Question given below is followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a “strong” argument and which is a “weak” argument. Give answer.
Statement:
Should robots replace astronauts in space missions?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will save the precious life of human beings.
II. No, this will make space missions more expensive.

Statement:
Should robots replace astronauts in space missions?
Arguments:
I. Yes, this will save the precious life of human beings. (Strong argument)
It presents a logical, ethical, and safety-based reason: protecting human life. Space missions are high-risk, so using robots instead of humans reduces danger to life. Therefore, this is a valid and strong point in favor of the replacement. 

II: No, this will make space missions more expensive. (Weak argument)

While it's true that robotic technology can be expensive, sending humans to space is also extremely costly (due to life support systems, safety measures, training, etc.). Moreover, cost alone is not a sufficient counterargument if the goal is to protect lives and improve efficiency. This argument lacks strong reasoning and can be challenged easily.

So, Only argument I is strong.

Thus, correct option is (c).