to the Indian economy, consider the following statements:

• The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a destination-based tax.
• GST is imposed only by the central government.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a destination-based tax.

• How to Think About It: GST is indeed a destination-based tax, meaning that tax is collected at the point of consumption rather than the point of origin. Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: GST is imposed only by the central government.

• How to Think About It: This statement is incorrect. Both the central government and state governments impose GST. The tax is divided into CGST (Central GST) and SGST (State GST) for intra-state transactions, and IGST (Integrated GST) for inter-state transactions. Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Opposition Between the Statements:

1.        Opposite Nature: Statement 1 correctly describes GST as a destination-based tax, while Statement 2 incorrectly asserts that only the central government imposes GST. Since one is correct and the other is wrong, this helps eliminate incorrect options.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 2 is incorrect.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 1 is true.
• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): Since we know that Statement 1 is correct and Statement 2 is incorrect, the correct answer is A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

• Students may mistakenly assume that GST is imposed only by the central government, leading them to select B (2 only) or C (Both 1 and 2).

Question: Consider the following statements regarding the International Solar Alliance (ISA):

• The ISA was launched at the 2015 Paris Climate Summit.
• The headquarters of the ISA are located in Paris, France.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A) 1 only

B) 2 only

C) Both 1 and 2

D) Neither 1 nor 2

Detailed Explanation:

Statement 1: The ISA was launched at the 2015 Paris Climate Summit.

• How to Think About It: This is true. The ISA was launched by India and France during the 2015 Paris Climate Summit to promote solar energy globally. Statement 1 is correct.

Statement 2: The headquarters of the ISA are located in Paris, France.

1.        How to Think About It: This is false. The headquarters of the ISA are located in Gurugram, India. Statement 2 is incorrect.

Identifying Opposition Between the Statements:

• Opposite Nature: While Statement 1 correctly mentions the Paris Climate Summit, Statement 2 falsely associates the ISA headquarters with Paris, creating a clear opposition. One statement is true, and the other is false.

Elimination Process:

• Option C (Both 1 and 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 2 is incorrect.
• Option D (Neither 1 nor 2): This can be eliminated because Statement 1 is true.
• Option A (1 only) and B (2 only): Since Statement 1 is true and Statement 2 is false, the correct answer is A (1 only).

Final Answer: A (1 only).

Common Mistake:

• Some students may confuse the launch location of the ISA with its headquarters, leading them to select C (Both 1 and 2).

The Eliminating Similar or Opposite Options method relies on carefully identifying relationships between statements or options. If two statements are very similar or completely opposite, one of them is likely correct. By focusing on the nature of the statements and their relationship to one another, you can effectively eliminate wrong answers and arrive at the correct one.

Common Mistakes:

• Overthinking simple oppositions and doubting which one is correct.
• Failing to notice subtle differences between two very similar options, leading to confusion.

This method is extremely useful when you’re unsure but can spot the logical or factual differences between options.