Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, egalitarianism will not survive if
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, why does man value his possessions more than his life?
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App |
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, which was the unfinished part of Gandhiji’s experiment?
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. Which of the following statements is ‘not true’ in the context of the passage?
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, true egalitarianism will last if
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, people ultimately overturn the form of a social order
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, the root cause of class conflict is
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. Which of the following statements is not true in the context of the passage?
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, which of the following statements is true?
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Q. According to the passage, what does adoption of the ideal of trusteeship mean?
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Directions : Which of the following is synonym/antonym of the given word from the passage?
Q. Possessions
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Directions : Which of the following is synonym/antonym of the given word from the passage?
Q. Radically
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Directions : Which of the following is synonym/antonym of the given word from the passage?
Q. Egalitarian
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Directions : Which of the following is synonym/antonym of the given word from the passage?
Q. Acquisitive
Directions : Read the passage and answer the following questions:
The task which Gandhiji undertook was not only the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood, and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. Political struggle involved fight against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his moral support. In establishing the social order of this pattern, there was a lively possibility of a conflict arising between groups and classes of our own people. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the ‘haves’ have to yield place to the ‘have-nots’. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force.
In the ultimate analysis, it is difficult, if not impossible, to say that the instinct to possess has been rooted out or that it will not reappear in an even worse from under a different guise. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held by a big dam, once a barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction.
The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct. So long as the ideal that is to be achieved is one of securing the maximum material satisfaction, possessiveness can neither be suppressed nor eliminated but will grow on what it feeds. Nor will it cease to be such- it is possessiveness, still, whether it is confined to only a few or is shared by many.
If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others. This calls for substitution of spiritual values for purely material ones. The paradise of material satisfaction, that is sometimes equated with progress these days neither spells peace nor progress. Mahatma Gandhi has shown us how the acquisitive instinct inherent in man could be transmuted by the adoption of the ideal of trusteeship by those who ‘have’ for the benefit of all those who ‘have not’ so that, instead of leading to exploitation and conflict, it would become a means and incentive for the amelioration and progress of society, respectively.
Directions : Which of the following is synonym/antonym of the given word from the passage?
Q. Paradise
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
Q. The project was difficult, but we Keep down and eventually, it Was done.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
He was acting on his feelings of inferiority by being overly aggressive.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
The past year has been successful and, look after, we expect to do even better in the coming months.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
The judge thanked the witness and allowed her to stand in.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
He looked like someone had worked him about pretty good.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
I came over the book in a little second-hand bookshop in Dorset
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
Three dangerous Category A prisoners break away Wands worth Prison last night
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
He was sent in to replace the starting goaltender
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
Each month she pays into an account that can be used for medical expenses.
Directions: Which of the phrases (a), (b), (c) and (d) given below should replace the phrase given in bold in the following sentences to make the sentence grammatically meaningful and correct. If the sentence is correct as it is and there is no correction required mark (e) as the answer.
All the seats were sold and a large crowd had to be turned away.
Directions (26-30): Rearrange the following six sentence (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.
A. It already has a nuclear arsenal, a formidable missile programme, and has taken creditable strides in the field of space exploation.
B. Owning a HSR network has become a status symbol for nations.
C. After all, it has the dream of becoming the third
D. China leveraged this phenomenon to the hilt by introducing high-speed trains on its network in the nineties, and can now boast of owning the world’s largest HSR network.
E. The high-speed rail (HSR) owes its genesis to the competition railways faced from fast-moving automobiles and airplanes.
F. It is but natural for India to aspire to join the exclusive club of nations having a HSR network.
the largest economy in 25 years.
Q. Which of the following should be the THIRD sentence after rearrangement?
Directions (26-30): Rearrange the following six sentence (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.
A. It already has a nuclear arsenal, a formidable missile programme, and has taken creditable strides in the field of space exploation.
B. Owning a HSR network has become a status symbol for nations.
C. After all, it has the dream of becoming the third
D. China leveraged this phenomenon to the hilt by introducing high-speed trains on its network in the nineties, and can now boast of owning the world’s largest HSR network.
E. The high-speed rail (HSR) owes its genesis to the competition railways faced from fast-moving automobiles and airplanes.
F. It is but natural for India to aspire to join the exclusive club of nations having a HSR network.
the largest economy in 25 years.
Q. Which of the following should be the FIFTH(last) sentence after rearrangement?
Directions (26-30): Rearrange the following six sentence (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.
A. It already has a nuclear arsenal, a formidable missile programme, and has taken creditable strides in the field of space exploation.
B. Owning a HSR network has become a status symbol for nations.
C. After all, it has the dream of becoming the third
D. China leveraged this phenomenon to the hilt by introducing high-speed trains on its network in the nineties, and can now boast of owning the world’s largest HSR network.
E. The high-speed rail (HSR) owes its genesis to the competition railways faced from fast-moving automobiles and airplanes.
F. It is but natural for India to aspire to join the exclusive club of nations having a HSR network.
the largest economy in 25 years.
Q. Which of the following should be the FIRST sentence after rearrangement?
Directions (26-30): Rearrange the following six sentence (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.
A. It already has a nuclear arsenal, a formidable missile programme, and has taken creditable strides in the field of space exploation.
B. Owning a HSR network has become a status symbol for nations.
C. After all, it has the dream of becoming the third
D. China leveraged this phenomenon to the hilt by introducing high-speed trains on its network in the nineties, and can now boast of owning the world’s largest HSR network.
E. The high-speed rail (HSR) owes its genesis to the competition railways faced from fast-moving automobiles and airplanes.
F. It is but natural for India to aspire to join the exclusive club of nations having a HSR network.
the largest economy in 25 years.
Q. Which of the following should be the FOURTH sentence after rearrangement?
Directions (26-30): Rearrange the following six sentence (A), (B), (C), (D), (E) and (F) in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them.
A. It already has a nuclear arsenal, a formidable missile programme, and has taken creditable strides in the field of space exploation.
B. Owning a HSR network has become a status symbol for nations.
C. After all, it has the dream of becoming the third
D. China leveraged this phenomenon to the hilt by introducing high-speed trains on its network in the nineties, and can now boast of owning the world’s largest HSR network.
E. The high-speed rail (HSR) owes its genesis to the competition railways faced from fast-moving automobiles and airplanes.
F. It is but natural for India to aspire to join the exclusive club of nations having a HSR network.
the largest economy in 25 years.
Q. Which of the following should be the SECOND sentence after rearrangement?