CAT Mock Test- 9 - CAT MCQ

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The brave new economy being rebuilt in the wake of the financial meltdown is being built on low-wage service work, as manufacturing’s decline has accelerated and construction ground to a halt. At the beginning of the Great Recession, economist Heather Boushey noted at Slate, manufacturing and construction made up fully half the jobs lost, along with financial services and other business fields, and writers declared the “Mancession” or “He-cession” or even, as Hanna Rosin’s popular book has it, The End of Men. But as others have pointed out, as the recession drags on, it’s women who’ve faced the largest losses, not only in direct attacks on public sector jobs that are dominated by women, but in increased competition from the men pushed out of their previous professions. Some 60 percent of the jobs lost in the public sector were held by women, according to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research. And women have regained only 12 percent of the jobs lost during the recession, while men have regained 63 percent of the jobs they lost.

Women may be overrepresented in the growing sectors of the economy, but those sectors pay poverty wages. The public sector job cuts that have been largely responsible for unemployment remaining at or near 8 percent have fallen disproportionately on women (and women of color are hit the hardest). Those good union jobs disappear, and are replaced with a minimum-wage gig at Walmart—and even in retail, women make only 90 percent of what men make.

“All work is gendered. And the economy that we have assigns different levels of value based off of that,” says Ai-Jen Poo, executive director of the National Domestic Workers Alliance. Poo came to labor organizing through feminism. As a volunteer in a domestic violence shelter for Asian immigrant women, she explains, she realized that it was women who had economic opportunities who were able to break the cycle of violence. She brings a sharp gender analysis to the struggle for respect and better treatment for the workers, mostly women, who “make all other work possible.”

“Society has devalued that work over time,” she notes of the cleaning, caring, cooking, and other work domestic workers perform, largely hidden from public view, “and we think that that has a lot to do with who’s done the work.”

This argument was at the root of the fight for access to employment outside of the “pink-collar” fields. To be trapped in women’s jobs was to be forever trapped in a certain vision of femininity. Breaking out of “women’s work” was a form of breaking through the “feminine mystique” that Betty Friedan decried. But that work still needs to be done, and, Poo notes, the conditions that have long defined domestic work and service work—instability, lack of training, lack of career pathways, low pay—are now increasingly the reality for all American workers, not just women. When we focus on equal access at the top, we miss out the real story, which historian Bethany Moreton points out, “is not ‘Oh wow, women get to be lawyers,’ but that men get to be casualized clerks.”

Q. "Breaking out of women’s work was a form of breaking through the feminine mystique". Which of the following statements best captures the sense of this statement?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

It’s been two decades since the Human Genome Project first unveiled a rough draft of our genetic instruction book. The promise of that medical moon shot was that doctors would soon be able to look at an individual’s DNA and prescribe the right medicines for that person’s illness or even prevent certain diseases. That promise, known as precision medicine, has yet to be fulfilled in any widespread way. True, researchers are getting clues about some genetic variants linked to certain conditions and some that affect how drugs work in the body. But many of those advances have benefited just one group: people whose ancestral roots stem from Europe. In other words, white people.

Instead of a truly human genome that represents everyone, “what we have is essentially a European genome,” says Constance Hilliard, an evolutionary historian at the University of North Texas in Denton. “That data doesn’t work for anybody apart from people of European ancestry.” She’s talking about more than the Human Genome Project’s reference genome. That database is just one of many that researchers are using to develop precision medicine strategies. Often those genetic databases draw on data mainly from white participants. But race isn’t the issue. The problem is that collectively, those data add up to a catalog of genetic variants that don’t represent the full range of human genetic diversity.

One solution is to make customized reference genomes for populations whose members die from cancer or heart disease at higher rates than other groups, for example, or who face other worse health outcomes, Hilliard suggests. Hilliard’s hypothesis is that precision medicine, which tailors treatments based on a person’s genetic data, lifestyle, environment and physiology, is more likely to succeed when researchers consider the histories of groups that have worse health outcomes.

And the more specific the better. For instance, African Americans who descended from enslaved people have geographic and ecological origins as well as evolutionary and social histories distinct from those of recent African immigrants to the United States. Those histories have left stamps in the DNA that can make a difference in people’s health today. The same goes for Indigenous people from various parts of the world and Latino people from Mexico versus the Caribbean or Central or South America.

Results of a survey conducted by Science News revealed that one big drawback to Hilliard’s proposal may be social rather than scientific. Many respondents expressed concern that even well-intentioned scientists might do research that ultimately increases bias and discrimination toward certain groups. As one respondent put it, “The idea of diversity is being stretched into an arena where racial differences will be emphasized and commonalities minimized. The fear is that any differences that are found would be exploited by those who want to denigrate others. This is truly the entry to a racist philosophy.” Indeed, the Chinese government has come under fire for using DNA to identify members of the Uighur Muslim ethnic group, singling them out for surveillance and sending some to “reeducation camps.”

Hilliard says that the argument that minorities become more vulnerable when they open themselves to genetic research is valid. “Genomics, like nuclear fusion, can be weaponized and dangerous,” she says in response to respondents' concerns. “Minorities can choose to be left out of the genomic revolution or they can make full use of it,” by adding their genetic data to the mix.

Q. Which of the following statements is Constance Hilliard least likely to agree with?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

It’s been two decades since the Human Genome Project first unveiled a rough draft of our genetic instruction book. The promise of that medical moon shot was that doctors would soon be able to look at an individual’s DNA and prescribe the right medicines for that person’s illness or even prevent certain diseases. That promise, known as precision medicine, has yet to be fulfilled in any widespread way. True, researchers are getting clues about some genetic variants linked to certain conditions and some that affect how drugs work in the body. But many of those advances have benefited just one group: people whose ancestral roots stem from Europe. In other words, white people.

Instead of a truly human genome that represents everyone, “what we have is essentially a European genome,” says Constance Hilliard, an evolutionary historian at the University of North Texas in Denton. “That data doesn’t work for anybody apart from people of European ancestry.” She’s talking about more than the Human Genome Project’s reference genome. That database is just one of many that researchers are using to develop precision medicine strategies. Often those genetic databases draw on data mainly from white participants. But race isn’t the issue. The problem is that collectively, those data add up to a catalog of genetic variants that don’t represent the full range of human genetic diversity.

One solution is to make customized reference genomes for populations whose members die from cancer or heart disease at higher rates than other groups, for example, or who face other worse health outcomes, Hilliard suggests. Hilliard’s hypothesis is that precision medicine, which tailors treatments based on a person’s genetic data, lifestyle, environment and physiology, is more likely to succeed when researchers consider the histories of groups that have worse health outcomes.

And the more specific the better. For instance, African Americans who descended from enslaved people have geographic and ecological origins as well as evolutionary and social histories distinct from those of recent African immigrants to the United States. Those histories have left stamps in the DNA that can make a difference in people’s health today. The same goes for Indigenous people from various parts of the world and Latino people from Mexico versus the Caribbean or Central or South America.

Results of a survey conducted by Science News revealed that one big drawback to Hilliard’s proposal may be social rather than scientific. Many respondents expressed concern that even well-intentioned scientists might do research that ultimately increases bias and discrimination toward certain groups. As one respondent put it, “The idea of diversity is being stretched into an arena where racial differences will be emphasized and commonalities minimized. The fear is that any differences that are found would be exploited by those who want to denigrate others. This is truly the entry to a racist philosophy.” Indeed, the Chinese government has come under fire for using DNA to identify members of the Uighur Muslim ethnic group, singling them out for surveillance and sending some to “reeducation camps.”

Hilliard says that the argument that minorities become more vulnerable when they open themselves to genetic research is valid. “Genomics, like nuclear fusion, can be weaponized and dangerous,” she says in response to respondents' concerns. “Minorities can choose to be left out of the genomic revolution or they can make full use of it,” by adding their genetic data to the mix.

Q. The central point in the fifth paragraph is that

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

It’s been two decades since the Human Genome Project first unveiled a rough draft of our genetic instruction book. The promise of that medical moon shot was that doctors would soon be able to look at an individual’s DNA and prescribe the right medicines for that person’s illness or even prevent certain diseases. That promise, known as precision medicine, has yet to be fulfilled in any widespread way. True, researchers are getting clues about some genetic variants linked to certain conditions and some that affect how drugs work in the body. But many of those advances have benefited just one group: people whose ancestral roots stem from Europe. In other words, white people.

Instead of a truly human genome that represents everyone, “what we have is essentially a European genome,” says Constance Hilliard, an evolutionary historian at the University of North Texas in Denton. “That data doesn’t work for anybody apart from people of European ancestry.” She’s talking about more than the Human Genome Project’s reference genome. That database is just one of many that researchers are using to develop precision medicine strategies. Often those genetic databases draw on data mainly from white participants. But race isn’t the issue. The problem is that collectively, those data add up to a catalog of genetic variants that don’t represent the full range of human genetic diversity.

One solution is to make customized reference genomes for populations whose members die from cancer or heart disease at higher rates than other groups, for example, or who face other worse health outcomes, Hilliard suggests. Hilliard’s hypothesis is that precision medicine, which tailors treatments based on a person’s genetic data, lifestyle, environment and physiology, is more likely to succeed when researchers consider the histories of groups that have worse health outcomes.

And the more specific the better. For instance, African Americans who descended from enslaved people have geographic and ecological origins as well as evolutionary and social histories distinct from those of recent African immigrants to the United States. Those histories have left stamps in the DNA that can make a difference in people’s health today. The same goes for Indigenous people from various parts of the world and Latino people from Mexico versus the Caribbean or Central or South America.

Results of a survey conducted by Science News revealed that one big drawback to Hilliard’s proposal may be social rather than scientific. Many respondents expressed concern that even well-intentioned scientists might do research that ultimately increases bias and discrimination toward certain groups. As one respondent put it, “The idea of diversity is being stretched into an arena where racial differences will be emphasized and commonalities minimized. The fear is that any differences that are found would be exploited by those who want to denigrate others. This is truly the entry to a racist philosophy.” Indeed, the Chinese government has come under fire for using DNA to identify members of the Uighur Muslim ethnic group, singling them out for surveillance and sending some to “reeducation camps.”

Hilliard says that the argument that minorities become more vulnerable when they open themselves to genetic research is valid. “Genomics, like nuclear fusion, can be weaponized and dangerous,” she says in response to respondents' concerns. “Minorities can choose to be left out of the genomic revolution or they can make full use of it,” by adding their genetic data to the mix.

Q. "But many of those advances have benefited just one group: people whose ancestral roots stem from Europe. In other words, white people." Which of the following cannot be inferred from the statement?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

It’s been two decades since the Human Genome Project first unveiled a rough draft of our genetic instruction book. The promise of that medical moon shot was that doctors would soon be able to look at an individual’s DNA and prescribe the right medicines for that person’s illness or even prevent certain diseases. That promise, known as precision medicine, has yet to be fulfilled in any widespread way. True, researchers are getting clues about some genetic variants linked to certain conditions and some that affect how drugs work in the body. But many of those advances have benefited just one group: people whose ancestral roots stem from Europe. In other words, white people.

Instead of a truly human genome that represents everyone, “what we have is essentially a European genome,” says Constance Hilliard, an evolutionary historian at the University of North Texas in Denton. “That data doesn’t work for anybody apart from people of European ancestry.” She’s talking about more than the Human Genome Project’s reference genome. That database is just one of many that researchers are using to develop precision medicine strategies. Often those genetic databases draw on data mainly from white participants. But race isn’t the issue. The problem is that collectively, those data add up to a catalog of genetic variants that don’t represent the full range of human genetic diversity.

One solution is to make customized reference genomes for populations whose members die from cancer or heart disease at higher rates than other groups, for example, or who face other worse health outcomes, Hilliard suggests. Hilliard’s hypothesis is that precision medicine, which tailors treatments based on a person’s genetic data, lifestyle, environment and physiology, is more likely to succeed when researchers consider the histories of groups that have worse health outcomes.

And the more specific the better. For instance, African Americans who descended from enslaved people have geographic and ecological origins as well as evolutionary and social histories distinct from those of recent African immigrants to the United States. Those histories have left stamps in the DNA that can make a difference in people’s health today. The same goes for Indigenous people from various parts of the world and Latino people from Mexico versus the Caribbean or Central or South America.

Results of a survey conducted by Science News revealed that one big drawback to Hilliard’s proposal may be social rather than scientific. Many respondents expressed concern that even well-intentioned scientists might do research that ultimately increases bias and discrimination toward certain groups. As one respondent put it, “The idea of diversity is being stretched into an arena where racial differences will be emphasized and commonalities minimized. The fear is that any differences that are found would be exploited by those who want to denigrate others. This is truly the entry to a racist philosophy.” Indeed, the Chinese government has come under fire for using DNA to identify members of the Uighur Muslim ethnic group, singling them out for surveillance and sending some to “reeducation camps.”

Hilliard says that the argument that minorities become more vulnerable when they open themselves to genetic research is valid. “Genomics, like nuclear fusion, can be weaponized and dangerous,” she says in response to respondents' concerns. “Minorities can choose to be left out of the genomic revolution or they can make full use of it,” by adding their genetic data to the mix.

Q. Hilliard likens Genomics to nuclear fusion for which one of the following reasons?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Cryptocurrencies have long been heralded as the future of finance, but it wasn’t until 2020 that it finally caught on to an old idea: making money with money. In the crypto world, decentralized finance (or DeFi) encompasses a wide array of blockchain-based applications intended to enhance cryptocurrency holders’ returns without relying on intermediaries — to earn the kind of passive returns an investor might get from a savings account, a Treasury bill, or an Apple Inc. bond.

The idea seems to be catching fire: Deposits in DeFi applications grew from about $1 billion in June to just under $40 billion by late January 2021, suggesting that DeFi could be a major element of crypto from here on out. In the tradition of disruptive innovations — as Clayton Christensen envisioned them — DeFi can be the evolution of blockchain technology that might launch it into mainstream.

The premise of DeFi is simple: Fix the longstanding inefficiency in crypto finance of capital being kept idle at a nonzero opportunity cost. Now, most investors buy crypto with the hope that the value of the currency itself will rise, as Bitcoin has. In general, that strategy has worked just fine. The value of cryptocurrencies has appreciated so rapidly that there just wasn’t much incentive to worry about gains of a few percent here and there.

But the recent rise of stablecoins, which are designed keep their value constant, has changed that calculation. The combined market cap of stablecoins such as Terra and USDC has more than quadrupled in 2020. Now, vast passive income opportunities are being awakened by DeFi.

The appeal of a lower-risk approach to crypto is obvious and has the potential to expand the pool of investors. For the first time, it’s possible to be compensated for owning cryptos (even in the absence of price appreciation), which brings real, tangible utilities to digital currencies and changes the narrative of an asset class whose sole purpose used to be about being sold at a higher price. Therefore, many of the DeFi protocols today might have the potential to become big and bold enough to rival their centralized counterparts, while staying true to their decentralized roots. Furthermore, with volatility out of the picture and the promise of more stable returns, institutional investors are now considering crypto as part of their investments in alternatives.

The search for passive returns on crypto assets, called “yield farming,” is already taking shape on a number of new lending platforms. Compound Labs has launched one of the biggest DeFi lending platforms, where users can now borrow and lend any cryptocurrency on a short-term basis at algorithmically determined rates. A prototypical yield farmer moves assets around pools on Compound, constantly chasing the pool offering the highest annual percentage yield (APY). Practically, it echoes a strategy in traditional finance — a foreign currency carry trade — where a trader seeks to borrow the currency charging a lower interest rate and lend the one offering a higher return.

Crypto yield farming, however, offers more incentives. For instance, by depositing stablecoins into a digital account, investors would be rewarded in at least two ways. First, they receive the APY on their deposits. Second, and more importantly, certain protocols offer an additional subsidy, in the form of a new token, on top of the yield that it charges the borrower and pays to the lender.

Q. Which of the following statements cannot be inferred from the passage?
I. DeFi is a form of finance that does not rely on financial intermediaries.
II. Capital invested in crypto finance would have zero opportunity cost with increased deposits in DeFi applications.
III. Deposits in DeFi applications would make cryptocurrency investments free from volatility.
IV. People follow traditional financial strategies on DeFi lending platforms.

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Cryptocurrencies have long been heralded as the future of finance, but it wasn’t until 2020 that it finally caught on to an old idea: making money with money. In the crypto world, decentralized finance (or DeFi) encompasses a wide array of blockchain-based applications intended to enhance cryptocurrency holders’ returns without relying on intermediaries — to earn the kind of passive returns an investor might get from a savings account, a Treasury bill, or an Apple Inc. bond.

The idea seems to be catching fire: Deposits in DeFi applications grew from about $1 billion in June to just under $40 billion by late January 2021, suggesting that DeFi could be a major element of crypto from here on out. In the tradition of disruptive innovations — as Clayton Christensen envisioned them — DeFi can be the evolution of blockchain technology that might launch it into mainstream.

The premise of DeFi is simple: Fix the longstanding inefficiency in crypto finance of capital being kept idle at a nonzero opportunity cost. Now, most investors buy crypto with the hope that the value of the currency itself will rise, as Bitcoin has. In general, that strategy has worked just fine. The value of cryptocurrencies has appreciated so rapidly that there just wasn’t much incentive to worry about gains of a few percent here and there.

But the recent rise of stablecoins, which are designed keep their value constant, has changed that calculation. The combined market cap of stablecoins such as Terra and USDC has more than quadrupled in 2020. Now, vast passive income opportunities are being awakened by DeFi.

The appeal of a lower-risk approach to crypto is obvious and has the potential to expand the pool of investors. For the first time, it’s possible to be compensated for owning cryptos (even in the absence of price appreciation), which brings real, tangible utilities to digital currencies and changes the narrative of an asset class whose sole purpose used to be about being sold at a higher price. Therefore, many of the DeFi protocols today might have the potential to become big and bold enough to rival their centralized counterparts, while staying true to their decentralized roots. Furthermore, with volatility out of the picture and the promise of more stable returns, institutional investors are now considering crypto as part of their investments in alternatives.

The search for passive returns on crypto assets, called “yield farming,” is already taking shape on a number of new lending platforms. Compound Labs has launched one of the biggest DeFi lending platforms, where users can now borrow and lend any cryptocurrency on a short-term basis at algorithmically determined rates. A prototypical yield farmer moves assets around pools on Compound, constantly chasing the pool offering the highest annual percentage yield (APY). Practically, it echoes a strategy in traditional finance — a foreign currency carry trade — where a trader seeks to borrow the currency charging a lower interest rate and lend the one offering a higher return.

Crypto yield farming, however, offers more incentives. For instance, by depositing stablecoins into a digital account, investors would be rewarded in at least two ways. First, they receive the APY on their deposits. Second, and more importantly, certain protocols offer an additional subsidy, in the form of a new token, on top of the yield that it charges the borrower and pays to the lender.

Q. Which of the following would the author cite as a reason for activity in DeFi applications being nascent until recently?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Cryptocurrencies have long been heralded as the future of finance, but it wasn’t until 2020 that it finally caught on to an old idea: making money with money. In the crypto world, decentralized finance (or DeFi) encompasses a wide array of blockchain-based applications intended to enhance cryptocurrency holders’ returns without relying on intermediaries — to earn the kind of passive returns an investor might get from a savings account, a Treasury bill, or an Apple Inc. bond.

The idea seems to be catching fire: Deposits in DeFi applications grew from about $1 billion in June to just under $40 billion by late January 2021, suggesting that DeFi could be a major element of crypto from here on out. In the tradition of disruptive innovations — as Clayton Christensen envisioned them — DeFi can be the evolution of blockchain technology that might launch it into mainstream.

The premise of DeFi is simple: Fix the longstanding inefficiency in crypto finance of capital being kept idle at a nonzero opportunity cost. Now, most investors buy crypto with the hope that the value of the currency itself will rise, as Bitcoin has. In general, that strategy has worked just fine. The value of cryptocurrencies has appreciated so rapidly that there just wasn’t much incentive to worry about gains of a few percent here and there.

But the recent rise of stablecoins, which are designed keep their value constant, has changed that calculation. The combined market cap of stablecoins such as Terra and USDC has more than quadrupled in 2020. Now, vast passive income opportunities are being awakened by DeFi.

The appeal of a lower-risk approach to crypto is obvious and has the potential to expand the pool of investors. For the first time, it’s possible to be compensated for owning cryptos (even in the absence of price appreciation), which brings real, tangible utilities to digital currencies and changes the narrative of an asset class whose sole purpose used to be about being sold at a higher price. Therefore, many of the DeFi protocols today might have the potential to become big and bold enough to rival their centralized counterparts, while staying true to their decentralized roots. Furthermore, with volatility out of the picture and the promise of more stable returns, institutional investors are now considering crypto as part of their investments in alternatives.

The search for passive returns on crypto assets, called “yield farming,” is already taking shape on a number of new lending platforms. Compound Labs has launched one of the biggest DeFi lending platforms, where users can now borrow and lend any cryptocurrency on a short-term basis at algorithmically determined rates. A prototypical yield farmer moves assets around pools on Compound, constantly chasing the pool offering the highest annual percentage yield (APY). Practically, it echoes a strategy in traditional finance — a foreign currency carry trade — where a trader seeks to borrow the currency charging a lower interest rate and lend the one offering a higher return.

Crypto yield farming, however, offers more incentives. For instance, by depositing stablecoins into a digital account, investors would be rewarded in at least two ways. First, they receive the APY on their deposits. Second, and more importantly, certain protocols offer an additional subsidy, in the form of a new token, on top of the yield that it charges the borrower and pays to the lender.

Q. According to the passage, a 'crypto currency' carry trade would necessarily involve
I. Borrowing from the pool charging a lower algorithmically determined rate.
II. Converting the borrowed cryptocurrency into another cryptocurrency offering a higher algorithmically determined rate and lending it out.
III. Not collecting the return from cryptocurrency lent out until the exchange rate resets to the value at the time of borrowing.
IV. Profit or loss due to difference in borrowed and lent out rates. 

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Cryptocurrencies have long been heralded as the future of finance, but it wasn’t until 2020 that it finally caught on to an old idea: making money with money. In the crypto world, decentralized finance (or DeFi) encompasses a wide array of blockchain-based applications intended to enhance cryptocurrency holders’ returns without relying on intermediaries — to earn the kind of passive returns an investor might get from a savings account, a Treasury bill, or an Apple Inc. bond.

The idea seems to be catching fire: Deposits in DeFi applications grew from about $1 billion in June to just under $40 billion by late January 2021, suggesting that DeFi could be a major element of crypto from here on out. In the tradition of disruptive innovations — as Clayton Christensen envisioned them — DeFi can be the evolution of blockchain technology that might launch it into mainstream.

The premise of DeFi is simple: Fix the longstanding inefficiency in crypto finance of capital being kept idle at a nonzero opportunity cost. Now, most investors buy crypto with the hope that the value of the currency itself will rise, as Bitcoin has. In general, that strategy has worked just fine. The value of cryptocurrencies has appreciated so rapidly that there just wasn’t much incentive to worry about gains of a few percent here and there.

But the recent rise of stablecoins, which are designed keep their value constant, has changed that calculation. The combined market cap of stablecoins such as Terra and USDC has more than quadrupled in 2020. Now, vast passive income opportunities are being awakened by DeFi.

The appeal of a lower-risk approach to crypto is obvious and has the potential to expand the pool of investors. For the first time, it’s possible to be compensated for owning cryptos (even in the absence of price appreciation), which brings real, tangible utilities to digital currencies and changes the narrative of an asset class whose sole purpose used to be about being sold at a higher price. Therefore, many of the DeFi protocols today might have the potential to become big and bold enough to rival their centralized counterparts, while staying true to their decentralized roots. Furthermore, with volatility out of the picture and the promise of more stable returns, institutional investors are now considering crypto as part of their investments in alternatives.

The search for passive returns on crypto assets, called “yield farming,” is already taking shape on a number of new lending platforms. Compound Labs has launched one of the biggest DeFi lending platforms, where users can now borrow and lend any cryptocurrency on a short-term basis at algorithmically determined rates. A prototypical yield farmer moves assets around pools on Compound, constantly chasing the pool offering the highest annual percentage yield (APY). Practically, it echoes a strategy in traditional finance — a foreign currency carry trade — where a trader seeks to borrow the currency charging a lower interest rate and lend the one offering a higher return.

Crypto yield farming, however, offers more incentives. For instance, by depositing stablecoins into a digital account, investors would be rewarded in at least two ways. First, they receive the APY on their deposits. Second, and more importantly, certain protocols offer an additional subsidy, in the form of a new token, on top of the yield that it charges the borrower and pays to the lender.

Q. The primary purpose of the passage is to

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

When investigating witchcraft, one needs to differentiate between real and imaginary magic in the early modern period. If we want to understand the connection between the imaginary magic of the witches and economic behaviour, we need to deal with the connection between the economy and the real magic practised by ‘common’ people. In pre-industrial Europe, magic was a part of everyday life, very much like religion. People didn’t just believe in the efficacy of magic, they actively tried to use magic themselves. Simple forms of divination and healing magic were common, as was magic related to agriculture. The peasant household used divination to find out if the time was right for certain agricultural activities. Charms were supposed to keep the livestock in good health. Urban artisans and merchants also used economic magic to increase their wealth.

Of all the forms of magic, magical treasure-hunting had the greatest economic significance. Treasure hunters drew on a vast magical arsenal. They had spell books of any description, divining rods available in any kind of wood, amulets to protect them against evil spirits, and lead tablets etched with magical signs.  To the utter horror of the ecclesiastical authorities, they invoked angels and saints. Treasure hunters talked to ghosts. Some of them even tried to conjure up demons. However,  common people simply didn’t see treasure magic as witchcraft, and most of the judges agreed. 

Separate from these real forms of magic, there was the imaginary magic of the witches. Nobody was ever (or could ever be) guilty of witchcraft in the full sense of the word, which was defined by the late Middle Ages as a crime that consisted of five elements: a pact with the devil; sexual intercourse with demons; the magical flight (on a broomstick or a similar device); the witches’ dance (often referred to by the antisemitic term ‘witches’ sabbath’); and malevolent magic. Early modern Europe and Britain treated witchcraft as a capital crime.

At first glance, the relation between the economy and the imaginary magic of the witches seems to be entirely negative. Witches were often accused of attacking livestock. They magically made frost, storm and hail, and thereby caused crop failure. Indeed, their weather magic was said to endanger the economy of entire regions. Still, at least in the majority of the witch trials on the European continent, the witches didn’t profit from their magic. Weather magic especially looked like a strange form of auto-aggression because the hailstorms the witches supposedly conjured up damaged their own fields as well. As a rule, the pact with the devil as it appears in trial records was not a contract like that of Goethe’s Faust, which was mostly about the wishes of the magician. Rather, it stated simply that the witch submitted to the will of the demon. She did what a demon told her and became the instrument of the demon’s abyssal hatred of all creation. Witchcraft was mostly about destruction for destruction’s sake, not about the personal interests and wishes of the witches, let alone their economic advantage.

Q. Which one of the following best describes what the passage is trying to do?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

When investigating witchcraft, one needs to differentiate between real and imaginary magic in the early modern period. If we want to understand the connection between the imaginary magic of the witches and economic behaviour, we need to deal with the connection between the economy and the real magic practised by ‘common’ people. In pre-industrial Europe, magic was a part of everyday life, very much like religion. People didn’t just believe in the efficacy of magic, they actively tried to use magic themselves. Simple forms of divination and healing magic were common, as was magic related to agriculture. The peasant household used divination to find out if the time was right for certain agricultural activities. Charms were supposed to keep the livestock in good health. Urban artisans and merchants also used economic magic to increase their wealth.

Of all the forms of magic, magical treasure-hunting had the greatest economic significance. Treasure hunters drew on a vast magical arsenal. They had spell books of any description, divining rods available in any kind of wood, amulets to protect them against evil spirits, and lead tablets etched with magical signs.  To the utter horror of the ecclesiastical authorities, they invoked angels and saints. Treasure hunters talked to ghosts. Some of them even tried to conjure up demons. However,  common people simply didn’t see treasure magic as witchcraft, and most of the judges agreed. 

Separate from these real forms of magic, there was the imaginary magic of the witches. Nobody was ever (or could ever be) guilty of witchcraft in the full sense of the word, which was defined by the late Middle Ages as a crime that consisted of five elements: a pact with the devil; sexual intercourse with demons; the magical flight (on a broomstick or a similar device); the witches’ dance (often referred to by the antisemitic term ‘witches’ sabbath’); and malevolent magic. Early modern Europe and Britain treated witchcraft as a capital crime.

At first glance, the relation between the economy and the imaginary magic of the witches seems to be entirely negative. Witches were often accused of attacking livestock. They magically made frost, storm and hail, and thereby caused crop failure. Indeed, their weather magic was said to endanger the economy of entire regions. Still, at least in the majority of the witch trials on the European continent, the witches didn’t profit from their magic. Weather magic especially looked like a strange form of auto-aggression because the hailstorms the witches supposedly conjured up damaged their own fields as well. As a rule, the pact with the devil as it appears in trial records was not a contract like that of Goethe’s Faust, which was mostly about the wishes of the magician. Rather, it stated simply that the witch submitted to the will of the demon. She did what a demon told her and became the instrument of the demon’s abyssal hatred of all creation. Witchcraft was mostly about destruction for destruction’s sake, not about the personal interests and wishes of the witches, let alone their economic advantage.

Q. Which of the following statements about magical treasure hunting and/or treasure hunters cannot be inferred? 

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

When investigating witchcraft, one needs to differentiate between real and imaginary magic in the early modern period. If we want to understand the connection between the imaginary magic of the witches and economic behaviour, we need to deal with the connection between the economy and the real magic practised by ‘common’ people. In pre-industrial Europe, magic was a part of everyday life, very much like religion. People didn’t just believe in the efficacy of magic, they actively tried to use magic themselves. Simple forms of divination and healing magic were common, as was magic related to agriculture. The peasant household used divination to find out if the time was right for certain agricultural activities. Charms were supposed to keep the livestock in good health. Urban artisans and merchants also used economic magic to increase their wealth.

Of all the forms of magic, magical treasure-hunting had the greatest economic significance. Treasure hunters drew on a vast magical arsenal. They had spell books of any description, divining rods available in any kind of wood, amulets to protect them against evil spirits, and lead tablets etched with magical signs.  To the utter horror of the ecclesiastical authorities, they invoked angels and saints. Treasure hunters talked to ghosts. Some of them even tried to conjure up demons. However,  common people simply didn’t see treasure magic as witchcraft, and most of the judges agreed. 

Separate from these real forms of magic, there was the imaginary magic of the witches. Nobody was ever (or could ever be) guilty of witchcraft in the full sense of the word, which was defined by the late Middle Ages as a crime that consisted of five elements: a pact with the devil; sexual intercourse with demons; the magical flight (on a broomstick or a similar device); the witches’ dance (often referred to by the antisemitic term ‘witches’ sabbath’); and malevolent magic. Early modern Europe and Britain treated witchcraft as a capital crime.

At first glance, the relation between the economy and the imaginary magic of the witches seems to be entirely negative. Witches were often accused of attacking livestock. They magically made frost, storm and hail, and thereby caused crop failure. Indeed, their weather magic was said to endanger the economy of entire regions. Still, at least in the majority of the witch trials on the European continent, the witches didn’t profit from their magic. Weather magic especially looked like a strange form of auto-aggression because the hailstorms the witches supposedly conjured up damaged their own fields as well. As a rule, the pact with the devil as it appears in trial records was not a contract like that of Goethe’s Faust, which was mostly about the wishes of the magician. Rather, it stated simply that the witch submitted to the will of the demon. She did what a demon told her and became the instrument of the demon’s abyssal hatred of all creation. Witchcraft was mostly about destruction for destruction’s sake, not about the personal interests and wishes of the witches, let alone their economic advantage.

Q. "Nobody was ever (or could ever be) guilty of witchcraft in the full sense of the word." Which of the following is the most likely reason for the author making this claim?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

When investigating witchcraft, one needs to differentiate between real and imaginary magic in the early modern period. If we want to understand the connection between the imaginary magic of the witches and economic behaviour, we need to deal with the connection between the economy and the real magic practised by ‘common’ people. In pre-industrial Europe, magic was a part of everyday life, very much like religion. People didn’t just believe in the efficacy of magic, they actively tried to use magic themselves. Simple forms of divination and healing magic were common, as was magic related to agriculture. The peasant household used divination to find out if the time was right for certain agricultural activities. Charms were supposed to keep the livestock in good health. Urban artisans and merchants also used economic magic to increase their wealth.

Of all the forms of magic, magical treasure-hunting had the greatest economic significance. Treasure hunters drew on a vast magical arsenal. They had spell books of any description, divining rods available in any kind of wood, amulets to protect them against evil spirits, and lead tablets etched with magical signs.  To the utter horror of the ecclesiastical authorities, they invoked angels and saints. Treasure hunters talked to ghosts. Some of them even tried to conjure up demons. However,  common people simply didn’t see treasure magic as witchcraft, and most of the judges agreed. 

Separate from these real forms of magic, there was the imaginary magic of the witches. Nobody was ever (or could ever be) guilty of witchcraft in the full sense of the word, which was defined by the late Middle Ages as a crime that consisted of five elements: a pact with the devil; sexual intercourse with demons; the magical flight (on a broomstick or a similar device); the witches’ dance (often referred to by the antisemitic term ‘witches’ sabbath’); and malevolent magic. Early modern Europe and Britain treated witchcraft as a capital crime.

At first glance, the relation between the economy and the imaginary magic of the witches seems to be entirely negative. Witches were often accused of attacking livestock. They magically made frost, storm and hail, and thereby caused crop failure. Indeed, their weather magic was said to endanger the economy of entire regions. Still, at least in the majority of the witch trials on the European continent, the witches didn’t profit from their magic. Weather magic especially looked like a strange form of auto-aggression because the hailstorms the witches supposedly conjured up damaged their own fields as well. As a rule, the pact with the devil as it appears in trial records was not a contract like that of Goethe’s Faust, which was mostly about the wishes of the magician. Rather, it stated simply that the witch submitted to the will of the demon. She did what a demon told her and became the instrument of the demon’s abyssal hatred of all creation. Witchcraft was mostly about destruction for destruction’s sake, not about the personal interests and wishes of the witches, let alone their economic advantage.

Q. In pre-industrial Europe, magic was practised for all of the following purposes, EXCEPT:

The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:

1. Some infections are noisy.
2. Other microbes are silent houseguests, so unobtrusive that we don’t even notice them.
3. They come with signs and symptoms of illness, either because the pathogen is causing a ruckus or because the body has grown cantankerous in its effort to evict an unwelcome tenant.
4. Coronavirus infections seem capable of running the gamut.

The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:

1. The stated aim was to prevent foreign workers from cornering jobs in the context of the economic distress associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
2. By some estimates, H-1B visa applications of up to 219,000 workers were likely blocked as a result of Mr. Trump’s proclamation last June, halting the processing and issuance of non-immigrant work visas of several types.
3. Mr. Biden’s action will have a significant and favourable impact for Indian nationals seeking employment with U.S. tech firms, given that they were the largest demographic to benefit from this visa annually.
4. President Joe Biden allowed a ban on issuance of H-1B visas for skilled workers to lapse at the end of March 2021, a move signalling his intent to pull the U.S. back from harsh immigration rules imposed by his predecessor, Donald Trump.

Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out.

1. It was found that he had discreetly made a trip to Dhanbad.
2. Both the agencies are concurrently probing the scam.
3. Investigation agencies CBI and Enforcement Directorate conducted joint raids at various places in West Bengal in connection with the multi-crore coal pilferage scam.
4. CBI has already examined a Trinamool Congress MP's wife for her alleged involvement in the coal scam.
5. While CBI is looking after the criminal aspect of it, ED is delving into the money laundering angle of the scam.

Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out.

1. A young American journalist, born into immense privilege, began publishing articles from South Vietnam in leading magazines, including The Atlantic.
2. Rather than competing with her male colleagues, she spent time in hospitals, villages, and slums, and she became engrossed in the politics of Buddhist students, the tragedies of refugees, the strategy of the Viet Cong, the history and culture of Vietnam.
3. All focused their reporting on the fighting, and on the lies and failures of American officialdom.
4. The Vietnam War had produced some of the greatest journalism of the century and made the reputations of young reporters such as David Halberstam, Neil Sheehan (who died earlier this year) and Malcolm Browne, and all of them were men.
5. But FitzGerald pursued a different story as she was profoundly shocked by the suffering of the Vietnamese—not just the death, injury, and displacement, but the loss of identity under the crushing weight of the Americans.

Modern history abounds with violence fueled by apocalyptic myths, not always explicitly religious in nature. The aim of the Jacobin terror in revolutionary France was the creation of a modern state. If the violent suppression of the peasant revolt in the Vendée is included, the casualties ran into the hundreds of thousands. The myths that possessed these anarchists in their campaigns of assassination were secular myths of social transformation. Lenin avowedly followed the Jacobin example when he used the Cheka to create a modern state in Russia. One of the factors that distinguished Nazism and fascism from conventional tyrannies was the belief that a new society could be fashioned by the systematic use of terror. Violent jihadism has more in common with these modern totalitarian movements than is commonly supposed.

When a language seems especially telegraphic (that is, requiring less to be actually said to put a sentence together), it is usually because enough adults learnt it at a certain stage in its history that, given the difficulty of learning a new language after childhood, it became a kind of stripped-down 'schoolroom"? version of itself. Because all languages, are, to some extent, busier than they need to be, this streamlining leaves the language thoroughly complex and nuanced, just lighter on the bric-a-brac that so many languages pant under. For example, Indonesian, one of the most economical languages in the world, is a first language to only one in four of its speakers; the language has been used for many centuries as a lingua franca in a vast region, imposed on speakers of several hundred languages. This means that while other languages can be like overgrown lawns, Indonesian’s grammar has been regularly mowed, such that especially the colloquial forms are tidier.

Nineteenth-century liberals recognized that democracy comes in various forms, and dreaded the version advocated by Rousseau, in which an inspired lawgiver interprets and implements the will of the people. Nowadays such fears are dismissed as elitist. But the old-fashioned liberals grasped a vital truth: popular government has no necessary connection with the freedom of individuals or minorities. Of course, liberals today will say this can be remedied by installing the rule of constitutional rights. Such systems are fragile, however, and count for nothing when large sections of society are indifferent or actively hostile to liberal values. Where this is the case, democracy means not much more than the tyranny of the majority.

The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, and 4) below, when properly sequenced, would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequencing of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer:

1. This philosophical crisis, percolating through the ages, questions the linear understanding of time, suggesting instead a more nuanced, cyclical concept.

2. The human perception of existence has been a subject of contemplation, often contrasting the empirical understanding of life with metaphysical interpretations.

3. It posits that existence is not merely a series of events but a complex pattern of cycles, each a reflection of recurring existential questions.

4. These interpretations challenge the very foundation of human experience, offering alternative narratives that transcend common reasoning.

Sheldon Cooper and Barry Kripke are 2 rival scientists at a world-renowned university. They both require highly expensive laser equipment for their research project but the university could afford only one. Not wanting to take sides of either of the scientists, Dr Siebert proposed them to use their logical brains to compete in a game and the winner would be allowed to use the equipment first. The game had following rules

1. An electric dog will be placed on the building which has ground floor as Level 0, 1st floor as Level 1 and so on. The dog will be placed on level N where N is an integer.
2. Each of the scientists will take a turn alternatively in deciding whether the dog jumps down 1 or 3 or 4 levels
3. Whichever scientist is able to make the dog land on level 0 will win
4. If the dog is at level 2, the only move possible is to bring down the dog by 1 level

Both the scientist play with the intention of winning and can not skip their turn

Q. Dr Siebert personally didn't like Sheldon and wanted him to lose. At what level must he place the dog and ask Sheldon to start so that he loses the game?

Sheldon Cooper and Barry Kripke are 2 rival scientists at a world-renowned university. They both require highly expensive laser equipment for their research project but the university could afford only one. Not wanting to take sides of either of the scientists, Dr Siebert proposed them to use their logical brains to compete in a game and the winner would be allowed to use the equipment first. The game had following rules

1. An electric dog will be placed on the building which has ground floor as Level 0, 1st floor as Level 1 and so on. The dog will be placed on level N where N is an integer.
2. Each of the scientists will take a turn alternatively in deciding whether the dog jumps down 1 or 3 or 4 levels
3. Whichever scientist is able to make the dog land on level 0 will win
4. If the dog is at level 2, the only move possible is to bring down the dog by 1 level

Both the scientist play with the intention of winning and can not skip their turn

Q. What is the lowest 3-digit level at which the dog should be placed given that Kripke starts the game and wins?

Sheldon Cooper and Barry Kripke are 2 rival scientists at a world-renowned university. They both require highly expensive laser equipment for their research project but the university could afford only one. Not wanting to take sides of either of the scientists, Dr Siebert proposed them to use their logical brains to compete in a game and the winner would be allowed to use the equipment first. The game had following rules

1. An electric dog will be placed on the building which has ground floor as Level 0, 1st floor as Level 1 and so on. The dog will be placed on level N where N is an integer.
2. Each of the scientists will take a turn alternatively in deciding whether the dog jumps down 1 or 3 or 4 levels
3. Whichever scientist is able to make the dog land on level 0 will win
4. If the dog is at level 2, the only move possible is to bring down the dog by 1 level

Both the scientist play with the intention of winning and can not skip their turn

Q. If Barry Kripke starts the game, then the probability that Sheldon wins the game is m/n where m and n are in lowest possible form. What is value of m+n ?

Sheldon Cooper and Barry Kripke are 2 rival scientists at a world-renowned university. They both require highly expensive laser equipment for their research project but the university could afford only one. Not wanting to take sides of either of the scientists, Dr Siebert proposed them to use their logical brains to compete in a game and the winner would be allowed to use the equipment first. The game had following rules

1. An electric dog will be placed on the building which has ground floor as Level 0, 1st floor as Level 1 and so on. The dog will be placed on level N where N is an integer.
2. Each of the scientists will take a turn alternatively in deciding whether the dog jumps down 1 or 3 or 4 levels
3. Whichever scientist is able to make the dog land on level 0 will win
4. If the dog is at level 2, the only move possible is to bring down the dog by 1 level

Both the scientist play with the intention of winning and can not skip their turn

Q. At beginning of the game, Sheldon looked at the level at which the dog was placed. He did a mental calculation and graciously offered Kripke to start the game. Kripke started the game by making the dog jump down 1 level. Which of the following 3 levels 1,3 and 4 will Sheldon surely not command the dog to jump down to ensure he wins the game?

5 friends Akbar, Birbal, Chandan, Dhanush and Eeshwar, are standing in a line, not necessarily in the same order. Each of them is wearing is a shirt of unique colour among Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and Black not necessarily in the same order. Each of them also was wearing a pant which is unique among Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and Black not necessarily in the same order. They each own a device among iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, iPod and Airpods.

The following things about the arrangements are known:

1. Nobody wear shirt and pant of the matching colours
2. Friend wearing Black pants is at the one of the extremes of the line and owns iPhone
3. The friend who owns Airpods and is wearing Blue pants is standing just behind the iPod owner but is ahead of the friend wearing green pants.
4. The guy wearing the Black shirt is standing at the end of the line and he owns iPad
5. Birbal who is wearing a Red shirt, is standing ahead of the friend with Blue pants
6. Eeshwar owns Apple Watch
7. The friend with Black pants is one of the neighbours of the friend who is wearing Yellow pants
8. Dhanush who is in the middle of the line is wearing a Blue Shirt and is standing ahead of the person who owns Airpods

Q. How many friends are their between Chandan and Akbar?

5 friends Akbar, Birbal, Chandan, Dhanush and Eeshwar, are standing in a line, not necessarily in the same order. Each of them is wearing is a shirt of unique colour among Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and Black not necessarily in the same order. Each of them also was wearing a pant which is unique among Red, Green, Blue, Yellow and Black not necessarily in the same order. They each own a device among iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, iPod and Airpods.

The following things about the arrangements are known:

1. Nobody wear shirt and pant of the matching colours
2. Friend wearing Black pants is at the one of the extremes of the line and owns iPhone
3. The friend who owns Airpods and is wearing Blue pants is standing just behind the iPod owner but is ahead of the friend wearing green pants.
4. The guy wearing the Black shirt is standing at the end of the line and he owns iPad
5. Birbal who is wearing a Red shirt, is standing ahead of the friend with Blue pants
6. Eeshwar owns Apple Watch
7. The friend with Black pants is one of the neighbours of the friend who is wearing Yellow pants
8. Dhanush who is in the middle of the line is wearing a Blue Shirt and is standing ahead of the person who owns Airpods

Q. What is the position of Eeshwar