Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Philosophical games aside, the practical importance of understanding the brain basis of consciousness is easy to appreciate. General anaesthesia has to count as one of the greatest inventions of all time. Less happily, distressing disturbances of consciousness can accompany brain injuries and mental illnesses for the increasing number of us, me included, who encounter these conditions. And for each one of us, conscious experiences change throughout life, from the blooming and buzzing confusion of early life, through the apparent though probably illusory and certainly not universal clarity of adulthood, and on to our final drift into the gradual — and for some, disorientingly rapid — dissolution of the self as neurodegenerative decay sets in. At each stage in this process, you exist, but the notion that there is a single unique conscious self (a soul?) that persists over time may be grossly mistaken. Indeed, one of the most compelling aspects of the mystery of consciousness is the nature of self. Is consciousness possible without self -consciousness? And if so, would it still matter so much? Answers to difficult questions like these have many implications for how we think about the world and the life it contains. When does consciousness begin in development? Does it emerge at birth, or is it present even in the womb? What about consciousness in nonhuman animals — and not just in primates and other mammals, but in otherworldly creatures like the octopus and perhaps even in simple organisms such as nematode worms or bacteria? Despite his now-tarnished reputation among neuroscientists, Sigmund Freud was right about many things. Looking back through the history of science, he identified three "strikes" against the perceived self-importance of the human species, each marking a major scientific advance that was strongly resisted at the time. The first was by Copernicus, who showed with his heliocentric theory that the Earth rotates around the sun and not the other way around. With this dawned the realisation that we are not at the centre of the universe; we are just a speck somewhere out there in the vastness, a pale blue dot suspended in the abyss. Next came Darwin, who revealed that we share common ancestry with all other living things, a realisation that is — astonishingly — still resisted in some parts of the world even today. Immodestly, Freud's third strike against human exceptionalism was his own theory of the unconscious mind, which challenged the idea that our mental lives are under our conscious, rational control. While he may have been off target in the details, he was absolutely right to point out that a naturalistic explanation of mind and consciousness would be a further, and perhaps final, dethronement of humankind. These shifts in how we see ourselves are to be welcomed. With each new advance in our understanding comes a new sense of wonder and a new ability to see ourselves as less apart from — and more a part of — the rest of nature. Our conscious experiences are part of nature just as our bodies are, just as our world is. And when life ends, consciousness will end too. When I think about this, I am transported back to my experience — my non -experience — of anaesthesia. To its oblivion, perhaps comforting, but oblivion nonetheless. The novelist Julian Barnes, in his meditation on mortality, puts it perfectly. When the end of consciousness comes, there is nothing — really nothing — to be frightened of. Q. Why does the author think that ''General anaesthesia has to count as one of the greatest inventions of all time''?

Anaesthesia procedures have led to accomplishment of medical feats that were previously impossible.

The anaesthetic activity helps an individual to transport himself into the comforting realm of oblivion.

General anaesthesia helps highlight the trivial control that we have over our own consciousness.

General anaesthesia can be helpful in finding out the origins of the consciousness among humans.

Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Philosophical games aside, the practical importance of understanding the brain basis of consciousness is easy to appreciate. General anaesthesia has to count as one of the greatest inventions of all time. Less happily, distressing disturbances of consciousness can accompany brain injuries and mental illnesses for the increasing number of us, me included, who encounter these conditions. And for each one of us, conscious experiences change throughout life, from the blooming and buzzing confusion of early life, through the apparent though probably illusory and certainly not universal clarity of adulthood, and on to our final drift into the gradual — and for some, disorientingly rapid — dissolution of the self as neurodegenerative decay sets in. At each stage in this process, you exist, but the notion that there is a single unique conscious self (a soul?) that persists over time may be grossly mistaken. Indeed, one of the most compelling aspects of the mystery of consciousness is the nature of self. Is consciousness possible without self-consciousness? And if so, would it still matter so much? Answers to difficult questions like these have many implications for how we think about the world and the life it contains. When does consciousness begin in development? Does it emerge at birth, or is it present even in the womb? What about consciousness in nonhuman animals — and not just in primates and other mammals, but in otherworldly creatures like the octopus and perhaps even in simple organisms such as nematode worms or bacteria? Despite his now-tarnished reputation among neuroscientists, Sigmund Freud was right about many things. Looking back through the history of science, he identified three "strikes" against the perceived self-importance of the human species, each marking a major scientific advance that was strongly resisted at the time. The first was by Copernicus, who showed with his heliocentric theory that the Earth rotates around the sun and not the other way around. With this dawned the realisation that we are not at the centre of the universe; we are just a speck somewhere out there in the vastness, a pale blue dot suspended in the abyss. Next came Darwin, who revealed that we share common ancestry with all other living things, a realisation that is — astonishingly — still resisted in some parts of the world even today. Immodestly, Freud's third strike against human exceptionalism was his own theory of the unconscious mind, which challenged the idea that our mental lives are under our conscious, rational control. While he may have been off target in the details, he was absolutely right to point out that a naturalistic explanation of mind and consciousness would be a further, and perhaps final, dethronement of humankind. These shifts in how we see ourselves are to be welcomed. With each new advance in our understanding comes a new sense of wonder and a new ability to see ourselves as less apart from — and more a part of — the rest of nature. Our conscious experiences are part of nature just as our bodies are, just as our world is. And when life ends, consciousness will end too. When I think about this, I am transported back to my experience — my non-experience — of anaesthesia. To its oblivion, perhaps comforting, but oblivion nonetheless. The novelist Julian Barnes, in his meditation on mortality, puts it perfectly. When the end of consciousness comes, there is nothing — really nothing — to be frightened of. Q. In context of the passage, what purpose do Freud's "three strikes" serve?

They support the author's view that even inanimate objects have the tendency to experience consciousness.

They are a premise for the view that our consciousness is a part of a larger entity instead of being purely personal.

They contradict the author's view that our consciousness will synonymously end when our life ends.

They help in concluding that consciousness is an ever-changing phenomenon dependent upon one's life stage.

Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Philosophical games aside, the practical importance of understanding the brain basis of consciousness is easy to appreciate. General anaesthesia has to count as one of the greatest inventions of all time. Less happily, distressing disturbances of consciousness can accompany brain injuries and mental illnesses for the increasing number of us, me included, who encounter these conditions. And for each one of us, conscious experiences change throughout life, from the blooming and buzzing confusion of early life, through the apparent though probably illusory and certainly not universal clarity of adulthood, and on to our final drift into the gradual — and for some, disorientingly rapid — dissolution of the self as neurodegenerative decay sets in. At each stage in this process, you exist, but the notion that there is a single unique conscious self (a soul?) that persists over time may be grossly mistaken. Indeed, one of the most compelling aspects of the mystery of consciousness is the nature of self. Is consciousness possible without self -consciousness? And if so, would it still matter so much? Answers to difficult questions like these have many implications for how we think about the world and the life it contains. When does consciousness begin in development? Does it emerge at birth, or is it present even in the womb? What about consciousness in nonhuman animals — and not just in primates and other mammals, but in otherworldly creatures like the octopus and perhaps even in simple organisms such as nematode worms or bacteria? Despite his now-tarnished reputation among neuroscientists, Sigmund Freud was right about many things. Looking back through the history of science, he identified three "strikes" against the perceived self-importance of the human species, each marking a major scientific advance that was strongly resisted at the time. The first was by Copernicus, who showed with his heliocentric theory that the Earth rotates around the sun and not the other way around. With this dawned the realisation that we are not at the centre of the universe; we are just a speck somewhere out there in the vastness, a pale blue dot suspended in the abyss. Next came Darwin, who revealed that we share common ancestry with all other living things, a realisation that is — astonishingly — still resisted in some parts of the world even today. Immodestly, Freud's third strike against human exceptionalism was his own theory of the unconscious mind, which challenged the idea that our mental lives are under our conscious, rational control. While he may have been off target in the details, he was absolutely right to point out that a naturalistic explanation of mind and consciousness would be a further, and perhaps final, dethronement of humankind. These shifts in how we see ourselves are to be welcomed. With each new advance in our understanding comes a new sense of wonder and a new ability to see ourselves as less apart from — and more a part of — the rest of nature. Our conscious experiences are part of nature just as our bodies are, just as our world is. And when life ends, consciousness will end too. When I think about this, I am transported back to my experience — my non -experience — of anaesthesia. To its oblivion, perhaps comforting, but oblivion nonetheless. The novelist Julian Barnes, in his meditation on mortality, puts it perfectly. When the end of consciousness comes, there is nothing — really nothing — to be frightened of. Q. Which of the following statements is the author most likely to agree with?

The fact that even the microorganisms possess consciousness helps in proving its pervasive nature.

Medical advances will not only be able to replicate consciousness but also regulate associated factors.

Since we are not at the centre stage of the universe, there is a serious threat to human species with respect to their survival and superiority.

Experiencing different conscious moments at different stages of life points out the transient nature of consciousness.

Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Philosophical games aside, the practical importance of understanding the brain basis of consciousness is easy to appreciate. General anaesthesia has to count as one of the greatest inventions of all time. Less happily, distressing disturbances of consciousness can accompany brain injuries and mental illnesses for the increasing number of us, me included, who encounter these conditions. And for each one of us, conscious experiences change throughout life, from the blooming and buzzing confusion of early life, through the apparent though probably illusory and certainly not universal clarity of adulthood, and on to our final drift into the gradual — and for some, disorientingly rapid — dissolution of the self as neurodegenerative decay sets in. At each stage in this process, you exist, but the notion that there is a single unique conscious self (a soul?) that persists over time may be grossly mistaken. Indeed, one of the most compelling aspects of the mystery of consciousness is the nature of self. Is consciousness possible without self -consciousness? And if so, would it still matter so much? Answers to difficult questions like these have many implications for how we think about the world and the life it contains. When does consciousness begin in development? Does it emerge at birth, or is it present even in the womb? What about consciousness in nonhuman animals — and not just in primates and other mammals, but in otherworldly creatures like the octopus and perhaps even in simple organisms such as nematode worms or bacteria? Despite his now-tarnished reputation among neuroscientists, Sigmund Freud was right about many things. Looking back through the history of science, he identified three "strikes" against the perceived self-importance of the human species, each marking a major scientific advance that was strongly resisted at the time. The first was by Copernicus, who showed with his heliocentric theory that the Earth rotates around the sun and not the other way around. With this dawned the realisation that we are not at the centre of the universe; we are just a speck somewhere out there in the vastness, a pale blue dot suspended in the abyss. Next came Darwin, who revealed that we share common ancestry with all other living things, a realisation that is — astonishingly — still resisted in some parts of the world even today. Immodestly, Freud's third strike against human exceptionalism was his own theory of the unconscious mind, which challenged the idea that our mental lives are under our conscious, rational control. While he may have been off target in the details, he was absolutely right to point out that a naturalistic explanation of mind and consciousness would be a further, and perhaps final, dethronement of humankind. These shifts in how we see ourselves are to be welcomed. With each new advance in our understanding comes a new sense of wonder and a new ability to see ourselves as less apart from — and more a part of — the rest of nature. Our conscious experiences are part of nature just as our bodies are, just as our world is. And when life ends, consciousness will end too. When I think about this, I am transported back to my experience — my non -experience — of anaesthesia. To its oblivion, perhaps comforting, but oblivion nonetheless. The novelist Julian Barnes, in his meditation on mortality, puts it perfectly. When the end of consciousness comes, there is nothing — really nothing — to be frightened of. Q. Which one of the following best describes the word 'oblivion' in the context of the passage?

A state of mind where one is completely unaware of one's surroundings

A situation where one experiences ecstasy and pure bliss

A situation where one completely loses control over one's surroundings

A state of mind where one is able to escape the reality

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question. Ask any hardcore substance addict (try this only when they are sober) how his or her very first experience was, and they will for sure tell you it was not a very pleasant one. The violent cough of the first puff, the distaste of the first sip, the bitterness of the powder, hits them first; the feel-good factor and ecstasy that ends up in an unbreakable bond comes slowly, and much later. That's why we urge you to start the new addiction programme now, whatever be the initial hiccups. Every patient is different, from shy and submissive to bold and aggressive; some are dead scared of injections while others go in for heart surgery with a smile. But the 'argumentative' types are special and the most difficult to handle; give them a piece of advice and they would be ready with an instant counter-argument. But it is these argumentative ones who teach the old doctors a new trick or two, by asking odd and embarrassing questions, forcing us to dig up old medical journals or try surfing the Net. That's exactly what happened when this young man asked me: ''I am not overweight, neither do I have diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease. Then why do you want me to exercise?'' The answer to that question is far from simple. fMRI, or functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, is a system that can track blood circulation and show the intensity of activation of a localised area of the brain during a specific activity. Reading, for example, activates the occipital cortex, speaking lights up the speech area, while decision-making switches on the frontal cortex. In a study researchers looked into the fMRI pattern in those who do regular exercise, and found that a 'C'-shaped structure, the caudate nucleus, a part of the basal ganglia, becomes highly active. This is caused by flooding of that area by a neurotransmitter called dopamine. This area is the reward area of the brain, and such activation makes the person feel happy. But what stumped the researchers was that the pattern of activation matched the fMRI imaging pattern of a nicotine or cocaine addict. The fMRI image of a cocaine addict who is high and a health freak doing exercise had an uncanny similarity from the perspective of neurochemistry and brain imaging. Lack of exercise is a technology problem. Today we don't even walk to our neighbour to chat; we pick up the mobile instead. And then there is the lure of sitting back at home knowing that the world of entertainment is just a click away. Some 150 minutes of exercise a week translates into 30 minutes a day for five days a week, or two 15 minute sessions of brisk walking. And that 15 minutes of apparent 'waste-of-time' would not only reduce your 'waist-in-time' but also reduce the chances of your developing high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease and stroke, each by 30 per cent. A similar reduction of chance of depression and consequent improvement of self-confidence would be a bonus. Powering your life and staying heart healthy is possible by getting hooked on to a new addiction - 'daily exercise'. All you need is to hold on till the initial hiccough is over - and then it would be bliss. Q. It can be inferred that the author of the passage makes a case for inculcating the habit of exercising because

He believes that everyone has a right and need to celebrate life

It hardly calls for much to accrue the benefits of a healthy life

He wants to answer an argumentative patient in a way that completely satisfies the latter

The solution to this technology problem lies in co-opting exercise into our daily regimen

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question. Ask any hardcore substance addict (try this only when they are sober) how his or her very first experience was, and they will for sure tell you it was not a very pleasant one. The violent cough of the first puff, the distaste of the first sip, the bitterness of the powder, hits them first; the feel-good factor and ecstasy that ends up in an unbreakable bond comes slowly, and much later. That's why we urge you to start the new addiction programme now, whatever be the initial hiccups. Every patient is different, from shy and submissive to bold and aggressive; some are dead scared of injections while others go in for heart surgery with a smile. But the 'argumentative' types are special and the most difficult to handle; give them a piece of advice and they would be ready with an instant counter-argument. But it is these argumentative ones who teach the old doctors a new trick or two, by asking odd and embarrassing questions, forcing us to dig up old medical journals or try surfing the Net. That's exactly what happened when this young man asked me: ''I am not overweight, neither do I have diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease. Then why do you want me to exercise?'' The answer to that question is far from simple. fMRI, or functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, is a system that can track blood circulation and show the intensity of activation of a localised area of the brain during a specific activity. Reading, for example, activates the occipital cortex, speaking lights up the speech area, while decision-making switches on the frontal cortex. In a study researchers looked into the fMRI pattern in those who do regular exercise, and found that a 'C'-shaped structure, the caudate nucleus, a part of the basal ganglia, becomes highly active. This is caused by flooding of that area by a neurotransmitter called dopamine. This area is the reward area of the brain, and such activation makes the person feel happy. But what stumped the researchers was that the pattern of activation matched the fMRI imaging pattern of a nicotine or cocaine addict. The fMRI image of a cocaine addict who is high and a health freak doing exercise had an uncanny similarity from the perspective of neurochemistry and brain imaging. Lack of exercise is a technology problem. Today we don't even walk to our neighbour to chat; we pick up the mobile instead. And then there is the lure of sitting back at home knowing that the world of entertainment is just a click away. Some 150 minutes of exercise a week translates into 30 minutes a day for five days a week, or two 15 minute sessions of brisk walking. And that 15 minutes of apparent 'waste-of-time' would not only reduce your 'waist-in-time' but also reduce the chances of your developing high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease and stroke, each by 30 per cent. A similar reduction of chance of depression and consequent improvement of self-confidence would be a bonus. Powering your life and staying heart healthy is possible by getting hooked on to a new addiction - 'daily exercise'. All you need is to hold on till the initial hiccough is over - and then it would be bliss. Q. All of the following statements can be inferred from the passage, EXCEPT that:

Technology manifests comforting ways that tempt us precluding the need to expend physical effort.

The more activated the areas of a man's body, the happier is the man.

It is always unpleasant to initiate a habit; the euphoria not catching up any soon.

Different activities activate different regions in the brain.

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question. Ask any hardcore substance addict (try this only when they are sober) how his or her very first experience was, and they will for sure tell you it was not a very pleasant one. The violent cough of the first puff, the distaste of the first sip, the bitterness of the powder, hits them first; the feel-good factor and ecstasy that ends up in an unbreakable bond comes slowly, and much later. That's why we urge you to start the new addiction programme now, whatever be the initial hiccups. Every patient is different, from shy and submissive to bold and aggressive; some are dead scared of injections while others go in for heart surgery with a smile. But the 'argumentative' types are special and the most difficult to handle; give them a piece of advice and they would be ready with an instant counter-argument. But it is these argumentative ones who teach the old doctors a new trick or two, by asking odd and embarrassing questions, forcing us to dig up old medical journals or try surfing the Net. That's exactly what happened when this young man asked me: ''I am not overweight, neither do I have diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease. Then why do you want me to exercise?'' The answer to that question is far from simple. fMRI, or functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, is a system that can track blood circulation and show the intensity of activation of a localised area of the brain during a specific activity. Reading, for example, activates the occipital cortex, speaking lights up the speech area, while decision-making switches on the frontal cortex. In a study researchers looked into the fMRI pattern in those who do regular exercise, and found that a 'C'-shaped structure, the caudate nucleus, a part of the basal ganglia, becomes highly active. This is caused by flooding of that area by a neurotransmitter called dopamine. This area is the reward area of the brain, and such activation makes the person feel happy. But what stumped the researchers was that the pattern of activation matched the fMRI imaging pattern of a nicotine or cocaine addict. The fMRI image of a cocaine addict who is high and a health freak doing exercise had an uncanny similarity from the perspective of neurochemistry and brain imaging. Lack of exercise is a technology problem. Today we don't even walk to our neighbour to chat; we pick up the mobile instead. And then there is the lure of sitting back at home knowing that the world of entertainment is just a click away. Some 150 minutes of exercise a week translates into 30 minutes a day for five days a week, or two 15 minute sessions of brisk walking. And that 15 minutes of apparent 'waste-of-time' would not only reduce your 'waist-in-time' but also reduce the chances of your developing high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease and stroke, each by 30 per cent. A similar reduction of chance of depression and consequent improvement of self-confidence would be a bonus. Powering your life and staying heart healthy is possible by getting hooked on to a new addiction - 'daily exercise'. All you need is to hold on till the initial hiccough is over - and then it would be bliss. Q. It can be inferred from the author's mention of the phrase 'waste-of-time' that he believes

Time being no less valuable to him as to his patients

Time to be something that one is too short of but still wastes

Time to be allocated in small units on certain tasks to reap large benefits in the long term

Time, no matter how less, allows it to be used for seemingly better alternatives

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question. Ask any hardcore substance addict (try this only when they are sober) how his or her very first experience was, and they will for sure tell you it was not a very pleasant one. The violent cough of the first puff, the distaste of the first sip, the bitterness of the powder, hits them first; the feel-good factor and ecstasy that ends up in an unbreakable bond comes slowly, and much later. That's why we urge you to start the new addiction programme now, whatever be the initial hiccups. Every patient is different, from shy and submissive to bold and aggressive; some are dead scared of injections while others go in for heart surgery with a smile. But the 'argumentative' types are special and the most difficult to handle; give them a piece of advice and they would be ready with an instant counter-argument. But it is these argumentative ones who teach the old doctors a new trick or two, by asking odd and embarrassing questions, forcing us to dig up old medical journals or try surfing the Net. That's exactly what happened when this young man asked me: ''I am not overweight, neither do I have diabetes, high blood pressure or heart disease. Then why do you want me to exercise?'' The answer to that question is far from simple. fMRI, or functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging, is a system that can track blood circulation and show the intensity of activation of a localised area of the brain during a specific activity. Reading, for example, activates the occipital cortex, speaking lights up the speech area, while decision-making switches on the frontal cortex. In a study researchers looked into the fMRI pattern in those who do regular exercise, and found that a 'C'-shaped structure, the caudate nucleus, a part of the basal ganglia, becomes highly active. This is caused by flooding of that area by a neurotransmitter called dopamine. This area is the reward area of the brain, and such activation makes the person feel happy. They also discovered that exercise released a hormone called BDNF (Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor) and endorphins, which resulted in such activation. While BDNF neutralised stress, endorphins took away the pain and fatigue of the exercise. But what stumped the researchers was that the pattern of activation matched the fMRI imaging pattern of a nicotine or cocaine addict. The fMRI image of a cocaine addict who is high and a health freak doing exercise had an uncanny similarity from the perspective of neurochemistry and brain imaging. Lack of exercise is a technology problem. Today we don't even walk to our neighbour to chat; we pick up the mobile instead. And then there is the lure of sitting back at home knowing that the world of entertainment is just a click away, right in front of us, in our bedroom on LCD TV in high definition. Some 150 minutes of exercise a week translates into 30 minutes a day for five days a week, which you can split it up into two 15 minute sessions of brisk walking. And that 15 minutes of apparent 'waste-of-time' would not only reduce your 'waist-in-time' but also reduce the chances of your developing high blood pressure, diabetes, heart disease and stroke, each by 30 per cent. A similar reduction of chance of depression and consequent improvement of self-confidence would be a bonus. For the eight-to-five creatures, who claim to be too busy, we advise them to walk or cycle to office. The theme of World Heart Day, which fell last week on September 29, was, 'power your life' and stay heart healthy. You can do that by getting hooked on to a new addiction - 'daily exercise'. All you need is to hold on till the initial hiccough is over - and then it would be bliss. No legal restrictions, side-effects or withdrawal problems. Q. According to the passage, which of the following revelations was rather surprising?

Waste of time–two 15 minute sessions of brisk walking a day–could well reduce 'waist-in-time'.

The brain imaging of a substance addict and a die-hard fitness addict may not be much different.

The argumentative types are the people that have lessons for the medical fraternity.

None of the options listed here.

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Beliefs in witchcraft in the generic sense are conspicuous in most small-scale communities where interaction is based upon personal relationships that tend to be life-long and difficult to break. In such societies belief in witches makes it possible for misfortunes to be explained in terms of disturbed social relationships; and the threat either of being accused of witchcraft or of being attacked by witches may well be a source of social control, making people more circumspect about their conduct toward others. Witches who are blamed for misfortunes, while visit near kinsmen and neighbours, are conceived of as inhuman and beyond the pale of decent society. They are, thus, convenient scapegoats who are blamed for events otherwise inexplicable in terms of the limited empirical knowledge prevailing in a society with a poorly developed technology - e.g., events such as sudden death or persistent illness or even accidents. This explanatory function of witchcraft is widespread. So too are some of the details of the witch's believed habits and techniques, such as operating at night flying through the air on broomsticks or saucer shaped winnowing baskets. The inherent disharmonies in the social system are cloaked under an insistence that there is harmony in the values of the society, and the surface disturbances that they cause are attributed to the wickedness of individuals. This is why the witch and sorcerer become the villains of the society's morality plays, the ones to whom the most inhuman crimes and characteristics are attributed. So numerous and so revolting are the believed practices of witches that to accuse anyone of witchcraft is a condensed way of charging him with a long list of the foulest crimes - and much the same may be said of sorcery, except that the alleged sorcerer might find some room for defence in the ambiguity as to when the use of destructive magic is legitimate and when it is to be regarded as sorcery. Because accusations of witchcraft, if they are successful, are devastating attacks on reputation, they punctuate the micro-political processes relating to many forms of competition for some scarce status, power, resource, or personal affiliation. The believed victim of witchcraft or sorcery may also sometimes be regarded as getting his just deserts if he has, by tactless folly, incurred the wrath of dangerous, powerful persons in the community. Because in such belief systems the transgressors of a society's ideals are depicted with dramatic disapproval, witchcraft and sorcery are usually powerful brakes upon social change. In many preliterate societies in modem times it is often those who have progressed economically and educationally who are most obsessed by fears of attack by witches and sorcerers or of accusation of employing witchcraft or sorcery. This is because they find themselves either out of line in social orders that economically at least are equalitarian or with a new-found status that lacks a niche in the traditional hierarchy. On the other hand, belief in witchcraft may, under certain circumstances, have the effect of accelerating social change; e.g., by facilitating the rupture of close relationships that have become redundant but are difficult to break off in such a situation an accusation of witchcraft has the effect of making a public issue out of what started as a private quarrel. Q. According to the author, witches are blamed unnecessarily and made to bear misdeeds of others in small scale communities because

They are condemned in the society for holding certain beliefs that are irreconcilable with the rest of the society

They are mythical figures that have no present relevance in the modern times due to their crude wisdom

They are ostracised from the society because of the superstitious beliefs that they hold

Of the failure on the part of people to explain certain events on account of their limited knowledge

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Beliefs in witchcraft in the generic sense are conspicuous in most small-scale communities where interaction is based upon personal relationships that tend to be life-long and difficult to break. In such societies belief in witches makes it possible for misfortunes to be explained in terms of disturbed social relationships; and the threat either of being accused of witchcraft or of being attacked by witches may well be a source of social control, making people more circumspect about their conduct toward others. Witches who are blamed for misfortunes, while visit near kinsmen and neighbours, are conceived of as inhuman and beyond the pale of decent society. They are, thus, convenient scapegoats who are blamed for events otherwise inexplicable in terms of the limited empirical knowledge prevailing in a society with a poorly developed technology - e.g., events such as sudden death or persistent illness or even accidents. This explanatory function of witchcraft is widespread. So too are some of the details of the witch's believed habits and techniques, such as operating at night flying through the air on broomsticks or saucer shaped winnowing baskets. The inherent disharmonies in the social system are cloaked under an insistence that there is harmony in the values of the society, and the surface disturbances that they cause are attributed to the wickedness of individuals. This is why the witch and sorcerer become the villains of the society's morality plays, the ones to whom the most inhuman crimes and characteristics are attributed. So numerous and so revolting are the believed practices of witches that to accuse anyone of witchcraft is a condensed way of charging him with a long list of the foulest crimes - and much the same may be said of sorcery, except that the alleged sorcerer might find some room for defence in the ambiguity as to when the use of destructive magic is legitimate and when it is to be regarded as sorcery. Because accusations of witchcraft, if they are successful, are devastating attacks on reputation, they punctuate the micro-political processes relating to many forms of competition for some scarce status, power, resource, or personal affiliation. The believed victim of witchcraft or sorcery may also sometimes be regarded as getting his just deserts if he has, by tactless folly, incurred the wrath of dangerous, powerful persons in the community. Because in such belief systems the transgressors of a society's ideals are depicted with dramatic disapproval, witchcraft and sorcery are usually powerful brakes upon social change. In many preliterate societies in modem times it is often those who have progressed economically and educationally who are most obsessed by fears of attack by witches and sorcerers or of accusation of employing witchcraft or sorcery. This is because they find themselves either out of line in social orders that economically at least are equalitarian or with a new-found status that lacks a niche in the traditional hierarchy. On the other hand, belief in witchcraft may, under certain circumstances, have the effect of accelerating social change; e.g., by facilitating the rupture of close relationships that have become redundant but are difficult to break off in such a situation an accusation of witchcraft has the effect of making a public issue out of what started as a private quarrel. Q. The author asserts that belief in witchcraft, by helping to break redundant close relationships, can

Potentially accelerate societal change

Cause troubles in familial hierarchy

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Beliefs in witchcraft in the generic sense are conspicuous in most small-scale communities where interaction is based upon personal relationships that tend to be life-long and difficult to break. In such societies belief in witches makes it possible for misfortunes to be explained in terms of disturbed social relationships; and the threat either of being accused of witchcraft or of being attacked by witches may well be a source of social control, making people more circumspect about their conduct toward others. Witches who are blamed for misfortunes, while visit near kinsmen and neighbours, are conceived of as inhuman and beyond the pale of decent society. They are, thus, convenient scapegoats who are blamed for events otherwise inexplicable in terms of the limited empirical knowledge prevailing in a society with a poorly developed technology - e.g., events such as sudden death or persistent illness or even accidents. This explanatory function of witchcraft is widespread. So too are some of the details of the witch's believed habits and techniques, such as operating at night flying through the air on broomsticks or saucer shaped winnowing baskets. The inherent disharmonies in the social system are cloaked under an insistence that there is harmony in the values of the society, and the surface disturbances that they cause are attributed to the wickedness of individuals. This is why the witch and sorcerer become the villains of the society's morality plays, the ones to whom the most inhuman crimes and characteristics are attributed. So numerous and so revolting are the believed practices of witches that to accuse anyone of witchcraft is a condensed way of charging him with a long list of the foulest crimes - and much the same may be said of sorcery, except that the alleged sorcerer might find some room for defence in the ambiguity as to when the use of destructive magic is legitimate and when it is to be regarded as sorcery. Because accusations of witchcraft, if they are successful, are devastating attacks on reputation, they punctuate the micro-political processes relating to many forms of competition for some scarce status, power, resource, or personal affiliation. The believed victim of witchcraft or sorcery may also sometimes be regarded as getting his just deserts if he has, by tactless folly, incurred the wrath of dangerous, powerful persons in the community. Because in such belief systems the transgressors of a society's ideals are depicted with dramatic disapproval, witchcraft and sorcery are usually powerful brakes upon social change. In many preliterate societies in modem times it is often those who have progressed economically and educationally who are most obsessed by fears of attack by witches and sorcerers or of accusation of employing witchcraft or sorcery. This is because they find themselves either out of line in social orders that economically at least are equalitarian or with a new-found status that lacks a niche in the traditional hierarchy. On the other hand, belief in witchcraft may, under certain circumstances, have the effect of accelerating social change; e.g., by facilitating the rupture of close relationships that have become redundant but are difficult to break off in such a situation an accusation of witchcraft has the effect of making a public issue out of what started as a private quarrel. Q. According to the author, an alleged sorcerer is sometimes better off when compared to a witch as

Sorcery is acceptable to the society than witchcraft as many people can relate to those practices.

People think sorcery is beneficial in protecting their property and regularly seek their help.

There is a dispute in deciding a yardstick as to when it is acceptable and when it is criminal.

Sorcery is not considered to be evil as great as witchcraft as it helps the sorcerer earn a living.

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Beliefs in witchcraft in the generic sense are conspicuous in most small-scale communities where interaction is based upon personal relationships that tend to be life-long and difficult to break. In such societies belief in witches makes it possible for misfortunes to be explained in terms of disturbed social relationships; and the threat either of being accused of witchcraft or of being attacked by witches may well be a source of social control, making people more circumspect about their conduct toward others. Witches who are blamed for misfortunes, while visit near kinsmen and neighbours, are conceived of as inhuman and beyond the pale of decent society. They are, thus, convenient scapegoats who are blamed for events otherwise inexplicable in terms of the limited empirical knowledge prevailing in a society with a poorly developed technology - e.g., events such as sudden death or persistent illness or even accidents. This explanatory function of witchcraft is widespread. So too are some of the details of the witch's believed habits and techniques, such as operating at night flying through the air on broomsticks or saucer shaped winnowing baskets. The inherent disharmonies in the social system are cloaked under an insistence that there is harmony in the values of the society, and the surface disturbances that they cause are attributed to the wickedness of individuals. This is why the witch and sorcerer become the villains of the society's morality plays, the ones to whom the most inhuman crimes and characteristics are attributed. So numerous and so revolting are the believed practices of witches that to accuse anyone of witchcraft is a condensed way of charging him with a long list of the foulest crimes - and much the same may be said of sorcery, except that the alleged sorcerer might find some room for defence in the ambiguity as to when the use of destructive magic is legitimate and when it is to be regarded as sorcery. Because accusations of witchcraft, if they are successful, are devastating attacks on reputation, they punctuate the micro-political processes relating to many forms of competition for some scarce status, power, resource, or personal affiliation. The believed victim of witchcraft or sorcery may also sometimes be regarded as getting his just deserts if he has, by tactless folly, incurred the wrath of dangerous, powerful persons in the community. Because in such belief systems the transgressors of a society's ideals are depicted with dramatic disapproval, witchcraft and sorcery are usually powerful brakes upon social change. In many preliterate societies in modem times it is often those who have progressed economically and educationally who are most obsessed by fears of attack by witches and sorcerers or of accusation of employing witchcraft or sorcery. This is because they find themselves either out of line in social orders that economically at least are equalitarian or with a new-found status that lacks a niche in the traditional hierarchy. On the other hand, belief in witchcraft may, under certain circumstances, have the effect of accelerating social change; e.g., by facilitating the rupture of close relationships that have become redundant but are difficult to break off in such a situation an accusation of witchcraft has the effect of making a public issue out of what started as a private quarrel. Q. According to the author, successful accusation of witchcraft can prove to be disastrous on reputation when

There is a competition for power or status in a micro-political process

The victims are very poor and do not have the means to uplift themselves

The victims are eccentric and are carrying a stigma in a society

The close kinsmen of the victims are believed to be the witches

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage: The famous gorilla experiment conducted by Harvard University when a woman dressed in a gorilla suit ambled across the floor thumping her chest, but 50 % of the audience didn't notice. The study shows we often err when it comes to concentration and perception. Humans have a limited capacity for attention which in turn means that we have a limited capacity to process information at any given point of time. When we open our eyes, the whole image gets projected on the retina, but only selective parts of the image are sensed by the brain. This is because as the amount of information in the image was too great to be processed, the brain selectively puts its attention on the most important aspects. Scientists have found that highly prominent events may go unnoticed. Researchers now recognize a phenomenon known as "change blindness", which means that people often fail to detect changes in their field of vision, so long that the change takes place during an eye movement or when the view is somehow interrupted. It has been discovered that our brain tries to construct a meaningful whole out of stimuli that fits in with the scenario of its interest and is capable of discarding majority of other information. This fact can be easily explained by observing a child play the game "spot the difference". On the first look the child finds the pictures to be similar. Only after careful attention, does he find the differences. The present decade has seen a lot of research into this field. The questions that the scientists are trying to answer are: What is the amount of visual input a brain can consciously and unconsciously encode? Why do some objects come in the field of observation and not others? What happens to information that is subconsciously perceived? Arien Mack and Irvin Rock also conducted many experiments and co-authored a book "Inattentional Blindness" in 1998. One of their experiments was very simple. They asked the subjects to observe a cross on the computer screen. The subjects were repetitively asked to judge which arm of the cross was longer. They were in a way made to concentrate on the cross. After some time, unrepentantly, another brightly coloured object was inserted in their field of vision. The researchers reported that the participants often failed to notice the unexpected object on the screen, even when it appeared in the middle of their line of vision. The study gave a conclusive proof that there exists a wide gulf between perception and attention. Some psychologists are of the view that intentional blindness may be in some way related to selective memory instead of selective perception. The cause of the 'intentional amnesia' may be organic, functional or circumstantial. Harvard university researchers have concluded that "we consciously see far less of our world than we think we do. We might well encode much of our visual world without awareness." We believe that we generally see what is in front of us and by basically looking. But looking and seeing are two different events. It has been observed that we look without seeing during moments of intense concentration. We have all observed that our eyes may be open, the images form on the retina, but still we have limited perception. We all remember these moments of blurred visuals and they come usually when either we are in deep thoughts or involved in an interesting conversation. Q. Which of the following statements can be directly inferred from the passage about "Inattentional blindness"?

Intentional blindness, a common phenomenon, is the brain's mechanism to filter out unwanted detail.

We live in a world of our own and tend to ignore even the most conspicuous events.

The mind of a man is like a videotape; the mind recalls what the eyes see.

The cognitive scientists believe that inattentive blindness results from the inhibition of attention.

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage: The famous gorilla experiment conducted by Harvard University when a woman dressed in a gorilla suit ambled across the floor thumping her chest, but 50 % of the audience didn't notice. The study shows we often err when it comes to concentration and perception. Humans have a limited capacity for attention which in turn means that we have a limited capacity to process information at any given point of time. When we open our eyes, the whole image gets projected on the retina, but only selective parts of the image are sensed by the brain. This is because as the amount of information in the image was too great to be processed, the brain selectively puts its attention on the most important aspects. Scientists have found that highly prominent events may go unnoticed. Researchers now recognize a phenomenon known as "change blindness", which means that people often fail to detect changes in their field of vision, so long that the change takes place during an eye movement or when the view is somehow interrupted. It has been discovered that our brain tries to construct a meaningful whole out of stimuli that fits in with the scenario of its interest and is capable of discarding majority of other information. This fact can be easily explained by observing a child play the game "spot the difference". On the first look the child finds the pictures to be similar. Only after careful attention, does he find the differences. The present decade has seen a lot of research into this field. The questions that the scientists are trying to answer are: What is the amount of visual input a brain can consciously and unconsciously encode? Why do some objects come in the field of observation and not others? What happens to information that is subconsciously perceived? Arien Mack and Irvin Rock also conducted many experiments and co-authored a book "Inattentional Blindness" in 1998. One of their experiments was very simple. They asked the subjects to observe a cross on the computer screen. The subjects were repetitively asked to judge which arm of the cross was longer. They were in a way made to concentrate on the cross. After some time, unrepentantly, another brightly coloured object was inserted in their field of vision. The researchers reported that the participants often failed to notice the unexpected object on the screen, even when it appeared in the middle of their line of vision. The study gave a conclusive proof that there exists a wide gulf between perception and attention. Some psychologists are of the view that intentional blindness may be in some way related to selective memory instead of selective perception. The cause of the 'intentional amnesia' may be organic, functional or circumstantial. Harvard university researchers have concluded that "we consciously see far less of our world than we think we do. We might well encode much of our visual world without awareness." We believe that we generally see what is in front of us and by basically looking. But looking and seeing are two different events. It has been observed that we look without seeing during moments of intense concentration. We have all observed that our eyes may be open, the images form on the retina, but still we have limited perception. We all remember these moments of blurred visuals and they come usually when either we are in deep thoughts or involved in an interesting conversation. Q. The primary purpose of the passage is

Report different investigations conducted by the researchers about intentional blindness

illustrate the fact that intentional blindness results when people fail to pay close attention

Describe the views of the cognitive scientists about human perception and attention

Explain the concept of 'intentional blindness' - a cognitive shortcoming in human beings

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage: The famous gorilla experiment conducted by Harvard University when a woman dressed in a gorilla suit ambled across the floor thumping her chest, but 50 % of the audience didn't notice. The study shows we often err when it comes to concentration and perception. Humans have a limited capacity for attention which in turn means that we have a limited capacity to process information at any given point of time. When we open our eyes, the whole image gets projected on the retina, but only selective parts of the image are sensed by the brain. This is because as the amount of information in the image was too great to be processed, the brain selectively puts its attention on the most important aspects. Scientists have found that highly prominent events may go unnoticed. Researchers now recognize a phenomenon known as "change blindness", which means that people often fail to detect changes in their field of vision, so long that the change takes place during an eye movement or when the view is somehow interrupted. It has been discovered that our brain tries to construct a meaningful whole out of stimuli that fits in with the scenario of its interest and is capable of discarding majority of other information. This fact can be easily explained by observing a child play the game "spot the difference". On the first look the child finds the pictures to be similar. Only after careful attention, does he find the differences. The present decade has seen a lot of research into this field. The questions that the scientists are trying to answer are: What is the amount of visual input a brain can consciously and unconsciously encode? Why do some objects come in the field of observation and not others? What happens to information that is subconsciously perceived? Arien Mack and Irvin Rock also conducted many experiments and co-authored a book "Inattentional Blindness" in 1998. One of their experiments was very simple. They asked the subjects to observe a cross on the computer screen. The subjects were repetitively asked to judge which arm of the cross was longer. They were in a way made to concentrate on the cross. After some time, unrepentantly, another brightly coloured object was inserted in their field of vision. The researchers reported that the participants often failed to notice the unexpected object on the screen, even when it appeared in the middle of their line of vision. The study gave a conclusive proof that there exists a wide gulf between perception and attention. Some psychologists are of the view that intentional blindness may be in some way related to selective memory instead of selective perception. The cause of the 'intentional amnesia' may be organic, functional or circumstantial. Harvard university researchers have concluded that "we consciously see far less of our world than we think we do. We might well encode much of our visual world without awareness." We believe that we generally see what is in front of us and by basically looking. But looking and seeing are two different events. It has been observed that we look without seeing during moments of intense concentration. We have all observed that our eyes may be open, the images form on the retina, but still we have limited perception. We all remember these moments of blurred visuals and they come usually when either we are in deep thoughts or involved in an interesting conversation. Q. The passage answers all the below given questions, except:

Why do people, a lot of times, fail to detect changes in their field of vision?

What brings some visual objects to conscious awareness, while others remain unnoticed?

What is the relationship between perception and attention?

Why we consciously think far less about what all we see in the world?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage: The famous gorilla experiment conducted by Harvard University when a woman dressed in a gorilla suit ambled across the floor thumping her chest, but 50 % of the audience didn't notice. The study shows we often err when it comes to concentration and perception. Humans have a limited capacity for attention which in turn means that we have a limited capacity to process information at any given point of time. When we open our eyes, the whole image gets projected on the retina, but only selective parts of the image are sensed by the brain. This is because as the amount of information in the image was too great to be processed, the brain selectively puts its attention on the most important aspects. Scientists have found that highly prominent events may go unnoticed. Researchers now recognize a phenomenon known as "change blindness", which means that people often fail to detect changes in their field of vision, so long that the change takes place during an eye movement or when the view is somehow interrupted. It has been discovered that our brain tries to construct a meaningful whole out of stimuli that fits in with the scenario of its interest and is capable of discarding majority of other information. This fact can be easily explained by observing a child play the game "spot the difference". On the first look the child finds the pictures to be similar. Only after careful attention, does he find the differences. The present decade has seen a lot of research into this field. The questions that the scientists are trying to answer are: What is the amount of visual input a brain can consciously and unconsciously encode? Why do some objects come in the field of observation and not others? What happens to information that is subconsciously perceived? Arien Mack and Irvin Rock also conducted many experiments and co-authored a book "Inattentional Blindness" in 1998. One of their experiments was very simple. They asked the subjects to observe a cross on the computer screen. The subjects were repetitively asked to judge which arm of the cross was longer. They were in a way made to concentrate on the cross. After some time, unrepentantly, another brightly coloured object was inserted in their field of vision. The researchers reported that the participants often failed to notice the unexpected object on the screen, even when it appeared in the middle of their line of vision. The study gave a conclusive proof that there exists a wide gulf between perception and attention. Some psychologists are of the view that intentional blindness may be in some way related to selective memory instead of selective perception. The cause of the 'intentional amnesia' may be organic, functional or circumstantial. Harvard university researchers have concluded that "we consciously see far less of our world than we think we do. We might well encode much of our visual world without awareness." We believe that we generally see what is in front of us and by basically looking. But looking and seeing are two different events. It has been observed that we look without seeing during moments of intense concentration. We have all observed that our eyes may be open, the images form on the retina, but still we have limited perception. We all remember these moments of blurred visuals and they come usually when either we are in deep thoughts or involved in an interesting conversation. Q. The role of the last paragraph of the passage is to

Lend credence to the concept through empirical evidence

Allay the apprehensions of skeptics

Support the thesis with corroborating opinions, based on scientific findings

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage. A dream pictures earthly beauty to our eyes in a truly heavenly splendour and clothes dignity with the highest majesty. It shows us everyday fears in the ghastliest shape and turns our amusement into jokes of indescribable pungency. And sometimes when we are awake and still under the full impact of an experience like one of these, we cannot but feel that never in our life has the real world offered us its equal.

Dreams help envision the good and bad of life in their weirdest forms.

A dream often enhances the effects of everything corporal through a somewhat strangely idealistic interpretation.

Life's experiences in their utmost manifestation nearest to reality can only be sensed in one's dreams.

A dream tends to have a deep understanding of real-life experiences, thereby pushing the limits of a sane and sober mind.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage. Helvetius, amongst many false positions and licentious reveries, observes with much justice, that the education of man begins at his birth, and is carried on during the whole course of his life. The lowest mechanic, though he may not have distinct and accurate science, has yet such a store of geography, of natural history, of mechanics, and other parts of knowledge, that were his mind to be emptied of it, the wretched vacancy would amaze us.

Helvetius fairly discerns education to be part of the knowledge the human mind amasses while living.

Education is an evolving subject and begins at birth.

Workers with lowly jobs would have gained more knowledge from their work than by studying accurate science.

Helvetius rightly places education on the pedestal of experience.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage. One principle of life drives man. This principle is physical sensibility. What produces in him this sensibility? A feeling of love for pleasure, and of hatred for pain? It is from both these feelings joined together in man and always present in his mind that is formed what one calls in him the feeling of self-love. This self-love engenders the desire for happiness; the desire for happiness that for power; and it is this latter that in turn brings forth envy, avarice, ambition and generally all the artificial passions, which, under different names, are only a disguised love of power in us and applied to the various means of obtaining it.

Ambitions and passions naturally orient man's life towards self-indulgence.

Happiness is a function of power that cannot be achieved if one is an altruist.

Envy, avarice, ambition and passions are innate feelings that only help man navigate through his life.

The pursuit of power that elicits from self-love is paradoxical in that it only makes man more vulnerable.

CAT Mock Test - 11 Free MCQ Practice Test with Solutions

EduRev

All Courses

Open App

	CAT Mock Test Series 2024 16 videos\|27 docs\|58 tests

	CAT Mock Test Series 2024 16 videos\|27 docs\|58 tests

Important Questions for CAT Mock Test - 11

Find all the important questions for CAT Mock Test - 11 at EduRev.Get fully prepared for CAT Mock Test - 11 with EduRev's comprehensive question bank and test resources. Our platform offers a diverse range of question papers covering various topics within the CAT Mock Test - 11 syllabus. Whether you need to review specific subjects or assess your overall readiness, EduRev has you covered. The questions are designed to challenge you and help you gain confidence in tackling the actual exam. Maximize your chances of success by utilizing EduRev's extensive collection of CAT Mock Test - 11 resources.

CAT Mock Test - 11 MCQs with Answers

Prepare for the CAT Mock Test - 11 within the CAT exam with comprehensive MCQs and answers at EduRev. Our platform offers a wide range of practice papers, question papers, and mock tests to familiarize you with the exam pattern and syllabus. Access the best books, study materials, and notes curated by toppers to enhance your preparation. Stay updated with the exam date and receive expert preparation tips and paper analysis. Visit EduRev's official website today and access a wealth of videos and coaching resources to excel in your exam.

Online Tests for CAT Mock Test - 11 CAT Mock Test Series 2024

Practice with a wide array of question papers that follow the exam pattern and syllabus. Our platform offers a user-friendly interface, allowing you to track your progress and identify areas for improvement. Access detailed solutions and explanations for each test to enhance your understanding of concepts. With EduRev's Online Tests, you can build confidence, boost your performance, and ace CAT Mock Test - 11 with ease. Join thousands of successful students who have benefited from our trusted online resources.

Education Revolution