All Exams >
Delhi Police Constable >
English Language & Comprehension for Competitive Exams >
All Questions
All questions of Comprehension for Delhi Police Constable Exam
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.A man with moral courage can- a)defy his enemies
- b)overcome all difficulties
- c)face a situation boldly
- d)be very pragmatic
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.
I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
A man with moral courage can
a)
defy his enemies
b)
overcome all difficulties
c)
face a situation boldly
d)
be very pragmatic
|
Ishita Reddy answered |
In the passage, the author talks about the courage, which are of two types physical courage and moral courage.
The author have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
It means, a person with moral courage can face situations boldly.
The author have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
It means, a person with moral courage can face situations boldly.
Can you explain the answer of this question below:He saw nothing, he had no knife or sharp instrument, the grating of the window was of iron and he had too often assured himself of its solidity. His furniture consisted of a bed, a chair, a table, a pail, and a jug. The bed had iron clamps, but they were screwed to the wall and it would have required a screwdriver to take them off.
Dantes had but one resource which was to break the jug and with one of the sharp fragments attack the wall. He left the jug fall on the floor and it broke in pieces. He concealed two or three of the sharpest fragments in his bed, leaving the rest on the floor. The breaking of the jug was too natural an accident to excite suspicion, and next morning gaoler went grumblingly to fetch another, without giving himself the trouble to remove the fragments. Dantes heard joyfully the key grate in the lock as guard departed.
Dantes heard the key grate in the lock when the
- A:
cell door was shut
- B:
cell door was opened
- C:
storeroom was opened
- D:
storeroom was shut
The answer is D.
He saw nothing, he had no knife or sharp instrument, the grating of the window was of iron and he had too often assured himself of its solidity. His furniture consisted of a bed, a chair, a table, a pail, and a jug. The bed had iron clamps, but they were screwed to the wall and it would have required a screwdriver to take them off.
Dantes had but one resource which was to break the jug and with one of the sharp fragments attack the wall. He left the jug fall on the floor and it broke in pieces. He concealed two or three of the sharpest fragments in his bed, leaving the rest on the floor. The breaking of the jug was too natural an accident to excite suspicion, and next morning gaoler went grumblingly to fetch another, without giving himself the trouble to remove the fragments. Dantes heard joyfully the key grate in the lock as guard departed.
Dantes heard the key grate in the lock when the
cell door was shut
cell door was opened
storeroom was opened
storeroom was shut
|
Krishna Iyer answered |
Dantes heard the key grate in the lock when the storeroom was shut.
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
Speech can be curse, because it can
- a) hurt others
- b) lead to carelessness
- c) create misunderstanding
- d) reveal our intentions
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
Speech can be curse, because it can
a)
hurt othersb)
lead to carelessnessc)
create misunderstandingd)
reveal our intentions
|
EduRev CAT answered |
"Speech is a great blessing but it can also be a great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows. It can also, if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood." An example being: "A slip of the tongue...may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend."
Option A also mentions the same: speech can be a curse because it can 'make our attitude completely misunderstood'.
Option A also mentions the same: speech can be a curse because it can 'make our attitude completely misunderstood'.
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly. A man of courage is- a)cunning
- b)intelligent
- c)curious
- d)careful
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.
I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
A man of courage is
a)
cunning
b)
intelligent
c)
curious
d)
careful
|
Alok Verma answered |
The author believes that the men who have moral courage are careful and has a reasoning attitude towards the general aspects of life like carrer, happiness, his whole future or his judgement. Therefore option D is correct.
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.The passage suggests that- a)health is an end in itself
- b)health is blessing
- c)health is only means to an end
- d)we should not talk about health
Correct answer is 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.
The passage suggests that
a)
health is an end in itself
b)
health is blessing
c)
health is only means to an end
d)
we should not talk about health
|
|
Kavya Saxena answered |
The passage suggests that “health is only means to an end.”
Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources. Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy. Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife. Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystemEven if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. What is the main purpose of the author in writing the passage? - a)argue that rampant timber harvesting is degrading national parks
- b)describe a plan of action to resolve an issue
- c)discuss different approaches to dealing with a problem
- d)suggest that local participation is necessary to solve the problem described
- e)to assert that national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.
Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.
Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.
Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem
Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.
The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. What is the main purpose of the author in writing the passage?
a)
argue that rampant timber harvesting is degrading national parks
b)
describe a plan of action to resolve an issue
c)
discuss different approaches to dealing with a problem
d)
suggest that local participation is necessary to solve the problem described
e)
to assert that national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries
|
Nandita Tiwari answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
¶2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which
failed.
¶3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
¶5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
¶6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local
participation.
¶1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
¶2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which
failed.
¶3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
¶5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
¶6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local
participation.
If you have mapped the passage correctly you will notice that most of the passage
discusses the different approaches that can be taken to solve the problem of
degradation of national parks. C matches best with this.
discusses the different approaches that can be taken to solve the problem of
degradation of national parks. C matches best with this.
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.All virtues become meaningful because of- a)faith
- b)charity
- c)courage
- d)hope
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.
I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
All virtues become meaningful because of
a)
faith
b)
charity
c)
courage
d)
hope
|
Meera Rana answered |
The given passage speaks about moral courage and physical courage, and how important they are. "All virtues become meaningful because of courage", without which those virtues aren't virtues at all. The answer is option C as it's given in the first two lines of the passage "Courage is not only the basis of all virtue; it is its expression. Faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them." These lines state that courage is the basis of all virtues, and a virtue is meaningful only when you have courage to exercise that virtue.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.The Second Hand September campaign, led by Oxfam . . . seeks to encourage shopping at local organisations and charities as alternatives to fast fashion brands such as Primark and Boohoo in the name of saving our planet. As innocent as mindless scrolling through online shops may seem, such consumers are unintentionally—or perhaps even knowingly —contributing to an industry that uses more energy than aviation. . . .Brits buy more garments than any other country in Europe, so it comes as no shock that many of those clothes end up in UK landfills each year: 300,000 tonnes of them, to be exact. This waste of clothing is destructive to our planet, releasing greenhouse gasses as clothes are burnt as well as bleeding toxins and dyes into the surrounding soil and water. As ecologist Chelsea Rochman bluntly put it, “The mismanagement of our waste has even come back to haunt us on our dinner plate.”It’s not surprising, then, that people are scrambling for a solution, the most common of which is second-hand shopping. Retailers selling consigned clothing are currently expanding at a rapid rate . . . If everyone bought just one used item in a year, it would save 449 million lbs of waste, equivalent to the weight of 1 million Polar bears. “Thrifting” has increasingly become a trendy practice. London is home to many second-hand, or more commonly coined ‘vintage’, shops across the city from Bayswater to Brixton.So you’re cool and you care about the planet; you’ve killed two birds with one stone. But do people simply purchase a second-hand item, flash it on Instagram with #vintage and call it a day without considering whether what they are doing is actually effective?According to a study commissioned by Patagonia, for instance, older clothes shed more microfibres. These can end up in our rivers and seas after just one wash due to the worn material, thus contributing to microfibre pollution. To break it down, the amount of microfibres released by laundering 100,000 fleece jackets is equivalent to as many as 11,900 plastic grocery bags, and up to 40 per cent of that ends up in our oceans. . . . So where does this leave second-hand consumers? [They would be well advised to buy] high-quality items that shed less and last longer [as this] combats both microfibre pollution and excess garments ending up in landfills. . . .Luxury brands would rather not circulate their latest season stock around the globe to be sold at a cheaper price, which is why companies like ThredUP, a US fashion resale marketplace, have not yet caught on in the UK. There will always be a market for consignment but there is also a whole generation of people who have been taught that only buying new products is the norm; second-hand luxury goods are not in their psyche. Ben Whitaker, director at Liquidation Firm B-Stock, told Prospect that unless recycling becomes cost-effective and filters into mass production, with the right technology to partner it, “high-end retailers would rather put brand before sustainability.”Based on the passage, we can infer that the opposite of fast fashion, ‘slow fashion’, would most likely refer to clothes that:- a)Are of high quality and long lasting.
- b)Do not bleed toxins and dyes.
- c)Are sold by genuine vintage stores.
- d)Do not shed microfibres.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
The Second Hand September campaign, led by Oxfam . . . seeks to encourage shopping at local organisations and charities as alternatives to fast fashion brands such as Primark and Boohoo in the name of saving our planet. As innocent as mindless scrolling through online shops may seem, such consumers are unintentionally—or perhaps even knowingly —contributing to an industry that uses more energy than aviation. . . .
Brits buy more garments than any other country in Europe, so it comes as no shock that many of those clothes end up in UK landfills each year: 300,000 tonnes of them, to be exact. This waste of clothing is destructive to our planet, releasing greenhouse gasses as clothes are burnt as well as bleeding toxins and dyes into the surrounding soil and water. As ecologist Chelsea Rochman bluntly put it, “The mismanagement of our waste has even come back to haunt us on our dinner plate.”
It’s not surprising, then, that people are scrambling for a solution, the most common of which is second-hand shopping. Retailers selling consigned clothing are currently expanding at a rapid rate . . . If everyone bought just one used item in a year, it would save 449 million lbs of waste, equivalent to the weight of 1 million Polar bears. “Thrifting” has increasingly become a trendy practice. London is home to many second-hand, or more commonly coined ‘vintage’, shops across the city from Bayswater to Brixton.
So you’re cool and you care about the planet; you’ve killed two birds with one stone. But do people simply purchase a second-hand item, flash it on Instagram with #vintage and call it a day without considering whether what they are doing is actually effective?
According to a study commissioned by Patagonia, for instance, older clothes shed more microfibres. These can end up in our rivers and seas after just one wash due to the worn material, thus contributing to microfibre pollution. To break it down, the amount of microfibres released by laundering 100,000 fleece jackets is equivalent to as many as 11,900 plastic grocery bags, and up to 40 per cent of that ends up in our oceans. . . . So where does this leave second-hand consumers? [They would be well advised to buy] high-quality items that shed less and last longer [as this] combats both microfibre pollution and excess garments ending up in landfills. . . .
Luxury brands would rather not circulate their latest season stock around the globe to be sold at a cheaper price, which is why companies like ThredUP, a US fashion resale marketplace, have not yet caught on in the UK. There will always be a market for consignment but there is also a whole generation of people who have been taught that only buying new products is the norm; second-hand luxury goods are not in their psyche. Ben Whitaker, director at Liquidation Firm B-Stock, told Prospect that unless recycling becomes cost-effective and filters into mass production, with the right technology to partner it, “high-end retailers would rather put brand before sustainability.”
Based on the passage, we can infer that the opposite of fast fashion, ‘slow fashion’, would most likely refer to clothes that:
a)
Are of high quality and long lasting.
b)
Do not bleed toxins and dyes.
c)
Are sold by genuine vintage stores.
d)
Do not shed microfibres.
|
EduRev GMAT answered |
- Option A is the correct answer because the passage emphasizes the environmental issues associated with fast fashion, including the wasteful disposal of garments in landfills. The opposite of this disposable and rapid turnover nature of fast fashion would be a more sustainable and durable approach, which aligns with the idea of "slow fashion."
- The passage suggests that buying high-quality items that last longer is a way to combat the negative environmental impact of the fashion industry. Therefore, 'slow fashion' can be inferred to refer to clothes that are of high quality and long-lasting, promoting a more sustainable and environmentally friendly approach to fashion consumption.
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for "Comprehension" under Verbal Aptitude. You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic. The same topic is covered under various competitive examinations like - CAT, GMAT, Bank PO, SSC and other competitive examinationsQ. He saw nothing, he had no knife or sharp instrument, the grating of the window was of iron and he had too often assured himself of its solidity. His furniture consisted of a bed, a chair, a table, a pail, and a jug. The bed had iron clamps, but they were screwed to the wall and it would have required a screwdriver to take them off.Dantes had but one resource which was to break the jug and with one of the sharp fragments attack the wall. He left the jug fall on the floor and it broke in pieces. He concealed two or three of the sharpest fragments in his bed, leaving the rest on the floor. The breaking of the jug was too natural an accident to excite suspicion, and next morning gaoler went grumblingly to fetch another, without giving himself the trouble to remove the fragments. Dantes heard joyfully the key grate in the lock as guard departed.Dantes was in- a)a hostel
- b)a dining room
- c)an army barracks
- d)a prison
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for "Comprehension" under Verbal Aptitude. You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic. The same topic is covered under various competitive examinations like - CAT, GMAT, Bank PO, SSC and other competitive examinations
Q.
He saw nothing, he had no knife or sharp instrument, the grating of the window was of iron and he had too often assured himself of its solidity. His furniture consisted of a bed, a chair, a table, a pail, and a jug. The bed had iron clamps, but they were screwed to the wall and it would have required a screwdriver to take them off.
Dantes had but one resource which was to break the jug and with one of the sharp fragments attack the wall. He left the jug fall on the floor and it broke in pieces. He concealed two or three of the sharpest fragments in his bed, leaving the rest on the floor. The breaking of the jug was too natural an accident to excite suspicion, and next morning gaoler went grumblingly to fetch another, without giving himself the trouble to remove the fragments. Dantes heard joyfully the key grate in the lock as guard departed.
Dantes was in
a)
a hostel
b)
a dining room
c)
an army barracks
d)
a prison
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
In the passage, it has been talked about the bed had iron clamps, but they were screwed to the wall and it would have required a screwdriver to take them off.
i.e. attached bed means jailer and the word Gaoler has the same meaning.
So the answer is prison.
i.e. attached bed means jailer and the word Gaoler has the same meaning.
So the answer is prison.
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.While talking to an uneducated person, we should use- a)ordinary speech
- b)his vocabulary
- c)simple words
- d)
polite language
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
While talking to an uneducated person, we should use
a)
ordinary speech
b)
his vocabulary
c)
simple words
d)
polite language
|
|
Ishita Reddy answered |
The passage tells us that we should handle the gift of speech carefully. While talking to another person we should use the speech he is most familiar with. In the case of an uneducated person also we should use the vocabulary he is most familiar with because "the ordinary speech of an educated man may strike an uneducated listener as pompous."
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for "Comprehension" under Verbal Aptitude. You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic. The same topic is covered under various competitive examinations like - CAT, GMAT, Bank PO, SSC and other competitive examinations.Q.In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.Modern medicine is primarily concerned with- a)promotion of good health
- b)people suffering from imaginary illness
- c)people suffering from real illness
- d)increased efficiency in work
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for "Comprehension" under Verbal Aptitude. You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic. The same topic is covered under various competitive examinations like - CAT, GMAT, Bank PO, SSC and other competitive examinations.
Q.
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.
Modern medicine is primarily concerned with
a)
promotion of good health
b)
people suffering from imaginary illness
c)
people suffering from real illness
d)
increased efficiency in work
|
Wizius Careers answered |
‘A lot of modern medicine, and this includes many patients as well as many physicians, pays very little attention to health but a lot of attention to those who imagine that they are ill.'
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.Physical courage is an expression of- a)emotions
- b)deliberation
- c)uncertainty
- d)defiance
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.
I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
Physical courage is an expression of
a)
emotions
b)
deliberation
c)
uncertainty
d)
defiance
|
Impact Learning answered |
This line describes "an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage"
Physical courage is an expression of emotions.
Physical courage is an expression of emotions.
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits. Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers. The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. Which of the following would most weaken the author‘s argument about the over-concentration on high technology products? - a)Producing low tech products is not as profitable as producing high tech products.
- b)Manufacturing high tech products is a completely different process than manufacturing low tech goods.
- c)Most of the low tech products purchased by Americans are made by foreign firms.
- d)Most of the high tech products purchased by Americans are made by foreign firms.
- e)Most of the high tech products purchased by Americans are made by American firms.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s
The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.
Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.
These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach.
The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. Which of the following would most weaken the author‘s argument about the over-concentration on high technology products?
a)
Producing low tech products is not as profitable as producing high tech products.
b)
Manufacturing high tech products is a completely different process than manufacturing low tech goods.
c)
Most of the low tech products purchased by Americans are made by foreign firms.
d)
Most of the high tech products purchased by Americans are made by foreign firms.
e)
Most of the high tech products purchased by Americans are made by American firms.
|
Dipanjan Pillai answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 outlines the decline of American business
¶s2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
¶4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
¶5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
¶6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.
Paraphrase the author‘s argument about high technology: it‘s better to start out with low-tech, get experience, and then ramp up to high-tech. Search the answer choices for something that would contradict this. (B) clearly does; if the processes are completely different, why start with low-tech.
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.People with physical courage of ten lack- a)mental balance
- b)capacity for reasoning
- c)emotional stability
- d)will to fight
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Courage is not only the basis of virtue; it is its expression. faith, hope, charity and all the rest don't become virtues until it takes courage to exercise them. There are roughly two types of courage. the first an emotional state which urges a man to risk injury or death, is physical courage. The second, more reasoning attitude which enables him to take coolly his career, happiness, his whole future or his judgement of what he thinks either right or worthwhile, is moral courage.
I have known many men, who had marked physical courage, but lacked moral courage. Some of them were in high places, but they failed to be great in themselves because they lacked moral courage. On the other hand I have seen men who undoubtedly possessed moral courage but were very cautious about taking physical risks. But I have never met a man with moral courage who couldn't, when it was really necessary, face a situation boldly.
People with physical courage of ten lack
a)
mental balance
b)
capacity for reasoning
c)
emotional stability
d)
will to fight
|
Christiana Oby answered |
B
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980sThe first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits. Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace. These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies. Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. With which of the following general statements would the author most likely NOT agree?- a)American business has been hurt by the inability to plan for the longterm.
- b)Cutting production costs always leads to increased competitiveness.
- c)American consumers are not the prime cause of the decline of American business.
- d)Initial analysis of the decline of American business yielded only partially accurate conclusions.
- e)Mergers and Acquisitions have not helped improve the situation
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s
The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.
Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace. These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products. Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods. American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach.
The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. With which of the following general statements would the author most likely NOT agree?
a)
American business has been hurt by the inability to plan for the longterm.
b)
Cutting production costs always leads to increased competitiveness.
c)
American consumers are not the prime cause of the decline of American business.
d)
Initial analysis of the decline of American business yielded only partially accurate conclusions.
e)
Mergers and Acquisitions have not helped improve the situation
|
Maulik Das answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 outlines the decline of American business
¶s2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
¶4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
¶5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
¶6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.
An inference question; make sure that you‘re clear on the main points of the author‘s argument. Remember that the author will agree with four, but will disagree with the correct answer. The three wrong answers could be easily eliminated, leading to (B). However, you can also reason that since management has suffered by cutting labour costs, cost-cutting doesn‘t always result in lowered prices.
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s. The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products.Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods.American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. The passage suggests that compared to Japanese workers, American workers are often considered: - a) more content and more efficient.
- b)more content but less efficient.
- c)less content and less efficient.
- d)less content but more efficient.
- e)lazy and less hard working
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In the decades following World War II, American business had undisputed control of the world economy, producing goods of such high quality and low cost that foreign corporations were unable to compete. But in the mid-1960s the United States began to lose its advantage and by the 1980s American corporations lagged behind the competition in many industries. In the computer chip industry, for example, American corporations had lost most of both domestic and foreign markets by the early 1980s.
The first analysts to examine the decline of American business blamed the U.S. government. They argued that stringent governmental restrictions on the behaviour of American corporations, combined with the wholehearted support given to foreign firms by their governments, created and environment in which American products could not compete. Later analysts blamed predatory corporate raiders who bought corporations, not to make them more competitive in the face of foreign competition, but rather to sell off the most lucrative divisions for huge profits.
Still later analysts blamed the American workforce, citing labour demands and poor productivity as the reasons American corporations have been unable to compete with Japanese and European firms. Finally, a few analysts even censured American consumers for their unpatriotic purchases of foreign goods. The blame actually lies with corporate management, which has made serious errors based on misconceptions about what it takes to be successful in the marketplace.
These missteps involve labour costs, production choices, and growth strategies.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products.
Even though labour costs typically account for less than 15% of a product‘s total cost, management has been quick to blame the costs of workers‘ wages for driving up prices, making American goods uncompetitive. As a result of attempts to minimize the cost of wages, American corporations have had trouble recruiting and retaining skilled workers.
The emphasis on cost minimization has also led to another blunder: an over-concentration on high technology products.
Many foreign firms began by specializing in the mass production and sale of low technology products, gaining valuable experience and earning tremendous profits. Later, these corporations were able to break into high technology markets without much trouble; they simply applied their previous manufacturing experience and ample financial resources to the production of higher quality goods.
American business has consistently ignored this very sensible approach. The recent rash of corporate mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. has not helped the situation either. While American firms have neglected long-range planning and production, preferring instead to reap fast profits through mergers and acquisitions, foreign firms have been quick to exploit opportunities to ensure their domination over future markets by investing in the streamlining and modernization of their facilities.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. The passage suggests that compared to Japanese workers, American workers are often considered:
a)
more content and more efficient.
b)
more content but less efficient.
c)
less content and less efficient.
d)
less content but more efficient.
e)
lazy and less hard working
|
|
Gargi Kulkarni answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 outlines the decline of American business
¶s2 and 3 list reasons that analysts have given for the decline and introduce the author‘s own theory for American business problems: incompetent management.
¶4 lists management‘s problems with labour.
¶5 explains the problem with America's fixation on high-tech products.
¶6 uses mergers to show that corporations lack long-range planning.
A quick scan of the answer choices shows that you have to compare the workers of the two nations on two criteria: contentedness and efficiency. Search for a part of the passage that touches on this. ¶3 is the only one that cites Japan, and mentions that analysts consider American workers less productive and less content. (C) it is.
Those who opine lose their impunity when the circumstances in which they pontificate are such that generate from their expression a positive instigation of some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that owning private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard. Acts, of whatever kind, which without justifiable cause do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases are absolutely required to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in matters that concern them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in matters which concern himself he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is that there should be different experiments of living, that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others, and that the worth of different modes of life should be proved practically, when anyone thinks fit to try them. Where not the person‘s own character but the traditions and customs of other people are the rule of conduct, there is wanting one of the principal ingredients of individual and social progress. It would be absurd to pretend that people ought to live as if nothing whatever had been known in the world before they came into it; as if experience had as yet done nothing toward showing that one mode of existence, or of conduct, is preferable to another. Nobody denies that people should be so taught and trained in youth as to know and benefit by the ascertained results of human experience. But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience in his own way. It is for him to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character. The traditions and customs of other people are, to a certain extent, evidence of what their experience has taught them—presumptive evidence, and as such, have a claim to his deference—but, in the first place, their experience may be too narrow, or they may have not interpreted it rightly. Secondly, their interpretation of experience may be correct, but unsuited to him. Customs are made for customary circumstances and customary characters, and his circumstances or his character may be uncustomary. Thirdly, though the customs be both good as customs and suitable to him, yet to conform to custom merely as custom does not educate him or develop in him any of the qualities which are the distinctive endowments of a human being. He gains no practice either in discerning or desiring what is best. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The author holds that one should not necessarily defer to the traditions and customs of other people. The author supports his position by arguing that: I. traditions and customs are usually the result of misinterpreted experiences. II. customs are based on experiences in the past, which are different from modern experiences.III. customs can stifle one‘s individual development. - a)II only
- b)III only
- c)I and III only
- d)II and III only
- e)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Those who opine lose their impunity when the circumstances in which they pontificate are such that generate from their expression a positive instigation of some mischievous act. An opinion that corn dealers are starvers of the poor, or that owning private property is robbery, ought to be unmolested when simply circulated through the press, but may justly incur punishment when delivered orally to an excited mob assembled before the house of a corn dealer, or when handed about among the same mob in the form of a placard. Acts, of whatever kind, which without justifiable cause do harm to others, may be, and in the more important cases are absolutely required to be, controlled by the unfavourable sentiments, and, when needful, by the active interference of mankind. The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in matters that concern them, and merely acts according to his own inclination and judgment in matters which concern himself he should be allowed, without molestation, to carry his opinions into practice at his own cost. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is that there should be different experiments of living, that free scope should be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others, and that the worth of different modes of life should be proved practically, when anyone thinks fit to try them. Where not the person‘s own character but the traditions and customs of other people are the rule of conduct, there is wanting one of the principal ingredients of individual and social progress.
It would be absurd to pretend that people ought to live as if nothing whatever had been known in the world before they came into it; as if experience had as yet done nothing toward showing that one mode of existence, or of conduct, is preferable to another. Nobody denies that people should be so taught and trained in youth as to know and benefit by the ascertained results of human experience. But it is the privilege and proper condition of a human being, arrived at the maturity of his faculties, to use and interpret experience in his own way. It is for him to find out what part of recorded experience is properly applicable to his own circumstances and character. The traditions and customs of other people are, to a certain extent, evidence of what their experience has taught them—presumptive evidence, and as such, have a claim to his deference—but, in the first place, their experience may be too narrow, or they may have not interpreted it rightly. Secondly, their interpretation of experience may be correct, but unsuited to him. Customs are made for customary circumstances and customary characters, and his circumstances or his character may be uncustomary. Thirdly, though the customs be both good as customs and suitable to him, yet to conform to custom merely as custom does not educate him or develop in him any of the qualities which are the distinctive endowments of a human being. He gains no practice either in discerning or desiring what is best.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.The author holds that one should not necessarily defer to the traditions and customs of other people. The author supports his position by arguing that:
I. traditions and customs are usually the result of misinterpreted experiences.
II. customs are based on experiences in the past, which are different from modern experiences.
III. customs can stifle one‘s individual development.
a)
II only
b)
III only
c)
I and III only
d)
II and III only
e)
None of the above
|
|
Moumita Rane answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 (first half) introduces the limits that should be placed on expression of opinions.
¶1 (second half) argues that differences of opinions are necessary.
¶2 offers three reasons why individual opinions are necessary to personal growth.
¶1 (first half) introduces the limits that should be placed on expression of opinions.
¶1 (second half) argues that differences of opinions are necessary.
¶2 offers three reasons why individual opinions are necessary to personal growth.
Use your reasoning from the last question to help yourself with this one. Remember to eliminate answer choices as you either select or eliminate Roman numerals. RN III is in three choices, so look there first. The author argues that customs aren‘t always good, and therefore can stifle growth. RN III is correct. Eliminate (A). Next to RN II: it also contradicts the author‘s argument that customs can be useful. By default, the answer must be (B), but check RN I to be sure. The author defends the general usefulness of customs. While sometimes experiences are misinterpreted, there‘s nothing to indicate that the usually are, which knocks RN I out immediately. RN II.
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.A 'slip of the tongue' means something said- a)
wrongly by choice - b)unintentionally
- c)without giving proper thought
- d)to hurt another person
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
A 'slip of the tongue' means something said
a)
wrongly by choice
b)
unintentionally
c)
without giving proper thought
d)
to hurt another person
|
Geetika Chopra answered |
The sentence in the passage is "A 'slip of the tongue', the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. ".
So, the term 'slip of tongue' is came with such things having similar meaning of lack of proper thought.
So, the term 'slip of tongue' is came with such things having similar meaning of lack of proper thought.
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine. The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds. Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats. Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press. While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. What is the main idea of the passage? - a)to argue that the media is acting against the national interests.
- b)to convince that journalists are attempting to enhance their own prestige.
- c)to discuss the negative effects that media ―leaks‖ have on foreign policy and the media‘s credibility.
- d)to criticise politicians for being dishonest in public.
- e)to suggest that the media needs to be regulated more strongly and effectively.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. What is the main idea of the passage?
a)
to argue that the media is acting against the national interests.
b)
to convince that journalists are attempting to enhance their own prestige.
c)
to discuss the negative effects that media ―leaks‖ have on foreign policy and the media‘s credibility.
d)
to criticise politicians for being dishonest in public.
e)
to suggest that the media needs to be regulated more strongly and effectively.
|
|
Milan Ghosh answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
¶s2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
¶4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
¶5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.
¶1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
¶s2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
¶4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
¶5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.
C is the most consistent with our passage summary above.
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.A healthy man should be concerned with- a)his work which good health makes possible
- b)looking after his health
- c)his health which makes work possible
- d)talking about health
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.
A healthy man should be concerned with
a)
his work which good health makes possible
b)
looking after his health
c)
his health which makes work possible
d)
talking about health
|
Akash Sengupta answered |
Ans.
Option (a)
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect. Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Following the example of the master Manet, the young Matisse often inserted in his pictures areas of white such as tablecloths or crockery that allowed for striking contrasts with black objects such as a knife or a dark bottle. What is the relevance of this information to the passage? - a)It supports the author‘s claim that the great artists are worthy of imitation.
- b)It supports the author‘s claim that neither black nor white is ever used ‗neat.‘
- c)It weakens the author‘s claim that black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression.
- d)It weakens the author‘s claim that great painters take Nature as their subject.
- e)This information has no relevance to the information in the passage
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.
I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.
But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.
Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.
But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect.
Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.Following the example of the master Manet, the young Matisse often inserted in his pictures areas of white such as tablecloths or crockery that allowed for striking contrasts with black objects such as a knife or a dark bottle. What is the relevance of this information to the passage?
a)
It supports the author‘s claim that the great artists are worthy of imitation.
b)
It supports the author‘s claim that neither black nor white is ever used ‗neat.‘
c)
It weakens the author‘s claim that black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression.
d)
It weakens the author‘s claim that great painters take Nature as their subject.
e)
This information has no relevance to the information in the passage
|
Baishali Nambiar answered |
Relevance of Manet and Matisse example to the passage:
Supporting the claim:
- The information about Matisse inserting areas of white in his paintings to create striking contrasts with black objects supports the author's claim that neither black nor white is ever used neat in painting.
- This example showcases how skilled painters like Matisse use the contrast between black and white to create impressive visual effects, which aligns with the author's discussion on the use of reserves and contrasts in painting.
Weakening the claim:
- The example of Matisse's technique could potentially weaken the author's claim that black and white placed in juxtaposition make no great impression.
- By showing how Matisse effectively utilized black and white contrast in his paintings to create striking visuals, it suggests that this technique can indeed make a significant impact in art.
In conclusion, while the information about Matisse's use of contrasting colors does not directly relate to the specific points made in the passage, it does provide a relevant example of how artists can effectively manipulate black and white elements in their work, which could potentially challenge the author's assertion about the impact of such contrasts.
Supporting the claim:
- The information about Matisse inserting areas of white in his paintings to create striking contrasts with black objects supports the author's claim that neither black nor white is ever used neat in painting.
- This example showcases how skilled painters like Matisse use the contrast between black and white to create impressive visual effects, which aligns with the author's discussion on the use of reserves and contrasts in painting.
Weakening the claim:
- The example of Matisse's technique could potentially weaken the author's claim that black and white placed in juxtaposition make no great impression.
- By showing how Matisse effectively utilized black and white contrast in his paintings to create striking visuals, it suggests that this technique can indeed make a significant impact in art.
In conclusion, while the information about Matisse's use of contrasting colors does not directly relate to the specific points made in the passage, it does provide a relevant example of how artists can effectively manipulate black and white elements in their work, which could potentially challenge the author's assertion about the impact of such contrasts.
While many points are worth making in an evaluation of the single sixyear presidential term, one of the most telling points against the single term has not been advanced. This kind of constitutional limitation on elections is generally a product of systems with weak or non-existent political parties.Since there is no party continuity or corporate party integrity in such systems, there is no basis for putting trust in the desire for re-election as a safeguard against mismanagement in the executive branch. Better under those conditions to operate on the basis of negative assumptions against incumbents. I do not know if the earliest proposal for a single, nonrepeatable term was made in the 1820s because that was a period of severely weak political parties. But I do feel confident that this is a major reason, if not the only reason, that such a proposal has been popular since the 1940s.Though the association of the non-repeatable election with weak political parties is not in itself an argument against the limitation, the fallout from this association does contribute significantly to the negative argument. Single-term limitations are strongly associated with corruption. In any weak party system, including the presidential system, the onus of making deals and compromises, both shady and honourable, rests heavily upon individual candidates. Without some semblance of corporate integrity in a party, individual candidates have few opportunities to amortize their obligations across the spectrum of elective and appointive jobs and policy proposals. The deals tend to be personalized and the payoffs come home to roost accordingly.If that situation is already endemic in conditions of weak or nonexistent parties, adding to it the limitation against re-election means that candidates and officials, already prevented from amortizing their deals across space, are also unable to amortize their obligations temporally. This makes for a highly beleaguered situation. The single six-year term for presidents is an effort to compensate for the absence of a viable party system, but it is a compensation ultimately paid for by further weakening the party system itself. Observers, especially foreign observers, have often noted that one source of weakness in American political parties is the certainty of election every two or four years, not only because any artificial limitation on elections is a violation of democratic principles but also because when elections are set in a certain and unchangeable cycle, political parties do not have to remain alert but can disappear into inactivity until a known point prior to the next election. To rigidify matters by going beyond the determinacy of the electoral cycle to add an absolute rule of one term would hang still another millstone around the neck of already doddering political parties. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author‘s claim about single-term political systems? - a)The discovery that foreign observers like this system
- b)The discovery that most politicians are honest
- c)The discovery that Americans dislike this system
- d)The discovery that parliamentary systems are more democratic
- e) The discovery that politicians favour such a system
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
While many points are worth making in an evaluation of the single sixyear presidential term, one of the most telling points against the single term has not been advanced. This kind of constitutional limitation on elections is generally a product of systems with weak or non-existent political parties.
Since there is no party continuity or corporate party integrity in such systems, there is no basis for putting trust in the desire for re-election as a safeguard against mismanagement in the executive branch. Better under those conditions to operate on the basis of negative assumptions against incumbents. I do not know if the earliest proposal for a single, nonrepeatable term was made in the 1820s because that was a period of severely weak political parties. But I do feel confident that this is a major reason, if not the only reason, that such a proposal has been popular since the 1940s.
Though the association of the non-repeatable election with weak political parties is not in itself an argument against the limitation, the fallout from this association does contribute significantly to the negative argument. Single-term limitations are strongly associated with corruption. In any weak party system, including the presidential system, the onus of making deals and compromises, both shady and honourable, rests heavily upon individual candidates. Without some semblance of corporate integrity in a party, individual candidates have few opportunities to amortize their obligations across the spectrum of elective and appointive jobs and policy proposals. The deals tend to be personalized and the payoffs come home to roost accordingly.
If that situation is already endemic in conditions of weak or nonexistent parties, adding to it the limitation against re-election means that candidates and officials, already prevented from amortizing their deals across space, are also unable to amortize their obligations temporally. This makes for a highly beleaguered situation. The single six-year term for presidents is an effort to compensate for the absence of a viable party system, but it is a compensation ultimately paid for by further weakening the party system itself.
Observers, especially foreign observers, have often noted that one source of weakness in American political parties is the certainty of election every two or four years, not only because any artificial limitation on elections is a violation of democratic principles but also because when elections are set in a certain and unchangeable cycle, political parties do not have to remain alert but can disappear into inactivity until a known point prior to the next election. To rigidify matters by going beyond the determinacy of the electoral cycle to add an absolute rule of one term would hang still another millstone around the neck of already doddering political parties.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
Q. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author‘s claim about single-term political systems?
a)
The discovery that foreign observers like this system
b)
The discovery that most politicians are honest
c)
The discovery that Americans dislike this system
d)
The discovery that parliamentary systems are more democratic
e)
The discovery that politicians favour such a system
|
Sreemoyee Joshi answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 introduces the idea of a single presidential term.
¶2 argues that the single term is usually associated with countries with weak political parties and therefore popular when political parties are weak.
¶s3 and 4 argue that single-term systems encourage corruption.
¶5 argues that the single-term system is designed to make up for weak parties, but ends up making parties even weaker.
¶1 introduces the idea of a single presidential term.
¶2 argues that the single term is usually associated with countries with weak political parties and therefore popular when political parties are weak.
¶s3 and 4 argue that single-term systems encourage corruption.
¶5 argues that the single-term system is designed to make up for weak parties, but ends up making parties even weaker.
What is the author‘s main argument for avoiding the single-term system? It leads to corruption. Looking for something that would weaken this argument turns up (B), which contradicts the author‘s main reason for avoiding the single-term system.
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect. Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.As the author creates the analogy between war and painting in the passage, the Commander-in-Chief is to the battleground as the: - a)painter is to the subject being painted.
- b)painter is to the canvas of the painting.
- c)painter is to the paint colours.
- d)painter is to the art gallery.
- e)painter is to the brush
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.
I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.
But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.
Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.
But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect.
Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.As the author creates the analogy between war and painting in the passage, the Commander-in-Chief is to the battleground as the:
a)
painter is to the subject being painted.
b)
painter is to the canvas of the painting.
c)
painter is to the paint colours.
d)
painter is to the art gallery.
e)
painter is to the brush
|
|
Ashwin Kulkarni answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 compares painting a picture to fighting a battle, lists two similarities, planning and
backup, and discusses planning.
¶2 explains that practicing art is a great way to become a lover of art.
¶s3 and 4 draws in the analogy of the general and explain the need to study previous masters in war and art.
¶s5 and 6 explain the need to keep reserves in battle and painting.
¶1 compares painting a picture to fighting a battle, lists two similarities, planning and
backup, and discusses planning.
¶2 explains that practicing art is a great way to become a lover of art.
¶s3 and 4 draws in the analogy of the general and explain the need to study previous masters in war and art.
¶s5 and 6 explain the need to keep reserves in battle and painting.
The Commander-in-Chief is mentioned in the first paragraph, so begin your search there. The author says that the battleground must be inspected and studied. What is the equivalent in painting? The subject being painted. (A) fits the bill.
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine. The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds. Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats. Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. Based on the passage, when the media now challenge the actions of a public official, the public assumes that: - a)the official is always wrong.
- b)the media is always wrong.
- c)the media may be wrong.
- d)the official and the media may both be wrong.
- e)the public ignores this piece of news completely
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. Based on the passage, when the media now challenge the actions of a public official, the public assumes that:
a)
the official is always wrong.
b)
the media is always wrong.
c)
the media may be wrong.
d)
the official and the media may both be wrong.
e)
the public ignores this piece of news completely
|
Kritika Bose answered |
Explanation:
Understanding Public Perception:
- The passage highlights that the public's perception of the media has changed over time.
- The public now views the media with skepticism, similar to other large institutions in society.
Media Criticism of Public Officials:
- When the media now challenge the actions of a public official, the public assumes that the media may be wrong.
- This is because the passage mentions that many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government.
- Public opinion surveys reflect ambivalence about the press, indicating a lack of complete trust in the media.
Shift in Public Trust:
- The passage suggests that the media have lost some credibility due to scandals and public skepticism.
- As a result, when the media challenge public officials, the public does not automatically assume the official is wrong.
- Instead, there is a recognition that both the official and the media may be wrong in certain situations.
- This shift in public trust underscores the evolving relationship between the media, public officials, and the general public.
Understanding Public Perception:
- The passage highlights that the public's perception of the media has changed over time.
- The public now views the media with skepticism, similar to other large institutions in society.
Media Criticism of Public Officials:
- When the media now challenge the actions of a public official, the public assumes that the media may be wrong.
- This is because the passage mentions that many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government.
- Public opinion surveys reflect ambivalence about the press, indicating a lack of complete trust in the media.
Shift in Public Trust:
- The passage suggests that the media have lost some credibility due to scandals and public skepticism.
- As a result, when the media challenge public officials, the public does not automatically assume the official is wrong.
- Instead, there is a recognition that both the official and the media may be wrong in certain situations.
- This shift in public trust underscores the evolving relationship between the media, public officials, and the general public.
Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources. Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife. Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem. Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation. The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. According to the passage, which of the following developments is most likely if environmental cooperation between the federal government and state governments does not improve? - a)A further decline in the land area of national parks
- b)A further increase in federal ownership of land adjacent to national parks
- c)A further growth in the powers of the National Park Service
- d)A further loss of species in national parks
- e)A further increase in timber harvesting activities
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Once surrounded and protected by vast wilderness, many of the national parks are adversely affected by activities outside their boundaries. The National Park Organic Act established the national park system and empowered the Secretary of the Interior to manage activities within the parks. Conditions outside park boundaries are not subject to regulation by the Park Service unless they involve the direct use of park resources.
Several approaches to protecting the national parks from external degradation have been proposed, such as one focusing on enacting federal legislation granting the National Park Service broader powers over lands adjacent to the national parks. Legislation addressing external threats to the national parks twice passed the House of Representatives but died without action in the Senate. Also brought to the table as a possible remedy is giving the states bordering the parks a significant and meaningful role in developing federal park management policy.
Because the livelihood of many citizens is linked to the management of national parks, local politicians often encourage state involvement in federal planning. But, state legislatures have not always addressed the fundamental policy issues of whether states should protect park wildlife.
Timber harvesting, ranching and energy exploration compete with wildlife within the local ecosystem. Priorities among different land uses are not generally established by current legislation. Additionally, often no mechanism exists to coordinate planning by the state environmental regulatory agencies. These factors limit the impact of legislation aimed at protecting park wildlife and the larger park ecosystem.
Even if these deficiencies can be overcome, state participation must be consistent with existing federal legislation. States lack jurisdiction within national parks themselves, and therefore state solutions cannot reach activities inside the parks, thus limiting state action to the land adjacent to the national parks. Under the supremacy clause, federal laws and regulations supersede state action if state law conflicts with federal legislation, if Congress precludes local regulation, or if federal regulation is so pervasive that no room remains for state control. Assuming that federal regulations leave open the possibility of state control, state participation in policy making must be harmonized with existing federal legislation.
The residents of states bordering national parks are affected by park management policies. They in turn affect the success of those policies. This interrelationship must be considered in responding to the external threats problem. Local participation is necessary in deciding how to protect park wildlife. Local interests should not, however, dictate national policy, nor should they be used as a pretext to ignore the threats to park regions.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. According to the passage, which of the following developments is most likely if environmental cooperation between the federal government and state governments does not improve?
a)
A further decline in the land area of national parks
b)
A further increase in federal ownership of land adjacent to national parks
c)
A further growth in the powers of the National Park Service
d)
A further loss of species in national parks
e)
A further increase in timber harvesting activities
|
|
Prisha Shah answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
¶2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which
failed.
¶3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
¶5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
¶6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.
¶1 describes a problem facing national parks: negative effects from the land
surrounding them.
¶2 describes one approach to dealing with the problem: federal legislation, which
failed.
¶3 and 4 describe a second approach: giving power to states to cooperate with
adjacent national parks, and describe the problems with it.
¶5 argues that state participation must be tied to federal regulations.
¶6 argues that any solution requires a national response with elements of local participation.
The ―according to the passage...‖ start to the question tips you off to look for a dnesetail within the passage. Where is the scenario in the question mentioned? Go to the last paragraph, which discusses a combination of national and local responses. It argues that this cooperation is necessary in order to ―protect park wildlife.If this cooperation doesn‘t occur then, wildlife would presumably be
harmed. (D) rewards the careful reading.
harmed. (D) rewards the careful reading.
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.If one used the same style of language with everyone, one would sound- a)flat
- b)boring
- c)foolish
- d)democratic
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
If one used the same style of language with everyone, one would sound
a)
flat
b)
boring
c)
foolish
d)
democratic
|
|
Arindam Roy answered |
Introduction:
Speech can be a great blessing or a great curse depending on how we use it. It is a powerful tool that helps us communicate our intentions and desires to others. However, if we use it carelessly, it can create misunderstandings and even enemies.
Using the Same Style of Language with Everyone:
If one were to use the same style of language with everyone, it would sound foolish. This is because different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated person may sound pompous to an uneducated listener. It is important to be aware of the listener's background and adjust our language accordingly.
The Importance of Careful Handling:
Speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought. It demands careful handling. A slip of the tongue, the use of an unusual or ambiguous word, or even a different pronunciation can create misunderstandings. Therefore, it is important to be vigilant and thoughtful when using language.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, speech is a powerful tool that can be both a blessing and a curse. To use it effectively, we must be aware of our listeners' backgrounds, use language carefully, and avoid using the same style of language with everyone. Only then can we communicate our intentions clearly and avoid creating misunderstandings.
Speech can be a great blessing or a great curse depending on how we use it. It is a powerful tool that helps us communicate our intentions and desires to others. However, if we use it carelessly, it can create misunderstandings and even enemies.
Using the Same Style of Language with Everyone:
If one were to use the same style of language with everyone, it would sound foolish. This is because different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated person may sound pompous to an uneducated listener. It is important to be aware of the listener's background and adjust our language accordingly.
The Importance of Careful Handling:
Speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought. It demands careful handling. A slip of the tongue, the use of an unusual or ambiguous word, or even a different pronunciation can create misunderstandings. Therefore, it is important to be vigilant and thoughtful when using language.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, speech is a powerful tool that can be both a blessing and a curse. To use it effectively, we must be aware of our listeners' backgrounds, use language carefully, and avoid using the same style of language with everyone. Only then can we communicate our intentions clearly and avoid creating misunderstandings.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
Understanding romantic aesthetics is not a simple undertaking for reasons that are internal to the nature of the subject. Distinguished scholars, such as Arthur Lovejoy, Northrop Frye and Isaiah Berlin, have remarked on the notorious challenges facing any attempt to define romanticism. Lovejoy, for example, claimed that romanticism is “the scandal of literary history and criticism” . . . The main difficulty in studying the romantics, according to him, is the lack of any “single real entity, or type of entity” that the concept “romanticism” designates. Lovejoy concluded, “the word ‘romantic’ has come to mean so many things that, by itself, it means nothing” . . .The more specific task of characterizing romantic aesthetics adds to these difficulties an air of paradox. Conventionally, “aesthetics” refers to a theory concerning beauty and art or the branch of philosophy that studies these topics. However, many of the romantics rejected the identification of aesthetics with a circumscribed domain of human life that is separated from the practical and theoretical domains of life. The most characteristic romantic commitment is to the idea that the character of art and beauty and of our engagement with them should shape all aspects of human life. Being fundamental to human existence, beauty and art should be a central ingredient not only in a philosophical or artistic life, but also in the lives of ordinary men and women. Another challenge for any attempt to characterize romantic aesthetics lies in the fact that most of the romantics were poets and artists whose views of art and beauty are, for the most part, to be found not in developed theoretical accounts, but in fragments, aphorisms and poems, which are often more elusive and suggestive than conclusive.Nevertheless, in spite of these challenges the task of characterizing romantic aesthetics is neither impossible nor undesirable, as numerous thinkers responding to Lovejoy’s radical skepticism have noted. While warning against a reductive definition of romanticism, Berlin, for example, still heralded the need for a general characterization: “[Although] one does have a certain sympathy with Lovejoy’s despair…[he is] in this instance mistaken. There was a romantic movement…and it is important to discover what it is” . . .Recent attempts to characterize romanticism and to stress its contemporary relevance follow this path. Instead of overlooking the undeniable differences between the variety of romanticisms of different nations that Lovejoy had stressed, such studies attempt to characterize romanticism, not in terms of a single definition, a specific time, or a specific place, but in terms of “particular philosophical questions and concerns” . . .While the German, British and French romantics are all considered, the central protagonists in the following are the German romantics. Two reasons explain this focus: first, because it
has paved the way for the other romanticisms, German romanticism has a pride of place among the different national romanticisms . . . Second, the aesthetic outlook that was developed in Germany roughly between 1796 and 1801-02 — the period that corresponds to the heyday of what is known as “Early Romanticism” . . .— offers the most philosophical expression of romanticism since it is grounded primarily in the epistemological, metaphysical, ethical, and political concerns that the German romantics discerned in the aftermath of Kant’s philosophy.Which one of the following statements is NOT supported by the passage?- a)Characterising romantic aesthetics is both possible and desirable, despite the challenges involved.
- b)Recent studies on romanticism seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms.
- c)Romantic aesthetics are primarily expressed through fragments, aphorisms, and poems.
- d)Many romantics rejected the idea of aesthetics as a domain separate from other aspects of life.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
Understanding romantic aesthetics is not a simple undertaking for reasons that are internal to the nature of the subject. Distinguished scholars, such as Arthur Lovejoy, Northrop Frye and Isaiah Berlin, have remarked on the notorious challenges facing any attempt to define romanticism. Lovejoy, for example, claimed that romanticism is “the scandal of literary history and criticism” . . . The main difficulty in studying the romantics, according to him, is the lack of any “single real entity, or type of entity” that the concept “romanticism” designates. Lovejoy concluded, “the word ‘romantic’ has come to mean so many things that, by itself, it means nothing” . . .
Understanding romantic aesthetics is not a simple undertaking for reasons that are internal to the nature of the subject. Distinguished scholars, such as Arthur Lovejoy, Northrop Frye and Isaiah Berlin, have remarked on the notorious challenges facing any attempt to define romanticism. Lovejoy, for example, claimed that romanticism is “the scandal of literary history and criticism” . . . The main difficulty in studying the romantics, according to him, is the lack of any “single real entity, or type of entity” that the concept “romanticism” designates. Lovejoy concluded, “the word ‘romantic’ has come to mean so many things that, by itself, it means nothing” . . .
The more specific task of characterizing romantic aesthetics adds to these difficulties an air of paradox. Conventionally, “aesthetics” refers to a theory concerning beauty and art or the branch of philosophy that studies these topics. However, many of the romantics rejected the identification of aesthetics with a circumscribed domain of human life that is separated from the practical and theoretical domains of life. The most characteristic romantic commitment is to the idea that the character of art and beauty and of our engagement with them should shape all aspects of human life. Being fundamental to human existence, beauty and art should be a central ingredient not only in a philosophical or artistic life, but also in the lives of ordinary men and women. Another challenge for any attempt to characterize romantic aesthetics lies in the fact that most of the romantics were poets and artists whose views of art and beauty are, for the most part, to be found not in developed theoretical accounts, but in fragments, aphorisms and poems, which are often more elusive and suggestive than conclusive.
Nevertheless, in spite of these challenges the task of characterizing romantic aesthetics is neither impossible nor undesirable, as numerous thinkers responding to Lovejoy’s radical skepticism have noted. While warning against a reductive definition of romanticism, Berlin, for example, still heralded the need for a general characterization: “[Although] one does have a certain sympathy with Lovejoy’s despair…[he is] in this instance mistaken. There was a romantic movement…and it is important to discover what it is” . . .
Recent attempts to characterize romanticism and to stress its contemporary relevance follow this path. Instead of overlooking the undeniable differences between the variety of romanticisms of different nations that Lovejoy had stressed, such studies attempt to characterize romanticism, not in terms of a single definition, a specific time, or a specific place, but in terms of “particular philosophical questions and concerns” . . .
While the German, British and French romantics are all considered, the central protagonists in the following are the German romantics. Two reasons explain this focus: first, because it
has paved the way for the other romanticisms, German romanticism has a pride of place among the different national romanticisms . . . Second, the aesthetic outlook that was developed in Germany roughly between 1796 and 1801-02 — the period that corresponds to the heyday of what is known as “Early Romanticism” . . .— offers the most philosophical expression of romanticism since it is grounded primarily in the epistemological, metaphysical, ethical, and political concerns that the German romantics discerned in the aftermath of Kant’s philosophy.
has paved the way for the other romanticisms, German romanticism has a pride of place among the different national romanticisms . . . Second, the aesthetic outlook that was developed in Germany roughly between 1796 and 1801-02 — the period that corresponds to the heyday of what is known as “Early Romanticism” . . .— offers the most philosophical expression of romanticism since it is grounded primarily in the epistemological, metaphysical, ethical, and political concerns that the German romantics discerned in the aftermath of Kant’s philosophy.
Which one of the following statements is NOT supported by the passage?
a)
Characterising romantic aesthetics is both possible and desirable, despite the challenges involved.
b)
Recent studies on romanticism seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms.
c)
Romantic aesthetics are primarily expressed through fragments, aphorisms, and poems.
d)
Many romantics rejected the idea of aesthetics as a domain separate from other aspects of life.
|
|
Nitya Kumar answered |
Explanation:
Recent studies on romanticism seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms
- This statement is NOT supported by the passage.
- According to the passage, recent studies do not seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms.
- Instead, these studies attempt to characterize romanticism in terms of particular philosophical questions and concerns.
- The passage emphasizes understanding romanticism in a broader sense without overlooking the differences between various national romanticisms.
Therefore, option B is not supported by the passage as it misrepresents the approach of recent studies on romanticism.
Recent studies on romanticism seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms
- This statement is NOT supported by the passage.
- According to the passage, recent studies do not seek to refute the differences between national romanticisms.
- Instead, these studies attempt to characterize romanticism in terms of particular philosophical questions and concerns.
- The passage emphasizes understanding romanticism in a broader sense without overlooking the differences between various national romanticisms.
Therefore, option B is not supported by the passage as it misrepresents the approach of recent studies on romanticism.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.Which one of the following has NOT contributed to the growing wolf population in Lozère?- a)A decline in the rural population of Lozère.
- b)An increase in woodlands and forest cover in Lozère.
- c)The shutting down of the royal office of the Luparii.
- d)The granting of a protected status to wolves in Europe.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
Which one of the following has NOT contributed to the growing wolf population in Lozère?
a)
A decline in the rural population of Lozère.
b)
An increase in woodlands and forest cover in Lozère.
c)
The shutting down of the royal office of the Luparii.
d)
The granting of a protected status to wolves in Europe.
|
|
EduRev GMAT answered |
The passage mentions that as early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii, or wolf-catchers, was created in France to tackle the predators. However, this office became redundant as it had finished it’s job (kill the last wolf). So the resurgence of the wolfs can’t be attributed to it shutting down. The other options on the other hand, can be clearly inferred.
Option A: “Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. “
Option B: “As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. “
Option D: “The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.”
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.- a)lack of educational facilities.
- b)poor rural communication infrastructure.
- c)livestock losses.
- d)decline in the number of hunting licences.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
a)
lack of educational facilities.
b)
poor rural communication infrastructure.
c)
livestock losses.
d)
decline in the number of hunting licences.
|
|
EduRev GMAT answered |
Considering the first paragraph: “RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .”
Options A, B and C can be clearly inferred from the highlighted part.
The passage mentions that the number of people holding hunting licenses is still high but the number of people who still actively hunt is low. So Option D which states that there is decline in the number of hunting licences is incorrect.
Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress...the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects. Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial. Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web, "adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do"Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. The passage is primarily concerned with which of the following? - a)criticise one interpretation of the early American railroads
- b)discuss the early years of the railroad and its connection to the American character of the time.
- c)suggest that railroads were the most important development in the history of America
- d)describe the apprehension with which most of the Americans greeted the early railroads
- e)assert that Americans were tricked into believing that the railroads were beneficial for them
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress...the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.
In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.
Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future.
To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.
Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web, "adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do"
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. The passage is primarily concerned with which of the following?
a)
criticise one interpretation of the early American railroads
b)
discuss the early years of the railroad and its connection to the American character of the time.
c)
suggest that railroads were the most important development in the history of America
d)
describe the apprehension with which most of the Americans greeted the early railroads
e)
assert that Americans were tricked into believing that the railroads were beneficial for them
|
|
Manasa Chavan answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
¶2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of
American character.
¶s3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
¶5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson)
¶1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
¶2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of
American character.
¶s3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
¶5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson)
The passage broadly describes the early years of the railroad and its impact on the American character at that time. B fits in very nicely with this.
As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a company‘s aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the company‘s practice organize a highly effective boycott of the company‘s products, their moral views will soon enter into the company‘s deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials. Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability? The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes. In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly.If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.A claim that things have ethical value to corporations only insofar as they are instrumental in furthering the ultimate goals of the corporation is: - a)necessarily true, given the information presented in the passage.
- b)perhaps true, and supported by the information presented in the passage.
- c)perhaps true, but not supported by any information in the passage.
- d)necessarily false, given the information presented in the passage.
- e)a figment of the author‘s imagination
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a company‘s aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the company‘s practice organize a highly effective boycott of the company‘s products, their moral views will soon enter into the company‘s deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials.
Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability?
The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes.
In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly.
If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
Q.A claim that things have ethical value to corporations only insofar as they are instrumental in furthering the ultimate goals of the corporation is:
a)
necessarily true, given the information presented in the passage.
b)
perhaps true, and supported by the information presented in the passage.
c)
perhaps true, but not supported by any information in the passage.
d)
necessarily false, given the information presented in the passage.
e)
a figment of the author‘s imagination
|
Arpita Basu answered |
Explanation:
Claim about ethical value to corporations:
- The claim that things have ethical value to corporations only insofar as they are instrumental in furthering the ultimate goals of the corporation is perhaps true, and it is supported by the information presented in the passage.
- The passage discusses how corporations are distinguished by their goals of profit maximization, growth, and survival, and how providing goods and services is a means to achieve these goals.
- It also mentions that corporations may not be moved by ethical arguments alone if their actions remain profitable, indicating that ethical considerations are secondary to their goals.
Support from the passage:
- The passage states that corporations are goal-directed entities, focused on achieving their objectives, which may not inherently include ethical values.
- It discusses how corporations may only consider moral views when they become limiting factors, similar to cost increases in raw materials.
- The example of the Ford Motor Company case further illustrates how corporations prioritize goals over ethical considerations.
Therefore, based on the information presented in the passage, the claim that ethical value to corporations is instrumental in furthering their goals is perhaps true and supported by the context provided.
Claim about ethical value to corporations:
- The claim that things have ethical value to corporations only insofar as they are instrumental in furthering the ultimate goals of the corporation is perhaps true, and it is supported by the information presented in the passage.
- The passage discusses how corporations are distinguished by their goals of profit maximization, growth, and survival, and how providing goods and services is a means to achieve these goals.
- It also mentions that corporations may not be moved by ethical arguments alone if their actions remain profitable, indicating that ethical considerations are secondary to their goals.
Support from the passage:
- The passage states that corporations are goal-directed entities, focused on achieving their objectives, which may not inherently include ethical values.
- It discusses how corporations may only consider moral views when they become limiting factors, similar to cost increases in raw materials.
- The example of the Ford Motor Company case further illustrates how corporations prioritize goals over ethical considerations.
Therefore, based on the information presented in the passage, the claim that ethical value to corporations is instrumental in furthering their goals is perhaps true and supported by the context provided.
The ―paradox of tolerance‖ admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech. While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech. According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative. From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress model‘s prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad ―buffer zone‖ that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. Which of the following scenarios, if true, would most weaken the argument contained in the paradox of tolerance which ―admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance?‖ - a)Islandia‘s government has decided to outlaw extremist political groups in order to protect its democratic political system.
- b)Islandia has a non-democratic government, despite its suppression of extremist political groups.
- c)Islandia‘s government became democratic only after extremist political groups were outlawed.
- d)Islandia has had a stable democratic government for decades, even though it has never outlawed extremist political groups
- e)Islandia has tried and failed repeatedly to have a stable government
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
The ―paradox of tolerance‖ admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech.
While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech.
According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.
Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative.
From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress model‘s prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad ―buffer zone‖ that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q. Which of the following scenarios, if true, would most weaken the argument contained in the paradox of tolerance which ―admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance?‖
a)
Islandia‘s government has decided to outlaw extremist political groups in order to protect its democratic political system.
b)
Islandia has a non-democratic government, despite its suppression of extremist political groups.
c)
Islandia‘s government became democratic only after extremist political groups were outlawed.
d)
Islandia has had a stable democratic government for decades, even though it has never outlawed extremist political groups
e)
Islandia has tried and failed repeatedly to have a stable government
|
|
Ameya Sen answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 introduces the ―"paradox of intolerance."
¶2 gives examples of countries that have taken the paradox into consideration by banning extreme speech, and argues that the United States tolerates even extremist speech.
¶3 introduces a justification for the defense of extremist speech: the classical model.
¶s4 and 5 introduce another justification: the fortress model.
¶1 introduces the ―"paradox of intolerance."
¶2 gives examples of countries that have taken the paradox into consideration by banning extreme speech, and argues that the United States tolerates even extremist speech.
¶3 introduces a justification for the defense of extremist speech: the classical model.
¶s4 and 5 introduce another justification: the fortress model.
Take a moment to review the paradox and its implications before attacking the choices. The paradox essentially states that free speech should be limited at its extremes when the extremes could contribute to eliminating free speech. Looking for an answer choice that weakens the implications of the paradox turns up (D): The paradox states that extreme speech weakens stable government, a point weakened by a scenario in which extreme speech and stable government coexist.
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect. Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.The author‘s statement ―"But [the fighting troops], in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect" assumes that- a)chaotic painting cannot have an unintended artistic effect.
- b)an artist naturally resists direction from another individual.
- c)a painting cannot help but reflect the mental state of its painter.
- d)it is impossible for painters to collaborate on a work without confusion.
- e)troops always need someone to guide them
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
In all battles two things are usually required of the Commander-in-Chief: to make a good plan for his army and to keep a strong reserve. Both of these are also obligatory for the painter. To make a plan, thorough reconnaissance of the country where the battle is to be fought is needed. Its fields, its mountains, its rivers, its bridges, its trees, its flowers, its atmosphere—all require and repay attentive observation from a special point of view.
I think this is one of the chief delights that have come to me through painting. No doubt many people who are lovers of art have acquired it to a high degree without actually practicing. But I expect that nothing will make one observe more quickly or more thoroughly than having to face the difficulty of representing the thing observed. And mind you, if you do observe accurately and with refinement, and if you do record what you have seen with tolerable correspondence, the result follows on the canvas with startling obedience.
But in order to make his plan, the General must not only reconnoitre the battle-ground; he must also study the achievements of the great Captains of the past. He must bring the observations he has collected in the field into comparison with the treatment of similar incidents by famous chiefs.
Considering this fact, the galleries of Europe take on a new—and to me at least — a severely practical interest. You see the difficulty that baffled you yesterday; and you see how easily it has been overcome by a great or even by a skilful painter. Not only is your observation of Nature sensibly improved and developed, but also your comprehension of the masterpieces of art.
But it is in the use and withholding of their reserves that the great commanders have generally excelled. After all, when once the last reserve has been thrown in, the commander‘s part is played. If that does not win the battle, he has nothing else to give. Everything must be left to luck and to the fighting troops. But these last reserves, in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect.
Mere masses count no more. The largest brush, the brightest colours cannot even make an impression. The pictorial battlefield becomes a sea of mud mercifully veiled by the fog of war. Even though the General plunges in himself and emerges bespattered, as he sometimes does, he will not retrieve the day. In painting, the reserves consist in Proportion or Relation. And it is here that the art of the painter marches along the road which is traversed by all the greatest harmonies in thought. At one side of the palette there is white, at the other black; and neither is ever used 'neat.‘ Between these two rigid limits all the action must lie, all the power required must be generated. Black and white themselves placed in juxtaposition make no great impression; and yet they are the most that you can do in pure contrast.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.The author‘s statement ―"But [the fighting troops], in the absence of high direction, are apt to get into sad confusion, all mixed together in a nasty mess, without order or plan—and consequently without effect" assumes that
a)
chaotic painting cannot have an unintended artistic effect.
b)
an artist naturally resists direction from another individual.
c)
a painting cannot help but reflect the mental state of its painter.
d)
it is impossible for painters to collaborate on a work without confusion.
e)
troops always need someone to guide them
|
|
Prerna Menon answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 compares painting a picture to fighting a battle, lists two similarities, planning and
backup, and discusses planning.
¶2 explains that practicing art is a great way to become a lover of art.
¶s3 and 4 draws in the analogy of the general and explain the need to study previous masters in war and art.
¶s5 and 6 explain the need to keep reserves in battle and painting.
¶1 compares painting a picture to fighting a battle, lists two similarities, planning and
backup, and discusses planning.
¶2 explains that practicing art is a great way to become a lover of art.
¶s3 and 4 draws in the analogy of the general and explain the need to study previous masters in war and art.
¶s5 and 6 explain the need to keep reserves in battle and painting.
Yet another question testing your understanding of the author‘s extended metaphor. These will be very common in any passage where unusual parallels are drawn. The quoted statement comes from ¶5; since all of the answer choices mention painting, work through how this part of the metaphor corresponds. The author is arguing that without a reserve, colours, like troops, will be confused and without order and therefore useless. For this to be true, the author must also believe that a painting without order suffers artistically, choice (A). To test an assumption in your practice, use the denial test: If the author does in fact assume X, the argument should fall apart if X is false. In this case, if chaotic painting can have an artistic effect, then the author‘s point about confused troops becomes meaningless. The assumption as it is written is therefore valid.
In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others‘ views familiar to his hearers. The oratory's immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they ‗made the worse appear the better cause,‘ and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes‘ Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigant‘s while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself. We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.If the author of the passage travelled to a political convention and saw various candidates speak he would most likely have the highest regard for an orator who: - a)roused his hearers to immediate and decisive action.
- b)understood that rhetoric serves an aesthetic as well as a practical purpose.
- c)relied on facts and reason rather than on rhetorical devices in making his case.
- d)passed on the techniques he had perfected to many students.
- e)made use of flowery and inflated words
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others‘ views familiar to his hearers. The oratory's immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.
Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they ‗made the worse appear the better cause,‘ and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes‘ Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigant‘s while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.
A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.
We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.If the author of the passage travelled to a political convention and saw various candidates speak he would most likely have the highest regard for an orator who:
a)
roused his hearers to immediate and decisive action.
b)
understood that rhetoric serves an aesthetic as well as a practical purpose.
c)
relied on facts and reason rather than on rhetorical devices in making his case.
d)
passed on the techniques he had perfected to many students.
e)
made use of flowery and inflated words
|
|
Jyoti Choudhury answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 introduces the importance of rhetoric in Greek life and the fact that it was taught.
¶2 explains why rhetorical skill was sometimes mistrusted, but still sought after.
¶3 states that as rhetoric (in writing and speech) became more of an art, its original purpose was corrupted.
¶4 states that the Greek system required rhetorical skills and therefore inherited rhetoric's drawbacks as well.
¶1 introduces the importance of rhetoric in Greek life and the fact that it was taught.
¶2 explains why rhetorical skill was sometimes mistrusted, but still sought after.
¶3 states that as rhetoric (in writing and speech) became more of an art, its original purpose was corrupted.
¶4 states that the Greek system required rhetorical skills and therefore inherited rhetoric's drawbacks as well.
What is the author‘s main argument about oratory? It was necessary for the Greeks, but became a "weakness" when they focused too much on making it artistic (¶s 3 and 4). Therefore the author would admire an orator who didn't sacrifice the facts and reason to too much rhetoric. (C) keeps the good parts of rhetoric while leaving out the artistic flourishes the author dislikes.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.The author presents a possible economic solution to an existing issue facing Lozère that takes into account the divergent and competing interests of:- a)politicians and farmers.
- b)environmentalists and politicians.
- c)farmers and environmentalists.
- d)tourists and environmentalists.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
The author presents a possible economic solution to an existing issue facing Lozère that takes into account the divergent and competing interests of:
a)
politicians and farmers.
b)
environmentalists and politicians.
c)
farmers and environmentalists.
d)
tourists and environmentalists.
|
|
Arjun Iyer answered |
Understanding the Economic Solution
The passage highlights the conflict between farmers and environmentalists regarding the return of wolves in Lozère, France. The interplay of their interests is critical in understanding the proposed economic solution.
Competing Interests
- Farmers' Concerns: Farmers are worried about the return of wolves, which they believe threaten their livestock and livelihoods. They report significant losses, claiming that green activists and urban dwellers have permitted the wolves' return without considering the economic impact on agriculture.
- Environmentalists' Perspective: On the other hand, environmentalists view the return of wolves as a positive development, indicative of a healthier ecosystem. They argue that wolves play a vital role in maintaining ecological balance and that their presence can enhance biodiversity.
Possible Economic Solutions
- Tourism Development: The passage mentions that tourist venues, like wolf parks, create jobs and stimulate the local economy. By promoting responsible tourism that educates visitors about wolves and their ecological importance, a balance can be struck between the two groups.
- Collaborative Approaches: Engaging both farmers and environmentalists in dialogue could lead to innovative solutions, such as compensation for livestock losses or creating wildlife corridors that protect both agricultural interests and wolf populations.
Conclusion
The answer is option 'C' because it encapsulates the need for a solution that respects and reconciles the competing interests of farmers concerned about livestock safety and environmentalists advocating for ecological health. The passage suggests that addressing these divergent interests is essential for sustainable coexistence in the region.
The passage highlights the conflict between farmers and environmentalists regarding the return of wolves in Lozère, France. The interplay of their interests is critical in understanding the proposed economic solution.
Competing Interests
- Farmers' Concerns: Farmers are worried about the return of wolves, which they believe threaten their livestock and livelihoods. They report significant losses, claiming that green activists and urban dwellers have permitted the wolves' return without considering the economic impact on agriculture.
- Environmentalists' Perspective: On the other hand, environmentalists view the return of wolves as a positive development, indicative of a healthier ecosystem. They argue that wolves play a vital role in maintaining ecological balance and that their presence can enhance biodiversity.
Possible Economic Solutions
- Tourism Development: The passage mentions that tourist venues, like wolf parks, create jobs and stimulate the local economy. By promoting responsible tourism that educates visitors about wolves and their ecological importance, a balance can be struck between the two groups.
- Collaborative Approaches: Engaging both farmers and environmentalists in dialogue could lead to innovative solutions, such as compensation for livestock losses or creating wildlife corridors that protect both agricultural interests and wolf populations.
Conclusion
The answer is option 'C' because it encapsulates the need for a solution that respects and reconciles the competing interests of farmers concerned about livestock safety and environmentalists advocating for ecological health. The passage suggests that addressing these divergent interests is essential for sustainable coexistence in the region.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
The inhabitants of Lozère have to grapple with all of the following problems, EXCEPT:
- a)lack of educational facilities.
- b)poor rural communication infrastructure.
- c)livestock losses.
- d)decline in the number of hunting licences.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
The inhabitants of Lozère have to grapple with all of the following problems, EXCEPT:
a)
lack of educational facilities.
b)
poor rural communication infrastructure.
c)
livestock losses.
d)
decline in the number of hunting licences.
|
|
Mihir Ghoshal answered |
Explanation:
Decline in the number of hunting licences:
- The passage mentions that the decline of hunting as a sport is one of the factors contributing to the recovery of wolf populations.
- While the number of hunting licences has decreased, the focus is on the impact this has had on wolf populations, rather than it being a problem faced by the inhabitants of Lozère.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'D' - decline in the number of hunting licences.
Decline in the number of hunting licences:
- The passage mentions that the decline of hunting as a sport is one of the factors contributing to the recovery of wolf populations.
- While the number of hunting licences has decreased, the focus is on the impact this has had on wolf populations, rather than it being a problem faced by the inhabitants of Lozère.
Therefore, the correct answer is option 'D' - decline in the number of hunting licences.
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds. Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats. Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust. Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. Implicit in the author‘s argument that leaks result in far more limited and unreliable policy discussions with foreign leaders is the idea that: - a)leaks should be considered breaches of trust and therefore immoral.
- b)leaks have occurred throughout the history of politics.
- c)foreign and U.S. leaders discussed policy without inhibition before the rise of the mass media.
- d)leaders fear the public would react negatively if it knew the real state of affairs.
- e)it is best to keep the media in the dark
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,‖ in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. Implicit in the author‘s argument that leaks result in far more limited and unreliable policy discussions with foreign leaders is the idea that:
Q. Implicit in the author‘s argument that leaks result in far more limited and unreliable policy discussions with foreign leaders is the idea that:
a)
leaks should be considered breaches of trust and therefore immoral.
b)
leaks have occurred throughout the history of politics.
c)
foreign and U.S. leaders discussed policy without inhibition before the rise of the mass media.
d)
leaders fear the public would react negatively if it knew the real state of affairs.
e)
it is best to keep the media in the dark
|
|
Harshad Iyer answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
¶s2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak‖ and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
¶4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
¶5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.
¶1 argues that the media‘s suspicion of government and lack of knowledge about the world harm government policy.
¶s2 and 3 introduce the concept of the ―leak‖ and explain why it‘s bad for foreign policy.
¶4 states that the media was trusted by the public until recently, but are now met with skepticism.
¶5 argues that leaks are usually part of a power grab and that the media is a pawn in the game.
This question requires students to find the assumption in the lines mentioned. Review the author‘s argument in ¶2 that leaks harm discussions with foreign leaders. What is the author assuming in this argument? The author argues that foreign leaders don‘t want their private thoughts to be made public; he must also therefore assume that leaders have some sort of reason for not wanting their views to be made public. (D) provides a possible reason. If unclear, use the denial test: if leaders didn‘t have this fear, what would be their motivation for hiding their personal views?
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.The passage tells us- a)how medicine should be manufactured
- b)what healthy man should or should not do
- c)what television programmes should be about
- d)how best to imagine illness
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.
The passage tells us
a)
how medicine should be manufactured
b)
what healthy man should or should not do
c)
what television programmes should be about
d)
how best to imagine illness
|
Deepika Mehta answered |
This line describes "The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work" what healthy man should or should not do.
As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a company‘s aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the company‘s practice organize a highly effective boycott of the company‘s products, their moral views will soon enter into the company‘s deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials.
Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability?
The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes.
In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly.
If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
Q. If a company that produced shampoo products opted to stop the routine testing of its products on animals because it decided that it is wrong to cause the animals pain, what effect would this have on the argument made in the passage?
- a)It would strongly support the argument.
- b)It would substantially weaken the argument.
- c)It would neither support nor substantially weaken the argument.
- d)It would support the argument somewhat, but not conclusively.
- e)It would weaken the argument only if the company is a government owned company
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
As formal organizations, business corporations are distinguished by their particular goals, which include maximization of profits, growth, and survival. Providing goods and services is a means to this end. If, for example, a number of individuals (outsiders or even insiders) believe that a company‘s aggressive marketing of infant formula in third world countries is morally wrong, the company is unlikely to be moved by arguments based on ethos alone as long as what it is doing remains profitable. But if those opposed to the company‘s practice organize a highly effective boycott of the company‘s products, their moral views will soon enter into the company‘s deliberations indirectly as limiting operating conditions. They can, at this point, no more be ignored than a prohibitive increase in the costs of certain raw materials.
Although the concepts and categories of ethics may be applied to the conduct of corporations, there are important differences between the values and principles underlying corporate behaviour and those underlying the actions of most individuals. If corporations are by their nature end- or goal-directed how can they acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves? Is it possible to hold one criminally responsible for acts that if performed by a human person would result in criminal liability?
The first case of this type to achieve widespread public attention was the attempt to prosecute the Ford Motor Company for manslaughter as the result of alleged negligent or reckless decision making concerning the safety engineering of the Pinto vehicle. Although the defendant corporation and its officers were found innocent after trial, the case can serve as an exemplar for our purposes.
In essence, the prosecution in this case attempted to show that the corporation had produced and distributed a vehicle that was known to be defective at the time of production and sale, and that even after a great deal of additional information accumulated regarding the nature of the problems, the corporation took no action to correct them. The obvious non-corporate analogy would be the prosecution of a person who was driving a car with brakes known to be faulty, who does not have them repaired because it would cost too much, and who kills someone when the brakes eventually fail and the car does not stop in time. Such cases involving individuals are prosecuted and won regularly.
If corporations have no concept of right or wrong because they are exclusively goal-directed, can they be convicted in cases of this type, and what purpose would be served by such a conviction? Perhaps we can make a utilitarian argument for convicting corporations of such crimes. The argument would be that of deterrence; conviction and punishment would deter other corporations from taking similar actions under similar circumstances. However, there appears to be considerable evidence that deterrence does not work on corporations, even if, arguably, it works on individuals. The possibility of being discovered and the potential magnitude of the fine merely become more data to be included in the analysis of limiting conditions.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
Q. If a company that produced shampoo products opted to stop the routine testing of its products on animals because it decided that it is wrong to cause the animals pain, what effect would this have on the argument made in the passage?
a)
It would strongly support the argument.
b)
It would substantially weaken the argument.
c)
It would neither support nor substantially weaken the argument.
d)
It would support the argument somewhat, but not conclusively.
e)
It would weaken the argument only if the company is a government owned company
|
|
Rishika Sen answered |
The correct answer is D. It would support the argument somewhat, but not conclusively.
The argument in the passage is that corporations are primarily goal-directed and focused on maximizing profits, growth, and survival. They are not inherently concerned with ethical considerations unless it directly affects their profitability.
If a company decides to stop routine animal testing because it believes it is wrong to cause animals pain, it does show that the company is considering ethical concerns. However, this decision alone does not conclusively prove that corporations can acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves. It could be argued that the company made this decision because it believes it will enhance its reputation and attract more customers who are concerned about animal welfare. Therefore, while it does support the argument to some extent, it does not provide conclusive evidence.
The argument in the passage is that corporations are primarily goal-directed and focused on maximizing profits, growth, and survival. They are not inherently concerned with ethical considerations unless it directly affects their profitability.
If a company decides to stop routine animal testing because it believes it is wrong to cause animals pain, it does show that the company is considering ethical concerns. However, this decision alone does not conclusively prove that corporations can acknowledge acts as wrong in and of themselves. It could be argued that the company made this decision because it believes it will enhance its reputation and attract more customers who are concerned about animal welfare. Therefore, while it does support the argument to some extent, it does not provide conclusive evidence.
By regarding the expanding universe as a motion picture, you can easily imagine ―running the film backward.‖ If you do so, you find the universe getting smaller and smaller, and eventually you come to the moment when its whole mass is crammed into an infinitely dense point. Before that time it didn‘t exist, or at least it didn‘t exist in its present form. Though there is some controversy about its exact age, most cosmologists would be inclined to agree that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years. For scale, this can be compared to the four-and-a-half-billion-year age of the solar system, the time since the disappearance of the dinosaurs (sixty-five million years), and the age of the human race (about three million years). The event that marked the beginning of the universe was christened the Big Bang; the term has now entered the vernacular of our culture. Originally the name referred only to the single initiating event; now, however, astronomers have come to use it to mean the entire developmental process of the birth and expansion of the cosmos. The simple statement that the universe had a beginning in time is by now so obvious to astrophysicists that few give it a second thought. Yet it is a statement that has profound implications. Most civilizations embrace one of two opposite concepts of time. Linear time has a beginning, a duration, and an end; cyclical time, as its name suggests, continues around and around forever. In a universe that functions through cyclical time, the question of creation never arises; the universe always was and always will be. The minute you switch to linear time you immediately confront the vexing question not only of creation, but also of the Creator. Although there is no logical reason for the assumption, many people believe that if something comes into existence, it must do so in response to the actions of some rational being. Because of that belief, astronomers, even though they resist becoming involved in theological discussion, find themselves in one when they posit the Big Bang universe. It puts them squarely in the middle of an age-old debate. One common misconception about the Big Bang that should be disposed of immediately is the notion that the universal expansion is analogous to the explosion of an artillery shell. The galaxies are not like bits of shrapnel speeding away from a central explosion. The raisin-indough analogy is a more satisfactory way to think about the whole process. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:Q.According to the passage, which of the following statements is NOT true? - a)Many people believe that a rational impetus created the universe.
- b)The solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang.
- c)The universe is larger today than it was in the past.
- d)Different societies measure time differently.
- e)Most cosmologists believe the universe to be 10 to 20 billion years old
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
By regarding the expanding universe as a motion picture, you can easily imagine ―running the film backward.‖ If you do so, you find the universe getting smaller and smaller, and eventually you come to the moment when its whole mass is crammed into an infinitely dense point. Before that time it didn‘t exist, or at least it didn‘t exist in its present form. Though there is some controversy about its exact age, most cosmologists would be inclined to agree that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years. For scale, this can be compared to the four-and-a-half-billion-year age of the solar system, the time since the disappearance of the dinosaurs (sixty-five million years), and the age of the human race (about three million years).
The event that marked the beginning of the universe was christened the Big Bang; the term has now entered the vernacular of our culture. Originally the name referred only to the single initiating event; now, however, astronomers have come to use it to mean the entire developmental process of the birth and expansion of the cosmos.
The simple statement that the universe had a beginning in time is by now so obvious to astrophysicists that few give it a second thought. Yet it is a statement that has profound implications. Most civilizations embrace one of two opposite concepts of time. Linear time has a beginning, a duration, and an end; cyclical time, as its name suggests, continues around and around forever. In a universe that functions through cyclical time, the question of creation never arises; the universe always was and always will be. The minute you switch to linear time you immediately confront the vexing question not only of creation, but also of the Creator. Although there is no logical reason for the assumption, many people believe that if something comes into existence, it must do so in response to the actions of some rational being. Because of that belief, astronomers, even though they resist becoming involved in theological discussion, find themselves in one when they posit the Big Bang universe. It puts them squarely in the middle of an age-old debate.
One common misconception about the Big Bang that should be disposed of immediately is the notion that the universal expansion is analogous to the explosion of an artillery shell. The galaxies are not like bits of shrapnel speeding away from a central explosion. The raisin-indough analogy is a more satisfactory way to think about the whole process.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
Q.According to the passage, which of the following statements is NOT true?
a)
Many people believe that a rational impetus created the universe.
b)
The solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang.
c)
The universe is larger today than it was in the past.
d)
Different societies measure time differently.
e)
Most cosmologists believe the universe to be 10 to 20 billion years old
|
Parijat Menon answered |
Explanation:
Incorrect Statement:
- The statement "The solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang" is not true according to the passage.
Reasoning:
- The passage mentions that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years, while the solar system is about four-and-a-half-billion years old. This age gap indicates that the solar system was not created immediately after the Big Bang.
- The passage also discusses the concept of linear time and the beginning of the universe with the Big Bang event, which led to the expansion of the cosmos. This expansion does not imply that the solar system was created at the same time as the Big Bang.
Therefore, based on the information provided in the passage, the statement that the solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang is not true.
Incorrect Statement:
- The statement "The solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang" is not true according to the passage.
Reasoning:
- The passage mentions that the universe has existed for about ten to twenty billion years, while the solar system is about four-and-a-half-billion years old. This age gap indicates that the solar system was not created immediately after the Big Bang.
- The passage also discusses the concept of linear time and the beginning of the universe with the Big Bang event, which led to the expansion of the cosmos. This expansion does not imply that the solar system was created at the same time as the Big Bang.
Therefore, based on the information provided in the passage, the statement that the solar system was created immediately after the Big Bang is not true.
While many points are worth making in an evaluation of the single sixyear presidential term, one of the most telling points against the single term has not been advanced. This kind of constitutional limitation on elections is generally a product of systems with weak or non-existent political parties. Since there is no party continuity or corporate party integrity in such systems, there is no basis for putting trust in the desire for re-election as a safeguard against mismanagement in the executive branch. Better under those conditions to operate on the basis of negative assumptions against incumbents. I do not know if the earliest proposal for a single, nonrepeatable term was made in the 1820s because that was a period of severely weak political parties. But I do feel confident that this is a major reason, if not the only reason, that such a proposal has been popular since the 1940s. Though the association of the non-repeatable election with weak political parties is not in itself an argument against the limitation, the fallout from this association does contribute significantly to the negative argument. Single-term limitations are strongly associated with corruption. In any weak party system, including the presidential system, the onus of making deals and compromises, both shady and honourable, rests heavily upon individual candidates. Without some semblance of corporate integrity in a party, individual candidates have few opportunities to amortize their obligations across the spectrum of elective and appointive jobs and policy proposals.The deals tend to be personalized and the payoffs come home to roost accordingly. If that situation is already endemic in conditions of weak or nonexistent parties, adding to it the limitation against re-election means that candidates and officials, already prevented from amortizing their deals across space, are also unable to amortize their obligations temporally. This makes for a highly beleaguered situation. The single six-year term for presidents is an effort to compensate for the absence of a viable party system, but it is a compensation ultimately paid for by further weakening the party system itself. Observers, especially foreign observers, have often noted that one source of weakness in American political parties is the certainty of election every two or four years, not only because any artificial limitation on elections is a violation of democratic principles but also because when elections are set in a certain and unchangeable cycle, political parties do not have to remain alert but can disappear into inactivity until a known point prior to the next election. To rigidify matters by going beyond the determinacy of the electoral cycle to add an absolute rule of one term would hang still another millstone around the neck of already doddering political parties. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:According to the passage, which of the following is most likely to be true of a political system with weak political parties? - a)Politicians appoint unqualified people to important posts.
- b)Political parties favour frequent elections.
- c)Political bargains are made by individual candidates.
- d)Elections tend to occur with very great frequency.
- e)It encourages politicians to be more honest
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
While many points are worth making in an evaluation of the single sixyear presidential term, one of the most telling points against the single term has not been advanced. This kind of constitutional limitation on elections is generally a product of systems with weak or non-existent political parties.
Since there is no party continuity or corporate party integrity in such systems, there is no basis for putting trust in the desire for re-election as a safeguard against mismanagement in the executive branch. Better under those conditions to operate on the basis of negative assumptions against incumbents. I do not know if the earliest proposal for a single, nonrepeatable term was made in the 1820s because that was a period of severely weak political parties. But I do feel confident that this is a major reason, if not the only reason, that such a proposal has been popular since the 1940s.
Though the association of the non-repeatable election with weak political parties is not in itself an argument against the limitation, the fallout from this association does contribute significantly to the negative argument. Single-term limitations are strongly associated with corruption. In any weak party system, including the presidential system, the onus of making deals and compromises, both shady and honourable, rests heavily upon individual candidates. Without some semblance of corporate integrity in a party, individual candidates have few opportunities to amortize their obligations across the spectrum of elective and appointive jobs and policy proposals.
The deals tend to be personalized and the payoffs come home to roost accordingly. If that situation is already endemic in conditions of weak or nonexistent parties, adding to it the limitation against re-election means that candidates and officials, already prevented from amortizing their deals across space, are also unable to amortize their obligations temporally. This makes for a highly beleaguered situation. The single six-year term for presidents is an effort to compensate for the absence of a viable party system, but it is a compensation ultimately paid for by further weakening the party system itself.
Observers, especially foreign observers, have often noted that one source of weakness in American political parties is the certainty of election every two or four years, not only because any artificial limitation on elections is a violation of democratic principles but also because when elections are set in a certain and unchangeable cycle, political parties do not have to remain alert but can disappear into inactivity until a known point prior to the next election. To rigidify matters by going beyond the determinacy of the electoral cycle to add an absolute rule of one term would hang still another millstone around the neck of already doddering political parties.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following:
According to the passage, which of the following is most likely to be true of a political system with weak political parties?
a)
Politicians appoint unqualified people to important posts.
b)
Political parties favour frequent elections.
c)
Political bargains are made by individual candidates.
d)
Elections tend to occur with very great frequency.
e)
It encourages politicians to be more honest
|
|
Ananya Sharma answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 introduces the idea of a single presidential term.
¶2 argues that the single term is usually associated with countries with weak political parties and therefore popular when political parties are weak.
¶s3 and 4 argue that single-term systems encourage corruption.
¶5 argues that the single-term system is designed to make up for weak parties, but ends up making parties even weaker.
¶1 introduces the idea of a single presidential term.
¶2 argues that the single term is usually associated with countries with weak political parties and therefore popular when political parties are weak.
¶s3 and 4 argue that single-term systems encourage corruption.
¶5 argues that the single-term system is designed to make up for weak parties, but ends up making parties even weaker.
What does the author say about weak political parties? They lead to a preference for single terms, which, when enacted, lead to corruption. Evaluate the choices with this main chain of causes and effects in mind. While three choices aren‘t touched on by the author, (C) is the main point made in ¶3 and the beginning of ¶ 4: single-term systems encourage individual bargains (which ultimately lead to corruption.)
The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia. Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion. During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation?
I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests. II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics. III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system. - a)II only
- b)III only
- c)I and II
- d)II and III
- e)I, II and III
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The original Hellenistic community was idealized, the Greeks‘ own golden dream—a community never achieved but only imagined by the Macedonian Alexander, who was possessed of the true faith of all converts to a larger vision. The evolving system of city-states had produced not only unity with a healthy diversity but also narrow rivalries. No Hellenic empire arose, only scores of squabbling cities pursuing bitter feuds born of ancient wrongs and existing ambitions. It was civil strife made possible by isolation from the great armies and ambitions of Asia.
Greek history could arguably begin in July of 776 B.C., the First Olympiad, and end with Theodosus‘s ban on the games in 393 A.D. Before this there had been a long era of two tribes, the Dorians and Ionians, scarcely distinguishable to the alien eye, but distinctly separate in their own eyes until 776. After Theodosus' ban most of the Mediterranean world was Greek-like, in fact, but the central core had been rendered impotent by diffusion.
During the eventful Greek millennium, the Olympics reflected not the high ideals of Hellenes but rather the mean reality of the times. Its founders had created a monster, games that twisted the strategists‘ aspirations to unity to fit the unpleasant reality of the Hellenistic world. The games not only mirrored the central practices of the Greek world that reformers would deny but also imposed the flaws of that world. Like the atomic theory of the Greek philosophers, the Greek gamers‘ theories were far removed from reality; they were elegant, consistent, logical, and irrelevant.
Part religious ritual, part game rite, in the five-day Olympic Games, various athletes coming together under the banner of their cities; winning became paramount, imposing defeat a delight. As Greek society evolved, so, too, did the games, but rarely as a unifying force. Athletes supposedly competing for the laurel of accomplishment in the name of idealism found that dried olive leaves changed to gold. Each local polis (city-state) sought not to contribute to the grandeur of Greece, but to achieve its own glory. As in the real world, in the games no Greek could trust another, and each envied rivals' victories. The Olympic spirit was not one of communal bliss but bitter lasting competition institutionalized in games.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q. For which of the following statements does the passage provide some evidence or explanation?
I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests.
I. Alexander united ancient Greece through a series of military conquests.
II. The divisions among Greek city-states were reflected in the Olympics.
III. The Olympic Games could not have occurred without a city-state system.
a)
II only
b)
III only
c)
I and II
d)
II and III
e)
I, II and III
|
|
Siddharth Datta answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 argues that in reality the Hellenic period was tumultuous, not the idealized community that Alexander desired.
¶2 gives a time frame for Greek civilization and the Olympic games.
¶3 argues that the games reflected Greek culture, but not positively as the founders intended.
¶4 argues that the games reinforced disunity instead of promoting the unity originally intended.
¶1 argues that in reality the Hellenic period was tumultuous, not the idealized community that Alexander desired.
¶2 gives a time frame for Greek civilization and the Olympic games.
¶3 argues that the games reflected Greek culture, but not positively as the founders intended.
¶4 argues that the games reinforced disunity instead of promoting the unity originally intended.
Take a moment to remind yourself of the author‘s main point about the Games and look at the layout of the choices before trying to answer. RN II is the most frequent, so hit that first. RN II is basically the author‘s main argument, and the passage itself is explanation and example for this. Eliminate (B). RN I offers a point not made by the passage: the author argues that Alexander never truly unified Greece (and he offers no evidence for this). Eliminate (C). The author never makes the claim in RN III, and therefore (D) can be eliminated. (A) alone is left.
Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress...the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are. In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects. Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future. TTo ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial. Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web,"adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do."Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig QuetionsQ. Suppose that an early nineteenth-century American inventor had developed a device that made it easier to construct multi-story building. How would early nineteenth-century Americans be expected to react to this invention? - a)They would not support society‘s use of such a device.
- b)They would generally support society‘s use of such a device.
- c)They would have no opinion about society‘s use of such a device.
- d)They themselves would not use such a device.
- e)They would initially view such a device with skepticism
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Henry Varnum Poor, editor of American Railroad Journal, drew the important elements of the image of the railroad together in 1851, ―Look at the results of this material progress...the vigor, life, and executive energy that followed in its train, rapidly succeeded by wealth, the refinement and intellectual culture of a high civilization. All this is typified, in a degree, by a locomotive. The combination in its construction of nice art and scientific application of power, its speed surpassing that of our proudest courser, and its immense strength, are all characteristic of our age and tendencies. To us, like the telegraph, it is essential, it constitutes a part of our nature, is a condition of our being what we are.
In the third decade of the nineteenth century, Americans began to define their character in light of the new railroads. They liked the idea that it took special people to foresee and capitalize on the promise of science. Railroad promoters, using the steam engine as a metaphor for what they thought Americans were and what they thought Americans were becoming, frequently discussed parallels between the locomotive and national character, pointing out that both possessed youth, power, speed, single-mindedness, and bright prospects.
Poor was, of course, promoting acceptance of railroads and enticing his readers to open their pocketbooks. But his metaphors had their dark side. A locomotive was quite unlike anything Americans had ever seen. It was large, mysterious and dangerous; many thought that it was a monster waiting to devour the unwary. There was a suspicion that a country founded upon Jeffersonian agrarian principles had bought a ticket and boarded a train pulled by some iron monster into the dark recesses of an unknown future. T
To ease such public apprehensions, promoters, poets, editors, and writers alike adopted the notion that locomotives were really only ―iron horses,‖ an early metaphor that lingered because it made steam technology ordinary and understandable. Iron horse metaphors assuaged fears about inherent defects in the national character, prompting images of a more secure future, and made an alien technology less frightening, and even comforting and congenial.
Essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson saw the locomotive as an agent of domestic harmony. He observed that ―the locomotive and the steamboat, like enormous shuttles, shoot every day across the thousand various threads of national descent and employment and bind them fast in one web,"adding ―an hourly assimilation goes forward, and there is no danger that local peculiarities and hostilities should be preserved. To us Americans, it seems to have fallen as a political aid. We could not else have held the vast North America together, which we now engage to do."
Direction: Read the above Paragraph and answer the follownig Quetions
Q. Suppose that an early nineteenth-century American inventor had developed a device that made it easier to construct multi-story building. How would early nineteenth-century Americans be expected to react to this invention?
a)
They would not support society‘s use of such a device.
b)
They would generally support society‘s use of such a device.
c)
They would have no opinion about society‘s use of such a device.
d)
They themselves would not use such a device.
e)
They would initially view such a device with skepticism
|
Mrinalini Basu answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
¶2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
¶s3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
¶5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson).
¶1 describes the opinions of one railroad promoter (Poor), who tied the railroad to the progressive nature of American character.
¶2 describes the American idea of the time that the railroad reflected elements of American character.
¶s3 and 4 discuss the fears associated with the railroad and the metaphors presented to counter them.
¶5 describes the way that Americans were won over to the railroad by these metaphors (Emerson).
The new situation involves scientific progress much like the railroad; what does the author say about Americans‘ ideas about this? Go back to ¶2: the author argues that Americans had a special fondness for science and progress. Therefore, they‘d endorse something that furthered these goals. (B) fits.
Direction: Read the following paragraph carefully and answer the question given below:
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.
Based on the information in the passage, with which of the following statements would the author most likely agree?
- a)Feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations.
- b)The public has a right to know the real state of foreign affairs.
- c)The fewer the number of people involved in policy discussions, the better.
- d)Leaders give up their right to privacy when they are elected.
- e)The media is not accountable to the public.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Direction: Read the following paragraph carefully and answer the question given below:
Suspicious as they are of American intentions, and bolstered by court rulings that seem to give them license to seek out and publish any and all government secrets, the media‘s distrust of our government, combined with their limited understanding of the world at large, damages our ability to design and conduct good policy in ways that the media rarely imagine.
The leak through which sensitive information flows from the government to the press is detrimental to policy in so far as it almost completely precludes the possibility of serious discussion. The fear that anything they say, even in what is construed as a private forum, may appear in print, makes many people, whether our own government officials or the leaders of foreign countries, unwilling to speak their minds.
Must we be content with the restriction of our leaders‘ policy discussions to a handful of people who trust each other, thus limiting the richness and variety of ideas that could be brought forward through a larger group because of the nearly endemic nature of this problem? It is vitally important for the leaders of the United States to know the real state of affairs internationally, and this can occur only if foreign leaders feel free to speak their minds to our diplomats.
Until recently, it looked as if the media had convinced the public that journalists were more reliable than the government; however, this may be changing. With the passage of time, the media have lost lustre. They—having grown large and powerful—provoke the same public skepticism that other large institutions in the society do. A series of media scandals has contributed to this. Many Americans have concluded that the media are no more credible than the government, and public opinion surveys reflect much ambivalence about the press.
While leaks are generally defended by media officials on the grounds of the public‘s ―right to know,in reality they are part of the Washington political power game, as well as part of the policy process. The "leaker" may be currying favour with the media, or may be planting information to influence policy. In the first case, he is helping himself by enhancing the prestige of a journalist; in the second, he is using the media as a stage for his preferred policies. In either instance, it closes the circle: the leak begins with a political motive, is advanced by a politicized media, and continues because of politics. Although some of the journalists think they are doing the work, they are more often than not instruments of the process, not prime movers. The media must be held accountable for their activities, just like every other significant institution in our society, and the media must be forced to earn the public‘s trust.
Based on the information in the passage, with which of the following statements would the author most likely agree?
a)
Feeding the public misinformation is warranted in certain situations.
b)
The public has a right to know the real state of foreign affairs.
c)
The fewer the number of people involved in policy discussions, the better.
d)
Leaders give up their right to privacy when they are elected.
e)
The media is not accountable to the public.
|
Gowri Bose answered |
Option: 1
Explanation:
Explanation:
Review the author's main arguments before looking for an answer choice that he's agree with. (A) recalls the author's point in paragraph 2: "Leaders often say one thing in public and something quite different in public conversation... " The author explains why this occurs—fear of media leaks—and clearly opposes such leaks. Therefore, the author must agree with (A)'s contention that misinformation is sometimes warranted.
Wrong Answers:
(B): Opposite. This is the opposite of (A); for the same reasons that (A) is a valid inference, (B) isn't.
(C): Opposite. The author argues in paragraph 3 that policy benefits from a "richness and variety of ideas. "
(D): Opposite. The author's point in decrying leaks is that privacy is a necessary component
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.The best way to win a friend is to avoid- a)irony in speech
- b)pomposity in speech
- c)verbosity in speech
- d)ambiguity in speech
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Speech is great blessings but it can also be great curse, for while it helps us to make our intentions and desires known to our fellows, it can also if we use it carelessly, make our attitude completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of unusual word, or of an ambiguous word, and so on, may create an enemy where we had hoped to win a friend. Again, different classes of people use different vocabularies, and the ordinary speech of an educated may strike an uneducated listener as pompous. Unwittingly, we may use a word which bears a different meaning to our listener from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to use lightly without thought, but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all kinds and conditions to men.
The best way to win a friend is to avoid
a)
irony in speech
b)
pomposity in speech
c)
verbosity in speech
d)
ambiguity in speech
|
Sandeep Chakraborty answered |
"Speech is a great blessing but it can also be a great curse" for while it helps us how to make our intensions and desires known to our fellow, it can also, if we use it carelessly, make our attitudes completely misunderstood. A slip of the tongue, the use of an unusual word or of an ambiguous word may create an enemy where we have hoped to win a friend.
Again different classes of people use different vocabularies and the ordinary speech of an educated man may strike an uneducated listener as showing pride. Unwillingly we may use a word which bears different meaning to our listeners from what it does to men of our own class. Thus speech is not a gift to be used lightly without thought but one which demands careful handling. Only a fool will express himself alike to all.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.Over the past four centuries liberalism has been so successful that it has driven all its opponents off the battlefield. Now it is disintegrating, destroyed by a mix of hubris and internal contradictions, according to Patrick Deneen, a professor of politics at the University of Notre Dame. . . . Equality of opportunity has produced a new meritocratic aristocracy that has all the aloofness of the old aristocracy with none of its sense of noblesse oblige. Democracy has degenerated into a theatre of the absurd. And technological advances are reducing ever more areas of work into meaningless drudgery. “The gap between liberalism’s claims about itself and the lived reality of the citizenry” is now so wide that “the lie can no longer be accepted,” Mr Deneen writes. What better proof of this than the vision of 1,000 private planes whisking their occupants to Davos to discuss the question of “creating a shared future in a fragmented world”? . . .Deneen does an impressive job of capturing the current mood of disillusionment, echoing leftwing complaints about rampant commercialism, right-wing complaints about narcissistic and bullying students, and general worries about atomisation and selfishness. But when he concludes that all this adds up to a failure of liberalism, is his argument convincing? . . . He argues that the essence of liberalism lies in freeing individuals from constraints. In fact, liberalism contains a wide range of intellectual traditions which provide different answers to the question of how to trade off the relative claims of rights and responsibilities, individual expression and social ties. . . . liberals experimented with a range of ideas from devolving power from the centre to creating national education systems.Mr Deneen’s fixation on the essence of liberalism leads to the second big problem of his book: his failure to recognise liberalism’s ability to reform itself and address its internal problems. The late 19th century saw America suffering from many of the problems that are reappearing today, including the creation of a business aristocracy, the rise of vast companies, the corruption of politics and the sense that society was dividing into winners and losers. But a wide variety of reformers, working within the liberal tradition, tackled these problems head on. Theodore Roosevelt took on the trusts. Progressives cleaned up government corruption. University reformers modernised academic syllabuses and built ladders of opportunity. Rather than dying, liberalism reformed itself.Mr Deneen is right to point out that the record of liberalism in recent years has been dismal. He is also right to assert that the world has much to learn from the premodern notions of liberty as self-mastery and self-denial. The biggest enemy of liberalism is not so much atomisation but old-fashioned greed, as members of the Davos elite pile their plates ever higher with perks and share options. But he is wrong to argue that the only way for people to liberate themselves from the contradictions of liberalism is “liberation from liberalism itself”. The best way to read “Why Liberalism Failed” is not as a funeral oration but as a call to action: up your game, or else.All of the following statements are evidence of the decline of liberalism today, EXCEPT:- a)“And technological advances are reducing ever more areas of work into meaningless drudgery.”
- b)“. . . the creation of a business aristocracy, the rise of vast companies . . .”
- c)“Democracy has degenerated into a theatre of the absurd.”
- d)“‘The gap between liberalism’s claims about itself and the lived reality of the citizenry’ is now so wide that ‘the lie can no longer be accepted,’. . .”
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
Over the past four centuries liberalism has been so successful that it has driven all its opponents off the battlefield. Now it is disintegrating, destroyed by a mix of hubris and internal contradictions, according to Patrick Deneen, a professor of politics at the University of Notre Dame. . . . Equality of opportunity has produced a new meritocratic aristocracy that has all the aloofness of the old aristocracy with none of its sense of noblesse oblige. Democracy has degenerated into a theatre of the absurd. And technological advances are reducing ever more areas of work into meaningless drudgery. “The gap between liberalism’s claims about itself and the lived reality of the citizenry” is now so wide that “the lie can no longer be accepted,” Mr Deneen writes. What better proof of this than the vision of 1,000 private planes whisking their occupants to Davos to discuss the question of “creating a shared future in a fragmented world”? . . .
Deneen does an impressive job of capturing the current mood of disillusionment, echoing leftwing complaints about rampant commercialism, right-wing complaints about narcissistic and bullying students, and general worries about atomisation and selfishness. But when he concludes that all this adds up to a failure of liberalism, is his argument convincing? . . . He argues that the essence of liberalism lies in freeing individuals from constraints. In fact, liberalism contains a wide range of intellectual traditions which provide different answers to the question of how to trade off the relative claims of rights and responsibilities, individual expression and social ties. . . . liberals experimented with a range of ideas from devolving power from the centre to creating national education systems.
Mr Deneen’s fixation on the essence of liberalism leads to the second big problem of his book: his failure to recognise liberalism’s ability to reform itself and address its internal problems. The late 19th century saw America suffering from many of the problems that are reappearing today, including the creation of a business aristocracy, the rise of vast companies, the corruption of politics and the sense that society was dividing into winners and losers. But a wide variety of reformers, working within the liberal tradition, tackled these problems head on. Theodore Roosevelt took on the trusts. Progressives cleaned up government corruption. University reformers modernised academic syllabuses and built ladders of opportunity. Rather than dying, liberalism reformed itself.
Mr Deneen is right to point out that the record of liberalism in recent years has been dismal. He is also right to assert that the world has much to learn from the premodern notions of liberty as self-mastery and self-denial. The biggest enemy of liberalism is not so much atomisation but old-fashioned greed, as members of the Davos elite pile their plates ever higher with perks and share options. But he is wrong to argue that the only way for people to liberate themselves from the contradictions of liberalism is “liberation from liberalism itself”. The best way to read “Why Liberalism Failed” is not as a funeral oration but as a call to action: up your game, or else.
All of the following statements are evidence of the decline of liberalism today, EXCEPT:
a)
“And technological advances are reducing ever more areas of work into meaningless drudgery.”
b)
“. . . the creation of a business aristocracy, the rise of vast companies . . .”
c)
“Democracy has degenerated into a theatre of the absurd.”
d)
“‘The gap between liberalism’s claims about itself and the lived reality of the citizenry’ is now so wide that ‘the lie can no longer be accepted,’. . .”
|
|
Tanvi Deshpande answered |
Explanation:
Decline of Liberalism Today
- Option 'a' does not provide evidence of the decline of liberalism, as it focuses on technological advances reducing work into drudgery.
- This statement does not directly relate to liberalism, but rather to the impact of technology on work and productivity.
- Therefore, option 'a' is the correct answer as it does not align with the evidence presented in the passage regarding the decline of liberalism.
Decline of Liberalism Today
- Option 'a' does not provide evidence of the decline of liberalism, as it focuses on technological advances reducing work into drudgery.
- This statement does not directly relate to liberalism, but rather to the impact of technology on work and productivity.
- Therefore, option 'a' is the correct answer as it does not align with the evidence presented in the passage regarding the decline of liberalism.
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.Which one of the following statements, if true, would weaken the author’s claims?- a)Having migrated out in the last century, wolves are now returning to Lozère.
- b)Unemployment concerns the residents of Lozère.
- c)Wolf attacks on tourists in Lozère are on the rise.
- d)The old mining sites of Lozère are now being used as grazing pastures for sheep.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
RESIDENTS of Lozère, a hilly department in southern France, recite complaints familiar to many rural corners of Europe. In remote hamlets and villages, with names such as Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about a lack of local schools, jobs, or phone and internet connections. Farmers of grazing animals add another concern: the return of wolves. Eradicated from France last century, the predators are gradually creeping back to more forests and hillsides. “The wolf must be taken in hand,” said an aspiring parliamentarian, Francis Palombi, when pressed by voters in an election campaign early this summer. Tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, but farmers fret over their livestock and their livelihoods. .
. .
. .
As early as the ninth century, the royal office of the Luparii—wolf-catchers—was created in France to tackle the predators. Those official hunters (and others) completed their job in the 1930s, when the last wolf disappeared from the mainland. Active hunting and improved technology such as rifles in the 19th century, plus the use of poison such as strychnine later on, caused the population collapse. But in the early 1990s the animals reappeared. They crossed the Alps from Italy, upsetting sheep farmers on the French side of the border. Wolves have since spread to areas such as Lozère, delighting environmentalists, who see the predators’ presence as a sign of wider ecological health. Farmers, who say the wolves cause the deaths of thousands of sheep and other grazing animals, are less cheerful. They grumble that green activists and politically correct urban types have allowed the return of an old enemy.
Various factors explain the changes of the past few decades. Rural depopulation is part of the story. In Lozère, for example, farming and a once-flourishing mining industry supported a population of over 140,000 residents in the mid-19th century. Today the department has fewer than 80,000 people, many in its towns. As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. In France, between 1990 and 2015, forest cover increased by an average of 102,000 hectares each year, as more fields were given over to trees. Now, nearly one-third of mainland France is covered by woodland of some sort. The decline of hunting as a sport also means more forests fall quiet. In the mid-to-late 20th century over 2m hunters regularly spent winter weekends tramping in woodland, seeking boars, birds and other prey. Today the Fédération Nationale des Chasseurs, the national body, claims 1.1m people hold hunting licences, though the number of active hunters is probably lower. The mostly protected status of the wolf in Europe—hunting them is now forbidden, other than when occasional culls are sanctioned by the state—plus the efforts of NGOs to track and count the animals, also contribute to the recovery of wolf populations.
As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators’ return. Farmers’ losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals’ spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas.
Which one of the following statements, if true, would weaken the author’s claims?
a)
Having migrated out in the last century, wolves are now returning to Lozère.
b)
Unemployment concerns the residents of Lozère.
c)
Wolf attacks on tourists in Lozère are on the rise.
d)
The old mining sites of Lozère are now being used as grazing pastures for sheep.
|
|
Arjun Iyer answered |
Understanding the Impact of Wolves on Tourism
The question focuses on which statement would weaken the author's claims regarding the balance between the return of wolves and the economic interests of residents in Lozère, particularly farmers and tourism.
Analysis of the Statements
- a) Having migrated out in the last century, wolves are now returning to Lozère.
- This statement reinforces the passage's narrative about the wolves' return, thus supporting the author's claims rather than weakening them.
- b) Unemployment concerns the residents of Lozère.
- While this statement highlights economic issues, it does not specifically address the relationship between wolf populations and tourism or farming, so it does not significantly weaken the claims.
- c) Wolf attacks on tourists in Lozère are on the rise.
- This statement directly challenges the notion that the presence of wolves is beneficial for tourism. If tourists are increasingly attacked, it would likely deter visitors, leading to economic losses rather than gains from tourism linked to wolf parks. This could weaken the argument that the return of wolves is economically advantageous for the region.
- d) The old mining sites of Lozère are now being used as grazing pastures for sheep.
- This statement could imply a shift in land use but does not directly counter the claims about the wolves' impact on tourism and farming.
Conclusion
Thus, option c is the correct answer because it introduces a negative aspect regarding the relationship between wolves and tourism, undermining the author’s assertion that the wolves' return benefits the local economy.
The question focuses on which statement would weaken the author's claims regarding the balance between the return of wolves and the economic interests of residents in Lozère, particularly farmers and tourism.
Analysis of the Statements
- a) Having migrated out in the last century, wolves are now returning to Lozère.
- This statement reinforces the passage's narrative about the wolves' return, thus supporting the author's claims rather than weakening them.
- b) Unemployment concerns the residents of Lozère.
- While this statement highlights economic issues, it does not specifically address the relationship between wolf populations and tourism or farming, so it does not significantly weaken the claims.
- c) Wolf attacks on tourists in Lozère are on the rise.
- This statement directly challenges the notion that the presence of wolves is beneficial for tourism. If tourists are increasingly attacked, it would likely deter visitors, leading to economic losses rather than gains from tourism linked to wolf parks. This could weaken the argument that the return of wolves is economically advantageous for the region.
- d) The old mining sites of Lozère are now being used as grazing pastures for sheep.
- This statement could imply a shift in land use but does not directly counter the claims about the wolves' impact on tourism and farming.
Conclusion
Thus, option c is the correct answer because it introduces a negative aspect regarding the relationship between wolves and tourism, undermining the author’s assertion that the wolves' return benefits the local economy.
In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others‘ views familiar to his hearers. The oratory's immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they 'made the worse appear the better cause,‘ and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes‘ Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigant‘s while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself. We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ.Historians agree that those seeking public office in modern America make far fewer speeches in the course of their campaign than those seeking a public position in ancient Greece did. The author would most likely explain this by pointing out that: - a)speeches are now only of limited use in the abrupt vicissitudes of politics.
- b)modern politicians need not rely exclusively on speeches to make themselves known.
- c)modern audiences are easier to persuade through rhetoric than were the Greek audiences.
- d)modern politicians do not make a study of rhetoric as did the Greeks.
- e)modern America is not much different from ancient Greece
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
In public Greek life, a man had to make his way at every step through the immediate persuasion of the spoken word. Whether it be addressing an assembly, a law-court or a more restricted body, his oratory would be a public affair rather than under the purview of a quiet committee, without the support of circulated commentary, and with no backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others‘ views familiar to his hearers. The oratory's immediate effect was all-important; it would be naive to expect that mere reasonableness or an inherently good case would equate to a satisfactory appeal. Therefore, it was early realized that persuasion was an art, up to a point teachable, and a variety of specific pedagogy was well established in the second half of the fifth century. When the sophists claimed to teach their pupils how to succeed in public life, rhetoric was a large part of what they meant, though, to do them justice, it was not the whole.
Skill naturally bred mistrust. If a man of good will had need of expression advanced of mere twaddle, to learn how to expound his contention effectively, the truculent or pugnacious could be taught to dress their case in well-seeming guise. It was a standing charge against the sophists that they 'made the worse appear the better cause,‘ and it was this immoral lesson which the hero of Aristophanes‘ Clouds went to learn from, of all people, Socrates. Again, the charge is often made in court that the opponent is an adroit orator and the jury must be circumspect so as not to let him delude them. From the frequency with which this crops up, it is patent that the accusation of cleverness might damage a man. In Greece, juries, of course, were familiar with the style, and would recognize the more evident artifices, but it was worth a litigant‘s while to get his speech written for him by an expert. Persuasive oratory was certainly one of the pressures that would be effective in an Athenian law-court.
A more insidious danger was the inevitable desire to display this art as an art. It is not easy to define the point at which a legitimate concern with style shades off into preoccupation with manner at the expense of matter, but it is easy to perceive that many Greek writers of the fourth and later centuries passed that danger point. The most influential was Isocrates, who polished for long years his pamphlets, written in the form of speeches, and taught to many pupils the smooth and easy periods he had perfected. Isocrates took to the written word in compensation for his inadequacy in live oratory; the tough and nervous tones of a Demosthenes were far removed from his, though they, too, were based on study and practice. The exaltation of virtuosity did palpable harm. The balance was always delicate, between style as a vehicle and style as an end in itself.
We must not try to pinpoint a specific moment when it, once and for all, tipped over; but certainly, as time went on, virtuosity weighed heavier. While Greek freedom lasted, and it mattered what course of action a Greek city decided to take, rhetoric was a necessary preparation for public life, whatever its side effects. It had been a source of strength for Greek civilization that its problems, of all kinds, were thrashed out very much in public. The shallowness which the study of rhetoric might (not must) encourage was the corresponding weakness.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q.Historians agree that those seeking public office in modern America make far fewer speeches in the course of their campaign than those seeking a public position in ancient Greece did. The author would most likely explain this by pointing out that:
a)
speeches are now only of limited use in the abrupt vicissitudes of politics.
b)
modern politicians need not rely exclusively on speeches to make themselves known.
c)
modern audiences are easier to persuade through rhetoric than were the Greek audiences.
d)
modern politicians do not make a study of rhetoric as did the Greeks.
e)
modern America is not much different from ancient Greece
|
Rounak Banerjee answered |
Mapping the Passage:
¶1 introduces the importance of rhetoric in Greek life and the fact that it was taught.
¶2 explains why rhetorical skill was sometimes mistrusted, but still sought after.
¶3 states that as rhetoric (in writing and speech) became more of an art, its original purpose was corrupted.
¶4 states that the Greek system required rhetorical skills and therefore inherited rhetoric's drawbacks as well.
¶1 introduces the importance of rhetoric in Greek life and the fact that it was taught.
¶2 explains why rhetorical skill was sometimes mistrusted, but still sought after.
¶3 states that as rhetoric (in writing and speech) became more of an art, its original purpose was corrupted.
¶4 states that the Greek system required rhetorical skills and therefore inherited rhetoric's drawbacks as well.
An application question. What would the author consider a main difference between ancient Greece and modern America? The opening lines mention that a Greek citizen had to rely on the spoken rather than the written word, and had "no" backcloth of daily reportage to make his own or others‘ views familiar to his hearers" as modern culture has. Therefore fewer speeches are needed nowadays, as (B) states.
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.Talking about the health all time makes people- a)always suffer from imaginary illness
- b)sometimes suffer from imaginary illness
- c)rarely suffer from imaginary illness
- d)often suffer from imaginary illness
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
In the world today we make health and end in itself. We have forgotten that health is really means to enable a person to do his work and do it well. a lot of modern medicine and this includes many patients as well as many physicians pays very little attention to health but very much attention to those who imagine that they are ill. Our great concern with health is shown by the medical columns in newspapers. the health articles in popular magazines and the popularity of television programmes and all those books on medicine. We talk about health all the time. Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness. The healthy man should not be wasting time talking about health: he should be using health for work. The work does the work that good health possible.
Talking about the health all time makes people
a)
always suffer from imaginary illness
b)
sometimes suffer from imaginary illness
c)
rarely suffer from imaginary illness
d)
often suffer from imaginary illness
|
|
Shivam Patel answered |
Option D is the right answer because it is clearly mentioned in the passage that - 'We talk about health all the time.
Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness.'
Options A, B, and C are incorrect because the right answer is Option D.
Yet for the most part the only result is more people with imaginary illness.'
Options A, B, and C are incorrect because the right answer is Option D.
The ―paradox of tolerance‖ admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech. While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech. According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative. From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress model‘s prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad ―buffer zone‖ that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed. Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the followingQ. The fortress model is ―built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt.‖ Based on information in the passage, each of the following statements is a view held by those who believe in the fortress model of free speech EXCEPT: - a)extremist political speech should be prohibited because it threatens democratic government.
- b)freedom of political speech is necessary in order to protect democratic government.
- c)a ban on extremist political speech raises the probability that more important political speech will also be banned.
- d)the government is unlikely to permit political speech that it finds objectionable unless the law prevents it from curbing political speech.
- e)the government should ensure that extremist speech, as long as it is political, is protected
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
The ―paradox of tolerance‖ admonishes us that tolerance of the intolerant leads to intolerance. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the constitutions and laws of Western European democracies that adhere to the principle of freedom of speech all heed the warning of this conundrum and do not afford legal protection to extremist speech.
While in Western European democracies, the speech of nondemocratic extremists has been successfully outlawed, in the United States the first amendment right to freedom of speech has been interpreted to encompass radical oration. The traditional justifications of this American stance originate in the belief that speech is entitled to greater tolerance than other kinds of activity. They are based on the belief that speech itself is valuable, and thus ascribe positive value to a very broad range of speech.
According to the classical model, freedom of speech serves an indispensable function in the process of democratic self-government. From this perspective, the free speech principle need only protect political speech, comprised of all the facts, theories, and opinions relating to any issue on which the citizens must vote. Proponents of this view insist that even extremist views cannot be concealed from voting citizens, if these views bear on any public issue before them.
Protection of free speech serves the collective self-interests of a selfgoverning society made up of all rational, equal, and fully participating citizens who take their civic duties seriously. The fortress model is built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt. At its deepest level, the fortress model values freedom of speech as a necessary precondition to the discovery and preservation of truth, but even at this level the function of speech remains primarily negative.
From this perspective, the government and a majority of the people pose a great danger of intolerance. In spite of the high probability that their beliefs will eventually prove to be false, it is argued, people nonetheless tend to feel certain about them and, consequently, feel justified in requiring others to conform. Thus, the fortress model‘s prescription for combating the tendency to censor nonconforming views is to overprotect speech by providing a broad ―buffer zone‖ that encompasses extremist speech because its protection substantially diminishes the probability that inherently valuable speech will be suppressed.
Directions: Read the above paragraph and answer the following
Q. The fortress model is ―built on a foundation of pessimism, individualism, relativism, and self-doubt.‖ Based on information in the passage, each of the following statements is a view held by those who believe in the fortress model of free speech EXCEPT:
a)
extremist political speech should be prohibited because it threatens democratic government.
b)
freedom of political speech is necessary in order to protect democratic government.
c)
a ban on extremist political speech raises the probability that more important political speech will also be banned.
d)
the government is unlikely to permit political speech that it finds objectionable unless the law prevents it from curbing political speech.
e)
the government should ensure that extremist speech, as long as it is political, is protected
|
|
Arshiya Roy answered |
Mapping the Passage
¶1 introduces the ―"paradox of intolerance."
¶2 gives examples of countries that have taken the paradox into consideration by banning extreme speech, and argues that the United States tolerates even extremist speech.
¶3 introduces a justification for the defense of extremist speech: the classical model.
¶s4 and 5 introduce another justification: the fortress model.
¶1 introduces the ―"paradox of intolerance."
¶2 gives examples of countries that have taken the paradox into consideration by banning extreme speech, and argues that the United States tolerates even extremist speech.
¶3 introduces a justification for the defense of extremist speech: the classical model.
¶s4 and 5 introduce another justification: the fortress model.
Review the fortress model before eliminating answer choices that match with what a proponent would believe. The fortress model argues that extremist speech should be protected because more harm is done in banning it than in allowing the speech itself. While three choices reasonably follow from this, (A) contradicts the main point of the model in general: free speech shouldn’t be banned.
Chapter doubts & questions for Comprehension - English Language & Comprehension for Competitive Exams 2025 is part of Delhi Police Constable exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the Delhi Police Constable exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for Delhi Police Constable 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Comprehension - English Language & Comprehension for Competitive Exams in English & Hindi are available as part of Delhi Police Constable exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for Delhi Police Constable Exam by signing up for free.
English Language & Comprehension for Competitive Exams
97 videos|55 docs|55 tests
|
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Study with 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos & Tests
10M+ students study on EduRev
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup on EduRev and stay on top of your study goals
10M+ students crushing their study goals daily