Course of Action

The format

A statement describes a real-world problem (a flood, a strike, a public-health failure). Two or more "courses of action" are proposed. You must decide which actions logically follow as appropriate responses. The standard answer choices are: only I follows, only II follows, both follow, neither follows, or either I or II follows.

The three filters every action must pass

• Direct relevance: the action must target the stated problem, not a tangential issue.
• Feasibility: the action must be practical given normal resources and authority.
• Proportionality: the action must not be extreme, draconian, or trivial relative to the problem.

If an action fails any filter, it does not follow. RS Aggarwal's reasoning textbook has a 50-item drill on this exact format and is the standard reference.

Worked example

Statement: "Many residents in the city are suffering from waterborne diseases due to contaminated tap water." Action I: The municipal authority should immediately inspect and disinfect the water supply system. Action II: All residents should be evacuated from the city.

Action I is direct, feasible, and proportionate — it follows. Action II is extreme and disproportionate (evacuation is not the standard response to contamination); it does not follow. Answer: only I follows.

Common traps

• Actions that punish rather than solve. "Arrest all polluters" in response to general pollution is too vague to follow.
• Actions that recommend study or research when immediate action is needed. "Form a committee to study the issue" rarely follows when lives are at stake.
• Actions that address the symptom but not the cause, or vice versa, when the problem demands both.

Either-or pattern

When two actions present mutually exclusive but jointly exhaustive options (build a bridge OR build a tunnel), and the problem demands one solution, the answer is "either I or II follows". This pattern is rare but appears occasionally.