CAT Mock Test- 4 - CAT MCQ

This can be inferred from the passage when it states that the Stoics offered an operating system that dealt with anxiety, stress, fear, and troubling questions like "What do I want out of life?" Their ultimate answer to these issues was to seek enduring happiness and tranquillity of mind, which comes from being a virtuous person. Additionally, the passage mentions that the Stoic philosophy focused on how to live a virtuous life, maximize happiness, and reduce negative emotions. Therefore, it can be inferred that Stoicism emphasizes the importance of virtue and inner peace in achieving enduring happiness.

The penultimate paragraph describes Epictetus' philosophy, where it is said that a person suffers when they tether their happiness to worldly possessions, which depend upon chance. Hence, he implies that chance does not directly affect the well-being of a person, but is affected when a person identifies their happiness in their possessions, which are subject to fate. Option C is in line with this.

Option A couples fate and well being, which is in direct contradiction to Epictetus's philosophy. Hence, it can be eliminated.

"But acceptance of this does not have to lead to fatalistic resignation in the assumption that because some things are out of our control, so too is our well-being."

Option B is again in contradiction to what is said. Epictetus does not distinguish between external and internal well-being and says that all well-being is under a person's control. Hence, Option B can be eliminated too.

Option D has not been implied in the passage. Moreover, goes against the main point stated in the penultimate paragraph, as mentioned above.

The Stoics take a very different view of misfortune than most people. They expect mishaps and use them as opportunities to hone their virtues.

A stoic response to adversity would be one where a person uses adversity as an opportunity to hone his/her virtues. Instead of woefully ruminating or complaining about the misfortune, a person would start working on his/her skills or engage in some other meaningful task. The focus would be on using the misfortune as an opportunity to improve themselves.

In Option A, the person decides to work on her technical skills instead of fretting over the loss of her job. Hence, A would be counted as a Stoic response.

In Option B, the student decides to prepare for competitive examinations when he is unable to attend the classes. He makes productive use of his time in the face of adversity. Hence, B is also an example of a Stoic response.

In Option D, the textile worker mentioned starts learning hand embroidery to support herself, instead of focusing on the fact that she lost a leg. She engages in a productive activity instead of fretting over her misfortune, and hence D is also an example of a Stoic response.

Option C does not classify as a stoic response. Though the person is engaging in an activity, we cannot say that rebuilding the house is working on honing their virtues. Moreover, a house is an external possession and not internal virtue which is the focus of Stoicism.

"People's primary concern was to avoid living an unfortunate life. Therefore, they were more likely to order their thoughts, decisions, and behaviours to promote increased life satisfaction."

These lines from the first paragraph state that since people wanted to avoid living an unfortunate life, they were likely to alter their thought processes, decision making and behaviour such that it increased their life satisfaction. Hence, we can infer that a direct consequence would be people making changes to themselves, such that their life satisfaction is increased. Hence Option C can be inferred.

Option A is mentioned in the same paragraph but is not implied as a direct consequence.

Option B is not a direct consequence, as people refer to philosophies like them to find answers to difficult questions, not necessarily to avoid an unfortunate life.

Option D is also not a direct consequence mentioned, as it mentions people embracing Stoicism, which is too specific. Ordering of thought, decisions and behaviour is not the same as embracing the same from as school of philosophy. Hence, it is a distortion and can be eliminated.

"In times of plague and trauma, we moderns seek to protect ourselves with prayers, charms, sigils and spells as much as any medieval peasant." Option A can be inferred from this line.

"various occult sciences - astrology, alchemy, kabbalah, geomancy, dream interpretation - became an important basis for empire more than ever before. The ability to predict the future with divination, then change it with magic, was of obvious political, military and economic interest." Hence, we can infer that magic as a means to predict/portend the future and alter it for certain purposes has been presented in the passage. Option C can be inferred.

"Many considered it alchemy’s sister, both sciences being predicated on the harnessing of cosmic correspondences and natural sympathies to restore elemental equilibrium in the human body - the definition of health. Techniques for life-extension were also central to the alchemical quest." Option D echoes the above point and hence, can be eliminated.

Option B has not been stated in the passage. 

The author highlights the following similarities between premodern medicine and alchemy in the fourth paragraph-

-"both sciences...predicated on the harnessing of cosmic correspondences and natural sympathies to restore elemental equilibrium in the human body - the definition of health."

-"Techniques for life-extension were also central to the alchemical quest."

Hence, we can infer that the similarity between the two was that they both were practised as an occult science and relied on occult methods such as harnessing cosmic correspondences and natural sympathies.

Option A is a distortion. Both sciences sought to restore the elemental equilibrium in the human body, but the author does not assert that they sought equitable health outcomes.

Option B is correct. It is based on the first of the two similarities outlined above.

Option C is wrong. They attempted to restore the elemental equilibrium, i.e., the natural state, and not alter it. 

Option D is also a distortion. Both sciences sought to restore an original elemental equilibrium. The creation of a new equilibrium has not been implied in the passage.

"Humans often appear to react irrationally in the face of disease, as the COVID-19 pandemic has shown. Many cling to religion or become superstitious. Others become fatalistic. In times of plague and trauma, we moderns seek to protect ourselves with prayers, charms, sigils and spells as much as any medieval peasant. That a surgical mask is hygienic doesn’t make it any less of a magical symbol."

The first paragraph is about how humans act irrationally in the face of disease, and how they have different coping mechanisms. The author also states that we protect ourselves with prayers and other occult practices like a medieval peasant would have done. But the last line of the passage has a deeper significance than just stating a fact. It acts as a justification for the previous lines. The author here justifies that a surgical mask could be construed as a magical symbol, in spite of it having scientific utility. The author has mentioned the mask here as a proof that modern humans do behave irrationally, just as they did in earlier times. Option C perfectly captures this.

The author explicitly mentions Option A, and this is not the purpose why he mentions the mask as explained above. Hence, A can be eliminated.

Option B is not the main contention of the author while mentioning the surgical masks, as it does not help his argument in any way. Hence B can be eliminated.

The author does not draw a parallel between occult and scientific practices but between the way humans reacted to disease in the pre-modern era and how they react to it in the modern era. Hence, D can be eliminated too.

Hence, Option C is the answer.

"Western Europe saw a parallel upsurge of occultism - much of it from Arabic sources - which we now call the Renaissance. The scientific revolution that followed continued the same trend: historians now admit that saints of science such as Johannes Kepler, Francis Bacon, Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton were likewise raving occultists."

So, while the Islamic world witnessed an occult-scientific revolution, the Western world also witnessed a surge in interest for the occult, thanks to Arabic sources. And this surge in interest/popularity continued during the subsequent scientific revolution as well. 

Only option D conveys the above inference. Option D is the answer 

In the former half of the passage, the author discusses the cons of the meritocracy system and how it has meandered away from its original objectives. But, in the latter half, the author makes a case for the continued adoption of the meritocracy system, highlighting its role in enabling economic efficiency and social equality. Towards the end, the author states, "The solution to the inequalities produced by meritocracy’s success is to tax the winners rather than to bind Prometheus." Here, the author advocates the need for positive changes to the system rather than completely doing away with it.

Comparing the options, option C captures the author's view correctly. Option C is the answer.

Option A is out of scope. The link between idealism and realism cannot be inferred from the passage.

Option B is extreme. The evidence has not been described as overwhelmingly in favour of the viewpoint that meritocracy breeds inequality. The author merely attempts to bring out the two sides of the system.

Option D is an exaggeration. The author does not imply that any system can be hijacked by the elite for their own benefit. Hence, option d can be eliminated.

The following is Mankiw's version of 'just deserts'- "Meritocracy holds that “a person who contributes more to society deserves a higher income that reflects those greater contributions.” Moreover, meritocracy measures each person’s contribution as the market value that she adds “to society’s production of goods and services.”

The following is the author's take on the same- "someone who contributes more to prosperity deserves a higher income that reflects their greater contribution."

Hence, the key difference between the two versions is how they quantify the contributions of an individual. While Mankiw focuses on the market value-added, the author is more concerned about the ability of the contribution to improve the prosperity of the society, i.e., the benefits to the society.

Comparing the options, option D is closest to the above interpretation and is the answer.

Option A is wrong. Mankiw does measure individual contribution based on market value-added.

Option B is a distortion. The author is concerned about prosperity in general and not just the social status of the individual. Both are not interchangeable.

Option C is wrong. The author only suggests a scale to quantify individual contributions and does not advance the exclusion of any particular kind of contribution.

"The solution to the inequalities produced by meritocracy’s success is to tax the winners rather than to bind Prometheus."

The last line of the passage is an argument in the favour of implementing pragmatic reforms rather than getting rid of meritocracy. Here, 'tax the winners' refers to the pragmatic reform advocated by the author and 'bind Prometheus' is the metaphor for doing away with meritocracy. (Prometheus is a greek mythological creature who signifies the striving and development of humans, and who was bound by Zeus. Hence the metaphor is apt in signifying that doing away with meritocracy, which has yielded many benefits, is like binding Prometheus. The mythological part is irrelevant to the answer, and one must only understand the context to identify the meaning of the metaphor). Hence, the answer is Option B.

The phrase does not advocate anything and just stands as a metaphor. Hence, A is eliminated.

Mentioning a Greek mythological character is neither the author's contention here, though the metaphor does mean this. C would have been the answer if the meaning of the phrase was asked, but will be eliminated here.

The phrase does not mean what is mentioned in Option D. Hence, it can be eliminated.

The author states the following about the developments in finance in the second and the third paragraph-

"super-educated elites have developed technologies—financial instruments, digital tools and legal regimes—that dramatically favour their own skills."

" But the innovation is not a true advance, and the new style of finance does not make a greater social contribution than the old."

From the above lines, options A and C can be inferred.

Also, in the opening line of the second paragraph, the author talks about meritocratic hierarchies distorting wages. And then goes on to establish this claim with the help of the finance industry example. In the latter half of the passage, the author notes that no other industry has higher wages, but also asserts that the innovations in finance have not led to greater social contributions. Hence, wages distort the true worth of a skill. Option D can be inferred as well.

Option B cannot be inferred. Meritocracy allows elites to promote skills favourable to them, true, but it cannot be concluded that this helps improve their own image or brand value. Option B is the answer.

"Yet to recognise something as true is to be influenced by evidence or affected by the world - and in many ways knowledge limits our freedom."

Option B can be inferred from the latter half of the above line.

In the passage, the author highlights the differences between doubt and irony and notes the following- "..critical scrutiny is crucial in science and an intrinsic part of scientific progress. The pursuit of knowledge goes hand in hand with doubt." Hence, option C can be inferred.

In the penultimate paragraph, the author highlights the example of free immigration activists rejecting the notion of borders as an example of an attitude of irony, which is driven by the pursuit of freedom from reality/knowledge. Option D can be inferred as well.

Option A cannot be concluded. The author discusses examples of ironists who interacted with the world, despite having no commitment to truth. Option A is the answer.

The situations category of individuals highlighted in Options A, B and D fulfil the criterion to be tagged as "Kierkegaard’s Socrates" - Individuals who are "happy to trade knowledge for freedom"; they are not truly invested in truth but are satisfied with their ignorance {Doubt is something we suffer insofar as we are invested in the truth but find it hard to verify our beliefs. The doubter feels alienated from reality and wants to get back in touch with it. The ironist, on the other hand, triumphs in this alienation. He does not love the truth; he loves the freedom that comes from not believing.}

Option C does not show a wilful ignoring of knowledge. The said companies might still sell those drinks for occasional consumption. 

The author notes the following about irony in the second paragraph-"There is a form of scepticism which cannot be taken as a scientific or otherwise theoretical attitude at all.So although climate science denial presents itself as a kind of doubt, based on an alternative interpretation of evidence, much of it should be understood as a practical attitude. It is not interested in knowledge to begin with. Instead, it seeks freedom from knowledge. " Option A can be inferred.

"Doubt is something we suffer insofar as we are invested in the truth but find it hard to verify our beliefs. The doubter feels alienated from reality and wants to get back in touch with it. The ironist, on the other hand, triumphs in this alienation. He does not love the truth; he loves the freedom that comes from not believing."

From the above lines, options B and D can be inferred. 

Though the doubter is invested in truth and seeks knowledge, this exercise has not been mentioned as an attempt to gain freedom. Furthermore, in the opening paragraph, the author states that "knowledge limits our freedom". Hence, option C cannot be concluded,

The author highlights the significance of critical scrutiny in the pursuit of knowledge in the first paragraph. However, he adds that climate change denial deviates from such scepticism wherein people are invested in pursuing truth or knowledge. Instead, such individuals find denial as a way to seek freedom from knowledge. This point is correctly captured in Option D.

The statement in Option A captures just a segment of the discussion and does not present it in its entirety. 

Options B and C are not implied via the discussion and, therefore, can be eliminated.

The correct sequence of the sentences provided in the question is indeed 4, 2, 3, 1. Let's break down each sentence and understand how they logically flow together to form a coherent paragraph:

• The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Jones v. Mississippi makes it easier for judges to sentence children to life in prison with no chance of parole. This sentence introduces the central idea of the paragraph, which is the recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the sentencing of juveniles to life in prison without parole. It sets the context for the subsequent sentences.
• This new ruling claims that the early teen years cast the die for how someone is likely to behave for the rest of their lives. Sentence 2 elaborates on the implications of the recent ruling mentioned in sentence 4. It explains that the ruling is based on the belief that behavior during early teenage years determines future behavior. This sentence provides insight into the rationale behind the ruling.
• It ignores the very scientific evidence that influenced and guided previous court decisions. Following the introduction of the recent ruling and its rationale in sentences 4 and 2, sentence 3 provides a critical perspective. It suggests that the recent ruling disregards or overlooks scientific evidence that was previously considered in similar court decisions. This statement challenges the validity or completeness of the reasoning behind the recent ruling.
• This argument woefully ignores the neuroscience that explains why juveniles should not be treated as adults. Finally, sentence 1 concludes the paragraph by explicitly stating the main critique or argument against the recent ruling. It points out that the ruling fails to consider neuroscience evidence that supports the idea that juveniles should not be treated as adults in the criminal justice system. This sentence reinforces the perspective introduced in sentence 3 and provides a clear critique of the ruling.

The paragraph is about how the study of tree rings can be used to reach conclusions about the state of warming in a region. 3 introduces the study by stating that tree rings can be used to study the climate and weather conditions of a region. 4 then mentions an example where the method was utilized. 2 and 1 then reach conclusions from the study. Here 21 is the appropriate order, as 2 better conjoins the two parts of the paragraph because of the presence of 'It was found that...'. Hence, the correct order is 3421.

The answer is 35142. Out of all the given options, statement 3 serves as the best introductory sentence because it tells about the rich literary heritage that includes the Russian folklore of various periods and also about the various phases of the literary schools through which Russia had passed at different points of time till the eighteenth century. Statement 1 cannot be the introductory sentence because it begins with "In discussing the ... the revolution of 1917" and there are other sentences which deals with literary heritage of different periods of time prior to the revolution. This proves that this particular sentence comes somewhere in the middle of the passage. Statement 5 cannot be the introductory sentence because it ruled out. Same is the case with 4. in sentence 2, "wraps up" indicates the final step; therefore, it has to be the concluding sentence. Statement 3 is followed by statement 5 which deals with literary works of the second half of the nineteenth century. Statement 1 is a logical extension of statement 5. In statement 1, there is a mention about the periods preceding the revolution of 1917 and the development between the literary movements and the other parallel developments which goes with 'the social and cultural advances' as mentioned in statement 5. Statement 4 brings into light what had happened after the revolution and how the Soviet writing had served as a propaganda tool of the Communist party. Statement 2 is the concluding sentence which states how literature emerged as a leader in the struggle for freedom of thought, genuine relevance and communion with the western culture. Therefore, 35142 is the answer.

- The missing sentence, "This stark reality has driven the growth of movements advocating for a drastic change in our lifestyle and economic priorities," fits best in Option A (1). It introduces societal reactions to the mounting environmental concerns outlined in the paragraph.
- This sentence highlights the impact of environmental issues on society, prompting movements for significant changes. It connects the urgency of environmental problems with broader societal actions.
- The sentence emphasizes the need for drastic changes in lifestyle and economic practices to address environmental challenges effectively. Its placement at the beginning of the paragraph provides context for understanding subsequent discussions about collective action and individual participation.
- Overall, it enhances the coherence and completeness of the paragraph by illustrating societal responses to environmental crises.

- The missing sentence, "Ironically, it's this data abundance that often leads companies to the paralysis of analysis, unable to sort what's truly actionable," fits best in Option B (2).
- It provides a critical perspective on the challenges posed by data abundance, highlighting the paradoxical situation where the wealth of data can hinder decision-making.
- This sentence introduces a contrast to the positive aspects of data abundance mentioned earlier, setting the stage for discussing the crucial role of human judgment in data interpretation and strategic decision-making.
- Its placement before the sentence about the human element underscores the importance of acknowledging and addressing the challenges associated with data-driven approaches.
- Overall, it adds depth to the discussion on leveraging data insights while maintaining strategic control.

Option C encapsulates the primary message of the passage, emphasizing the new preference for adaptability and learning in the face of technological advancements, without distorting the passage’s nuances.

Option B correctly mirrors the passage’s central idea, pointing out the potential impact of neuroscience on concepts of free will and judiciary principles, without exaggerating the implications.

Option B accurately summarizes the passage, highlighting the ecological importance of coral reefs and the wider implications of their destruction.

Let us draw Venn diagram.

From statement (1),
(b + c) - (b + e) = 8
⇒ c = 8 + e ... (1)
From statement (2),
(a + b) - (d + e) = 7
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e ... (2)
From statement (3),
(a + b + e + f) - (b + c) = 21
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + c
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + 8 + e [From equation (1), c = 8 + e]
⇒ a + f = 29 ... (3)
From statement (4) ,
(a + b + e + f) + (d + e) = 66
⇒ a + b + d + 2e + f = 66 ... (4)
From statement (5),
b + e = 21 ... (5)
⇒ c = 21 - 4 = 17 ... (6)
From equation (1),
e = c - 8 = 17 - 8 = 9 ... (7)
From equations (5) and (7),
b = 21 - e = 21 - 9 = 12 ... (8)
From equations (3) and (4),
b + d + 2e = 37
⇒ d = 37 - 12 - 2 x 9 = 7 ... (9)
From equations (2), (7), (8) and (9),
a + b = 7 + d + e
⇒ a = 7 + 7 + 9 - 12 = 11 ... (10)
From equations (3) and (10),
a + f = 29
⇒ f = 29 - 11 = 18

Number of friends who only watched movies = 7

Let us draw a Venn diagram

From statement (1):
⇒ (b + c) - (b + e) = 8
⇒ c = 8 + e ... (1)
From statement (2):
⇒ (a + b) - (d + e) = 7
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e ... (2)
From statement (3):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) - (b + c) = 21
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + c
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + 8 + e (From equation (1): c = 8 + e)
⇒ a + f = 29 ... (3)
From statement (4):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) + (d + e) = 66
⇒ a + b + d + 2e + f = 66 ... (4)
From statement (5):
⇒ b + e = 21 ... (5)
⇒ c = 21 - 4 = 17 ... (6)
From equation (1):
e = c - 8 = 17 - 8 = 9 ... (7)
From equations (5) and (7):
⇒ b = 21 - e = 21 - 9 = 12 ... (8)
From equations (3) and (4):
⇒ b + d + 2e = 37
⇒ d = 37 - 12 - 2 x 9 = 7 ... (9)
From equations (2), (7), (8) and (9):
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e
⇒ a = 7 + 7 + 9 - 12 = 11 ... (10)
From equations (3) and (10):
⇒ a + f = 29
⇒ f = 29 - 11 = 18

Difference between the number of friends who went to Goa and the number of friends who stayed at home = (11 + 12 + 17) - (7 + 9 + 18) = 40 - 34 = 6

Let us draw a Venn diagram

From statement (1):
⇒ (b + c) - (b + e) = 8
⇒ c = 8 + e ... (1)
From statement (2):
⇒ (a + b) - (d + e) = 7
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e ... (2)
From statement (3):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) - (b + c) = 21
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + c
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + 8 + e (From equation (1): c = 8 + e)
⇒ a + f = 29 ... (3)
From statement (4):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) + (d + e) = 66
⇒ a + b + d + 2e + f = 66 ... (4)
From statement (5):
⇒ b + e = 21 ... (5)
⇒ c = 21 - 4 = 17 ... (6)
From equation (1):
e = c - 8 = 17 - 8 = 9 ... (7)
From equations (5) and (7):
⇒ b = 21 - e = 21 - 9 = 12 ... (8)
From equations (3) and (4):
⇒ b + d + 2e = 37
⇒ d = 37 - 12 - 2 x 9 = 7 ... (9)
From equations (2), (7), (8) and (9):
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e
⇒ a = 7 + 7 + 9 - 12 = 11 ... (10)
From equations (3) and (10):
⇒ a + f = 29
⇒ f = 29 - 11 = 18

Number of friends who played charades among the ones who stayed at home = 18 + 9 = 27

Let us draw a Venn diagram

From statement (1):
⇒ (b + c) - (b + e) = 8
⇒ c = 8 + e ... (1)
From statement (2):
⇒ (a + b) - (d + e) = 7
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e ... (2)
From statement (3):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) - (b + c) = 21
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + c
⇒ a + e + f = 21 + 8 + e (From equation (1): c = 8 + e)
⇒ a + f = 29 ... (3)
From statement (4):
⇒ (a + b + e + f) + (d + e) = 66
⇒ a + b + d + 2e + f = 66 ... (4)
From statement (5):
⇒ b + e = 21 ... (5)
⇒ c = 21 - 4 = 17 ... (6)
From equation (1):
e = c - 8 = 17 - 8 = 9 ... (7)
From equations (5) and (7):
⇒ b = 21 - e = 21 - 9 = 12 ... (8)
From equations (3) and (4):
⇒ b + d + 2e = 37
⇒ d = 37 - 12 - 2 x 9 = 7 ... (9)
From equations (2), (7), (8) and (9):
⇒ a + b = 7 + d + e
⇒ a = 7 + 7 + 9 - 12 = 11 ... (10)
From equations (3) and (10):
⇒ a + f = 29
⇒ f = 29 - 11 = 18

Total number of friends = 11 + 12 + 17 + 7 + 9 + 18 = 74

Number of hours Mr. Xavier spent coding any mobile app = 92
Average time per day == 5.11 hours

Since Mr. Xavier could spend at most 1.5 hours per day on any one mobile app, the maximum time he could spend coding a mobile app during the last time slot would be 1.5 × 18 = 27 hours.
Therefore, any mobile app which has more than 27 hours of preparation remaining (after the first three time slots) cannot be studied completely.
By a quick observation, App-3, App-5 and App-9 have more than 27 hours remaining. Hence, the answer is 9 - 3 = 6.