CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern)


75 Questions MCQ Test CAT Mock Test Series | CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern)


Description
This mock test of CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern) for CAT helps you for every CAT entrance exam. This contains 75 Multiple Choice Questions for CAT CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern) (mcq) to study with solutions a complete question bank. The solved questions answers in this CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern) quiz give you a good mix of easy questions and tough questions. CAT students definitely take this CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern) exercise for a better result in the exam. You can find other CAT Mock Test - 1 (New Pattern) extra questions, long questions & short questions for CAT on EduRev as well by searching above.
QUESTION: 1

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

As a composer I have always maintained that you cannot compose in a vacuum; to me the composition of art music has to be an expression of creative dissatisfaction with something. The European cultural construct of the artist has long been that of a traveller for whom the train of history has stopped too early; alighting, our composer is aware of being short of the destination — but the track has just come to an end. Like the dog Gromit in The Wrong Trousers, therefore, he or she must lay the track ahead while actually moving forward on it. The transport metaphor is apt in that our travellers will by definition have a sense of whence they came: even falling short of their destination, composers know what route led to that point — the main stretch of a track still to be extended. According to this wisdom, then, a cultural identity is a bit like a copy of Bradshaw’s, the Victorian railway guide that charted the iron roads around Europe for the gentleman traveller; the history behind each of us is a travel journal that tells not only whence we have come but also the direction in which we are now heading. The past is not a burden but a provenance. The past is context; the past is all we have.

I wonder. The above model was fine for the artist belonging to an unwavering narrative of history, the artist with a sense of what it is — but it has certainly hit the buffers in modern times. For Schoenberg it worked: his composition was part of “a good, old-fashioned, properly-understood tradition” because he had no shadow of doubt what that tradition was, or that it occupied a position of cultural supremacy. Webern later unpacked this, in 1935, in the talks published as The Path To The New Music: drawing on examples from Ludwig Senfl through to Beethoven and on to Schoenberg, Webern set out the construction of the train track, mapping the point at which successive composers alighted to take charge of a new stretch. “We haven’t advanced beyond the classical composers’ forms,” he claimed, reassuringly. “What happened after them was only alteration, extension, abbreviation; but the forms remained, even in Schoenberg! All that has remained, but something has altered, all the same.” In other words, the past (whether the historic past or just the prior statement of a phrase four bars earlier) is the Pole Star from which we take all our bearings and upon which we elaborate — in the process becoming ourselves part of the past for someone else “further down the tracks”.

But all this development, this laying of track, has to rest on something we may no longer have — namely that sense of culture as a matter of a consensual history. I’m interested in when, and how, we lost this. As it happens, it still works for me as a composer; but this is not the case for everyone nowadays. For a start, this narrative sense of past can today be personal-individual, rather than part of a shared movement; you and I cannot assume we share a “journey” just from our both being composers, as once we could, for composition even of “art music” within our culture embraces infinite histories and narratives — or even non-histories, in terms of the old canons of European culture. I remember an American composer responding to the question, “How do you evolve without a thousand years’ history behind you?” by countering, “How do you manage to evolve with a thousand years’ history behind you?”

Q. According to the information provided in the passage:

I. Classical musicians in the past had the advantage of knowing what lay ahead as they were walking on a path set-up by the predecessors.
II. For composers, the sharing of history that set-up the tradition of composing along certain lines is something that is no longer the case.
III. At some point of time, the past was the source of origin of music for composers.

Solution:

Statement I can be derived from the lines: The transport metaphor is apt in that our travellers will by definition have a sense of whence they came: even falling short of their destination, composers know what route led to that point — the main stretch of a track still to be extended.

Statement II can be derived from the lines: But all this development, this laying of track, has to rest on something we may no longer have — namely that sense of culture as a matter of a consensual history. I’m interested in when, and how, we lost this.
Also, refer to the lines: Webern set out the construction of the train track, mapping the point at which successive composers alighted to take charge of a new stretch.
These also help us identify statement II.

Statement III can be derived from the lines: The past is not a burden but a provenance. The past is context; the past is all we have.
Provenance means ''the place of origin or earliest known history of something.''

QUESTION: 2

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

As a composer I have always maintained that you cannot compose in a vacuum; to me the composition of art music has to be an expression of creative dissatisfaction with something. The European cultural construct of the artist has long been that of a traveller for whom the train of history has stopped too early; alighting, our composer is aware of being short of the destination — but the track has just come to an end. Like the dog Gromit in The Wrong Trousers, therefore, he or she must lay the track ahead while actually moving forward on it. The transport metaphor is apt in that our travellers will by definition have a sense of whence they came: even falling short of their destination, composers know what route led to that point — the main stretch of a track still to be extended. According to this wisdom, then, a cultural identity is a bit like a copy of Bradshaw’s, the Victorian railway guide that charted the iron roads around Europe for the gentleman traveller; the history behind each of us is a travel journal that tells not only whence we have come but also the direction in which we are now heading. The past is not a burden but a provenance. The past is context; the past is all we have.

I wonder. The above model was fine for the artist belonging to an unwavering narrative of history, the artist with a sense of what it is — but it has certainly hit the buffers in modern times. For Schoenberg it worked: his composition was part of “a good, old-fashioned, properly-understood tradition” because he had no shadow of doubt what that tradition was, or that it occupied a position of cultural supremacy. Webern later unpacked this, in 1935, in the talks published as The Path To The New Music: drawing on examples from Ludwig Senfl through to Beethoven and on to Schoenberg, Webern set out the construction of the train track, mapping the point at which successive composers alighted to take charge of a new stretch. “We haven’t advanced beyond the classical composers’ forms,” he claimed, reassuringly. “What happened after them was only alteration, extension, abbreviation; but the forms remained, even in Schoenberg! All that has remained, but something has altered, all the same.” In other words, the past (whether the historic past or just the prior statement of a phrase four bars earlier) is the Pole Star from which we take all our bearings and upon which we elaborate — in the process becoming ourselves part of the past for someone else “further down the tracks”.

But all this development, this laying of track, has to rest on something we may no longer have — namely that sense of culture as a matter of a consensual history. I’m interested in when, and how, we lost this. As it happens, it still works for me as a composer; but this is not the case for everyone nowadays. For a start, this narrative sense of past can today be personal-individual, rather than part of a shared movement; you and I cannot assume we share a “journey” just from our both being composers, as once we could, for composition even of “art music” within our culture embraces infinite histories and narratives — or even non-histories, in terms of the old canons of European culture. I remember an American composer responding to the question, “How do you evolve without a thousand years’ history behind you?” by countering, “How do you manage to evolve with a thousand years’ history behind you?”

Q. According to Webern:

Solution:

►Refer to the lines: “We haven’t advanced beyond the classical composers’ forms,” he claimed, reassuringly. “What happened after them was only alteration, extension, abbreviation; but the forms remained, even in Schoenberg! All that has remained, but something has altered, all the same.”
These suggest that even though changes have taken place, fundamentals have remained the same. This makes option 4 the correct answer.

QUESTION: 3

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

As a composer I have always maintained that you cannot compose in a vacuum; to me the composition of art music has to be an expression of creative dissatisfaction with something. The European cultural construct of the artist has long been that of a traveller for whom the train of history has stopped too early; alighting, our composer is aware of being short of the destination — but the track has just come to an end. Like the dog Gromit in The Wrong Trousers, therefore, he or she must lay the track ahead while actually moving forward on it. The transport metaphor is apt in that our travellers will by definition have a sense of whence they came: even falling short of their destination, composers know what route led to that point — the main stretch of a track still to be extended. According to this wisdom, then, a cultural identity is a bit like a copy of Bradshaw’s, the Victorian railway guide that charted the iron roads around Europe for the gentleman traveller; the history behind each of us is a travel journal that tells not only whence we have come but also the direction in which we are now heading. The past is not a burden but a provenance. The past is context; the past is all we have.

I wonder. The above model was fine for the artist belonging to an unwavering narrative of history, the artist with a sense of what it is — but it has certainly hit the buffers in modern times. For Schoenberg it worked: his composition was part of “a good, old-fashioned, properly-understood tradition” because he had no shadow of doubt what that tradition was, or that it occupied a position of cultural supremacy. Webern later unpacked this, in 1935, in the talks published as The Path To The New Music: drawing on examples from Ludwig Senfl through to Beethoven and on to Schoenberg, Webern set out the construction of the train track, mapping the point at which successive composers alighted to take charge of a new stretch. “We haven’t advanced beyond the classical composers’ forms,” he claimed, reassuringly. “What happened after them was only alteration, extension, abbreviation; but the forms remained, even in Schoenberg! All that has remained, but something has altered, all the same.” In other words, the past (whether the historic past or just the prior statement of a phrase four bars earlier) is the Pole Star from which we take all our bearings and upon which we elaborate — in the process becoming ourselves part of the past for someone else “further down the tracks”.

But all this development, this laying of track, has to rest on something we may no longer have — namely that sense of culture as a matter of a consensual history. I’m interested in when, and how, we lost this. As it happens, it still works for me as a composer; but this is not the case for everyone nowadays. For a start, this narrative sense of past can today be personal-individual, rather than part of a shared movement; you and I cannot assume we share a “journey” just from our both being composers, as once we could, for composition even of “art music” within our culture embraces infinite histories and narratives — or even non-histories, in terms of the old canons of European culture. I remember an American composer responding to the question, “How do you evolve without a thousand years’ history behind you?” by countering, “How do you manage to evolve with a thousand years’ history behind you?”

Q. The train track in the given passage is a/an:

I. Oxymoron
II. Hyperbole
III. Metaphor
IV. Analogy

Identify the ones which are apt in the given case.

Solution:

Let’s analyze the meaning of each term:

I. Oxymoron: Conjoining contradictory terms (as in 'deafening silence')

II. Hyperbole: Extravagant exaggeration

III. Metaphor: A figure of speech in which an expression is used to refer to something that it does not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity

IV. Analogy: Drawing a comparison in order to show a similarity in some respect

We can see from the options above that III and IV are the perfect fit for the given passage.

QUESTION: 4

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

As a composer I have always maintained that you cannot compose in a vacuum; to me the composition of art music has to be an expression of creative dissatisfaction with something. The European cultural construct of the artist has long been that of a traveller for whom the train of history has stopped too early; alighting, our composer is aware of being short of the destination — but the track has just come to an end. Like the dog Gromit in The Wrong Trousers, therefore, he or she must lay the track ahead while actually moving forward on it. The transport metaphor is apt in that our travellers will by definition have a sense of whence they came: even falling short of their destination, composers know what route led to that point — the main stretch of a track still to be extended. According to this wisdom, then, a cultural identity is a bit like a copy of Bradshaw’s, the Victorian railway guide that charted the iron roads around Europe for the gentleman traveller; the history behind each of us is a travel journal that tells not only whence we have come but also the direction in which we are now heading. The past is not a burden but a provenance. The past is context; the past is all we have.

I wonder. The above model was fine for the artist belonging to an unwavering narrative of history, the artist with a sense of what it is — but it has certainly hit the buffers in modern times. For Schoenberg it worked: his composition was part of “a good, old-fashioned, properly-understood tradition” because he had no shadow of doubt what that tradition was, or that it occupied a position of cultural supremacy. Webern later unpacked this, in 1935, in the talks published as The Path To The New Music: drawing on examples from Ludwig Senfl through to Beethoven and on to Schoenberg, Webern set out the construction of the train track, mapping the point at which successive composers alighted to take charge of a new stretch. “We haven’t advanced beyond the classical composers’ forms,” he claimed, reassuringly. “What happened after them was only alteration, extension, abbreviation; but the forms remained, even in Schoenberg! All that has remained, but something has altered, all the same.” In other words, the past (whether the historic past or just the prior statement of a phrase four bars earlier) is the Pole Star from which we take all our bearings and upon which we elaborate — in the process becoming ourselves part of the past for someone else “further down the tracks”.

But all this development, this laying of track, has to rest on something we may no longer have — namely that sense of culture as a matter of a consensual history. I’m interested in when, and how, we lost this. As it happens, it still works for me as a composer; but this is not the case for everyone nowadays. For a start, this narrative sense of past can today be personal-individual, rather than part of a shared movement; you and I cannot assume we share a “journey” just from our both being composers, as once we could, for composition even of “art music” within our culture embraces infinite histories and narratives — or even non-histories, in terms of the old canons of European culture. I remember an American composer responding to the question, “How do you evolve without a thousand years’ history behind you?” by countering, “How do you manage to evolve with a thousand years’ history behind you?”

Q. In the given passage, the author highlights:

Solution:

Option 1 is too generic in nature.
Option 2 is a negative sentiment not expressed in the passage.
Option 3 is factually incorrect.
Option 4 can be derived from the last paragraph of the passage

QUESTION: 5

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Scientism has left humanity in our technical mastery of inanimate nature, but improvised us in our quest for an answer to the riddle of the universe and of our existence in it. Scientism has done worse than that with respect to our status as social beings, that is, to our life with our fellow human beings. The quest for the technical mastery of social life, comparable to our mastery over nature, did not find scientism at a loss for an answer: reason suggested that physical nature and social life were fundamentally alike and therefore proposed identical methods for their domination. Since reason in the form of causality reveals itself most plainly in nature, nature became the model for the social world and the natural sciences the image of what the social sciences one day would be. According to scientism, there was only one truth, the truth of science, and by knowing it, humanity would know all. This was, however, a fallacious argument, its universal acceptance initiated an intellectual movement and a political technique which retarded, rather than furthered, human mastery of the social world.

The analogy between the natural and social worlds is mistaken for two reasons. On the one hand human action is unable to model the social world with the same degree of technical perfection that is possible in the natural world. On the other hand, the very notion that physical nature is the embodiment of reason from which the analogy between natural and social worlds derives, is invalidated by modern scientific thought itself.

Physical nature, as seen by the practitioner of science consists of a multitude of isolated facts over which human action has complete control. We know that water boils at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit and, by exposing water to this temperature, we can make it boil at will. All practical knowledge of physical nature and all control over it are essentially of the same kind.

Scientism proposed that the same kind of knowledge and of control held true for the social world. The search for a single cause, in the social sciences, was but a faithful copy of the method of the physical sciences. Yet in the social sphere, the logical coherence of the natural sciences finds no adequate object and there is no single cause by the creation of which one can create a certain effect at will. Any single cause in the social sphere can entail an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different causes.

Q. According to the author, causes and effects in the social world are

Solution:

The last paragraph highlights that in social sphere there is no single cause by the creation of which one can create a certain effect at will.

QUESTION: 6

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Scientism has left humanity in our technical mastery of inanimate nature, but improvised us in our quest for an answer to the riddle of the universe and of our existence in it. Scientism has done worse than that with respect to our status as social beings, that is, to our life with our fellow human beings. The quest for the technical mastery of social life, comparable to our mastery over nature, did not find scientism at a loss for an answer: reason suggested that physical nature and social life were fundamentally alike and therefore proposed identical methods for their domination. Since reason in the form of causality reveals itself most plainly in nature, nature became the model for the social world and the natural sciences the image of what the social sciences one day would be. According to scientism, there was only one truth, the truth of science, and by knowing it, humanity would know all. This was, however, a fallacious argument, its universal acceptance initiated an intellectual movement and a political technique which retarded, rather than furthered, human mastery of the social world.

The analogy between the natural and social worlds is mistaken for two reasons. On the one hand human action is unable to model the social world with the same degree of technical perfection that is possible in the natural world. On the other hand, the very notion that physical nature is the embodiment of reason from which the analogy between natural and social worlds derives, is invalidated by modern scientific thought itself.

Physical nature, as seen by the practitioner of science consists of a multitude of isolated facts over which human action has complete control. We know that water boils at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit and, by exposing water to this temperature, we can make it boil at will. All practical knowledge of physical nature and all control over it are essentially of the same kind.

Scientism proposed that the same kind of knowledge and of control held true for the social world. The search for a single cause, in the social sciences, was but a faithful copy of the method of the physical sciences. Yet in the social sphere, the logical coherence of the natural sciences finds no adequate object and there is no single cause by the creation of which one can create a certain effect at will. Any single cause in the social sphere can entail an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different causes.

Q. Which of the following statements about scientism is best supported by the passage?

Solution:

The author has tried to show that scientism cannot be properly applied to explain social behaviour.

QUESTION: 7

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Scientism has left humanity in our technical mastery of inanimate nature, but improvised us in our quest for an answer to the riddle of the universe and of our existence in it. Scientism has done worse than that with respect to our status as social beings, that is, to our life with our fellow human beings. The quest for the technical mastery of social life, comparable to our mastery over nature, did not find scientism at a loss for an answer: reason suggested that physical nature and social life were fundamentally alike and therefore proposed identical methods for their domination. Since reason in the form of causality reveals itself most plainly in nature, nature became the model for the social world and the natural sciences the image of what the social sciences one day would be. According to scientism, there was only one truth, the truth of science, and by knowing it, humanity would know all. This was, however, a fallacious argument, its universal acceptance initiated an intellectual movement and a political technique which retarded, rather than furthered, human mastery of the social world.

The analogy between the natural and social worlds is mistaken for two reasons. On the one hand human action is unable to model the social world with the same degree of technical perfection that is possible in the natural world. On the other hand, the very notion that physical nature is the embodiment of reason from which the analogy between natural and social worlds derives, is invalidated by modern scientific thought itself.

Physical nature, as seen by the practitioner of science consists of a multitude of isolated facts over which human action has complete control. We know that water boils at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit and, by exposing water to this temperature, we can make it boil at will. All practical knowledge of physical nature and all control over it are essentially of the same kind.

Scientism proposed that the same kind of knowledge and of control held true for the social world. The search for a single cause, in the social sciences, was but a faithful copy of the method of the physical sciences. Yet in the social sphere, the logical coherence of the natural sciences finds no adequate object and there is no single cause by the creation of which one can create a certain effect at will. Any single cause in the social sphere can entail an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different causes.

Q. As is used in the passage, the term ‘scientism’ can best be defined as

Solution:

According to scientism there is only one truth the truth of science and the methods of physical science can thus be applied to other fields of enquiry, like the social sciences.

QUESTION: 8

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Scientism has left humanity in our technical mastery of inanimate nature, but improvised us in our quest for an answer to the riddle of the universe and of our existence in it. Scientism has done worse than that with respect to our status as social beings, that is, to our life with our fellow human beings. The quest for the technical mastery of social life, comparable to our mastery over nature, did not find scientism at a loss for an answer: reason suggested that physical nature and social life were fundamentally alike and therefore proposed identical methods for their domination. Since reason in the form of causality reveals itself most plainly in nature, nature became the model for the social world and the natural sciences the image of what the social sciences one day would be. According to scientism, there was only one truth, the truth of science, and by knowing it, humanity would know all. This was, however, a fallacious argument, its universal acceptance initiated an intellectual movement and a political technique which retarded, rather than furthered, human mastery of the social world.

The analogy between the natural and social worlds is mistaken for two reasons. On the one hand human action is unable to model the social world with the same degree of technical perfection that is possible in the natural world. On the other hand, the very notion that physical nature is the embodiment of reason from which the analogy between natural and social worlds derives, is invalidated by modern scientific thought itself.

Physical nature, as seen by the practitioner of science consists of a multitude of isolated facts over which human action has complete control. We know that water boils at a temperature of 212 degrees Fahrenheit and, by exposing water to this temperature, we can make it boil at will. All practical knowledge of physical nature and all control over it are essentially of the same kind.

Scientism proposed that the same kind of knowledge and of control held true for the social world. The search for a single cause, in the social sciences, was but a faithful copy of the method of the physical sciences. Yet in the social sphere, the logical coherence of the natural sciences finds no adequate object and there is no single cause by the creation of which one can create a certain effect at will. Any single cause in the social sphere can entail an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different effects, and the same effect can spring from an indefinite number of different causes.

Q. In the passage, the author is most concerned with doing which of the following?

Solution:

The author has attacked the approach of scientism towards social sciences.

QUESTION: 9

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Now let us turn back to inquire whether sending our capital abroad, and consenting to be taxed to pay emigration fares to get rid of the women and men who are left without employment in consequence, is all that capitalism can do when our employers, who act for our capitalists in industrial affairs, and are more or less capitalists themselves in the earlier stages of capitalistic development, find that they can sell no more of their goods at a profit, or indeed at all, in their own country.

Clearly, they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the workers, leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship's hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital that can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished products. But the British land held by him on long lease, must, when once he has sold all the goods at home that his British customers can afford to buy, either shut up his works until the customers have worn out their stock of what they have bought, which would bankrupt him (for the landlord will not wait), or else sell his superfluous goods somewhere else; that is, he must send them abroad. Now it is not easy to send them to civilized countries, because they practice Protection, which means that they impose heavy taxes (customs duties) on foreign goods. Uncivilized countries, without Protection, and inhabited by natives to whom gaudy calicoes and cheap showy brassware are dazzling and delightful novelties, are the best places to make for at first.

But trade requires a settled government to put down the habit of plundering strangers. This is not a habit of simple tribes, who are often friendly and honest. It is what civilized men do where there is no law to restrain them. Until quite recent times it was extremely dangerous to be wrecked on our own coasts, as wrecking, which meant plundering wrecked ships and refraining from any officious efforts to save the lives of their crews, was a well-established business in many places on our shores. The Chinese still remember some astonishing outbursts of looting perpetrated by English ladies of high position, at moments when law was suspended and priceless works of art were to be had for the grabbing. When trading with aborigines begins with the visit of a single ship, the cannons and cutlasses carried may be quite sufficient to overawe the natives if they are troublesome. The real difficulty begins when so many ships come that a little trading station of white men grows up and attracts the white ne'er-do-wells and violent roughs who are always being squeezed out of civilization by the pressure of law and order. It is these riff-raff who turn the place into a sort of hell in which sooner or later missionaries are murdered and traders plundered. Their home governments are appealed to put a stop to this. A gunboat is sent out and inquiry made. The report after the inquiry is that there is nothing to be done but set up a civilized government, with a post office, police, troops and the navy in the offing. In short, the place is added to some civilized Empire. And the civilized taxpayer pays the bill without getting a farthing of the profits.

Of course the business does not stop there. The riff-raff who have created the emergency move out just beyond the boundary of the annexed territory, and are as great a nuisance as ever to the traders when they have exhausted the purchasing power of the included natives and push on after fresh customers. Again they call on their home government to civilize a further area; and so bit by bit the civilized Empire grows at the expense of the home taxpayers, without any intention or approval on their part, until at last although all their real patriotism is centred on their own people and confined to their own country, their own rulers, and their own religious faith; they find that the centre of their beloved realm has shifted to the other hemisphere. That is how we in the British Islands have found our centre moved from London to the Suez Canal, and are now in the position that out of every hundred of our fellow-subjects, in whose defence we are expected to shed the last drop of our blood, only 11 are whites or even Christians. In our bewilderment some of us declare that the Empire is a burden and blunder, whilst others glory in it as a triumph. You and I need not argue with them just now, our point for the moment being that, whether blunder or glory, the British Empire was quite unintentional. What should have been undertaken only as a most carefully considered political development has been a series of commercial adventures thrust on us by capitalists forced by their own system to cater to foreign customers before their own country's needs were one-tenth satisfied.

Q. It may be inferred that the passage was written

Solution:

The passage refers to the British Government as the 'Empire', and talks about the way it takes over foreign territories.

QUESTION: 10

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Now Let us turn back to inquire whether sending our capital abroad, and consenting to be taxed to pay emigration fares to get rid of the women and men who are left without employment in consequence, is all that capitalism can do when our employers, who act for out capitalists in industry affairs, and are more or less capitalists themselves in the earlier stages of capitalistic development, find that they can sell no more of their goods at a profit, or indeed at all, in their own country.

Clearly, they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the works leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship’s hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital than can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished product. But the British land held by him on long lease, must, when once he has sold all the goods at home that his British customers can afford to buy, either shut up his works until the customers have worn out their stock of what they have bought, which would bankrupt him (for the landlord will not wait), or else sell his superfluous good somewhere else; that is, he must send them abroad. Now it is not easy to send them to civilized countries, because they practise protection, which means that they impose heavy taxes on foreign goods. Uncivilized countries, without protection, and inhabited by natives to whom gaudy calicoes and cheap showy brassware are dazzling and delightful novelties, are the best places to make for at first.

But trader requires a settled government to put down the habit of plundering strangers. This is not a habit of simple tribes, who are often friendly and honest. It is what civilized men do where there is no law to restrain them. Until quite recent times it was extremely dangerous to be wrecked on our coasts, as wrecking, which meant plundering wrecked ships and refraining from any officious efforts to save the lives of their crews was a well-established business in many places on our shores. The Chinese still remember some astonishing outbursts of looting perpetrated by English ladies of high position, at moments when trading was suspended and priceless works of art were to be had for the grabbing. When trading with aborigines begins with the visit of a single ship, the cannons and cutlasses carried may be quite sufficient to overawe the natives if they are troublesome. The real difficulty begins when so many ships come that a little trading station of white men grows up and attracts the white never-do-wells and violent roughs who are always being squeezed out of civilization by the pressure of law and order. It is these riff-raff who turn the place into a sort of hell in which sooner or later missionaries and murdered and traders plundered. Their home governments are appealed to put a stop to this. A gunboat is sent out and inquiry made. The report after the inquiry is that there is nothing to be done but set up a civilized empire. And the civilized taxpayer plays the bill without getting a farthing of the profits.

Of course the business does not stop there. The riff-raff who have created the emergency move out just beyond the boundary of the annexed territory, and are as great a nuisance as ever to the traders when they have exhausted the purchasing power of the included natives and push on after fresh customers. Again they call on their home government to civilize a further area; and so bit by bit the civilized empire grows at the expense of the home taxpayers, without any intention or approval on their own country, their own rulers, and their own religious faith; they find that the centre of their beloved realm has shifted to the other hemisphere. That is how we in the British Islands have found our centre moved from London to the Suez Canal, and are now in the position that out of every hundred of our fellow-subjects, in whose defence we are expected to shed the last drop of our blood, only 11 are whites or even Christians. In our bewilderment some of us declare that the Empire is a burden and a blunder, whilst others glory in it as triumph. You and I need not argue with them just now, our point for the moment being that, whether blunder or glory. The British Empire was quite unintentional. What should have been undertaken only as most carefully considered political development has been a series of commercial adventures thrust on us by capitalists forced by their own system to cater to foreign customers before their own country’s need were one-tenth satisfied.

According to the author, the habit of plundering the strangers:

Solution:

The author says that simple tribes are often friendly and hones.

QUESTION: 11

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Now Let us turn back to inquire whether sending our capital abroad, and consenting to be taxed to pay emigration fares to get rid of the women and men who are left without employment in consequence, is all that capitalism can do when our employers, who act for out capitalists in industry affairs, and are more or less capitalists themselves in the earlier stages of capitalistic development, find that they can sell no more of their goods at a profit, or indeed at all, in their own country.

Clearly, they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the works leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship’s hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital than can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished product. But the British land held by him on long lease, must, when once he has sold all the goods at home that his British customers can afford to buy, either shut up his works until the customers have worn out their stock of what they have bought, which would bankrupt him (for the landlord will not wait), or else sell his superfluous good somewhere else; that is, he must send them abroad. Now it is not easy to send them to civilized countries, because they practise protection, which means that they impose heavy taxes on foreign goods. Uncivilized countries, without protection, and inhabited by natives to whom gaudy calicoes and cheap showy brassware are dazzling and delightful novelties, are the best places to make for at first.

But trader requires a settled government to put down the habit of plundering strangers. This is not a habit of simple tribes, who are often friendly and honest. It is what civilized men do where there is no law to restrain them. Until quite recent times it was extremely dangerous to be wrecked on our coasts, as wrecking, which meant plundering wrecked ships and refraining from any officious efforts to save the lives of their crews was a well-established business in many places on our shores. The Chinese still remember some astonishing outbursts of looting perpetrated by English ladies of high position, at moments when trading was suspended and priceless works of art were to be had for the grabbing. When trading with aborigines begins with the visit of a single ship, the cannons and cutlasses carried may be quite sufficient to overawe the natives if they are troublesome. The real difficulty begins when so many ships come that a little trading station of white men grows up and attracts the white never-do-wells and violent roughs who are always being squeezed out of civilization by the pressure of law and order. It is these riff-raff who turn the place into a sort of hell in which sooner or later missionaries and murdered and traders plundered. Their home governments are appealed to put a stop to this. A gunboat is sent out and inquiry made. The report after the inquiry is that there is nothing to be done but set up a civilized empire. And the civilized taxpayer plays the bill without getting a farthing of the profits.

Of course the business does not stop there. The riff-raff who have created the emergency move out just beyond the boundary of the annexed territory, and are as great a nuisance as ever to the traders when they have exhausted the purchasing power of the included natives and push on after fresh customers. Again they call on their home government to civilize a further area; and so bit by bit the civilized empire grows at the expense of the home taxpayers, without any intention or approval on their own country, their own rulers, and their own religious faith; they find that the centre of their beloved realm has shifted to the other hemisphere. That is how we in the British Islands have found our centre moved from London to the Suez Canal, and are now in the position that out of every hundred of our fellow-subjects, in whose defence we are expected to shed the last drop of our blood, only 11 are whites or even Christians. In our bewilderment some of us declare that the Empire is a burden and a blunder, whilst others glory in it as triumph. You and I need not argue with them just now, our point for the moment being that, whether blunder or glory. The British Empire was quite unintentional. What should have been undertaken only as most carefully considered political development has been a series of commercial adventures thrust on us by capitalists forced by their own system to cater to foreign customers before their own country’s need were one-tenth satisfied.

Q. Which of the following does not come under the aegis of capital already invested?

Solution:

Trade of finished products falls under the capital freshly saved. Refer to lines "Clearly they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the workers, leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship's hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital that can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished products."

Clearly they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the workers, leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship''s hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital that can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished products.

QUESTION: 12

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

Now Let us turn back to inquire whether sending our capital abroad, and consenting to be taxed to pay emigration fares to get rid of the women and men who are left without employment in consequence, is all that capitalism can do when our employers, who act for out capitalists in industry affairs, and are more or less capitalists themselves in the earlier stages of capitalistic development, find that they can sell no more of their goods at a profit, or indeed at all, in their own country.

Clearly, they cannot send abroad the capital they have already invested, because it has all been eaten up by the works leaving in its place factories and railways and mines and the like; and these cannot be packed into a ship’s hold and sent to Africa. It is only the freshly saved capital than can be sent out of the country. This, as we have seen, does go abroad in heaps of finished product. But the British land held by him on long lease, must, when once he has sold all the goods at home that his British customers can afford to buy, either shut up his works until the customers have worn out their stock of what they have bought, which would bankrupt him (for the landlord will not wait), or else sell his superfluous good somewhere else; that is, he must send them abroad. Now it is not easy to send them to civilized countries, because they practise protection, which means that they impose heavy taxes on foreign goods. Uncivilized countries, without protection, and inhabited by natives to whom gaudy calicoes and cheap showy brassware are dazzling and delightful novelties, are the best places to make for at first.

But trader requires a settled government to put down the habit of plundering strangers. This is not a habit of simple tribes, who are often friendly and honest. It is what civilized men do where there is no law to restrain them. Until quite recent times it was extremely dangerous to be wrecked on our coasts, as wrecking, which meant plundering wrecked ships and refraining from any officious efforts to save the lives of their crews was a well-established business in many places on our shores. The Chinese still remember some astonishing outbursts of looting perpetrated by English ladies of high position, at moments when trading was suspended and priceless works of art were to be had for the grabbing. When trading with aborigines begins with the visit of a single ship, the cannons and cutlasses carried may be quite sufficient to overawe the natives if they are troublesome. The real difficulty begins when so many ships come that a little trading station of white men grows up and attracts the white never-do-wells and violent roughs who are always being squeezed out of civilization by the pressure of law and order. It is these riff-raff who turn the place into a sort of hell in which sooner or later missionaries and murdered and traders plundered. Their home governments are appealed to put a stop to this. A gunboat is sent out and inquiry made. The report after the inquiry is that there is nothing to be done but set up a civilized empire. And the civilized taxpayer plays the bill without getting a farthing of the profits.

Of course the business does not stop there. The riff-raff who have created the emergency move out just beyond the boundary of the annexed territory, and are as great a nuisance as ever to the traders when they have exhausted the purchasing power of the included natives and push on after fresh customers. Again they call on their home government to civilize a further area; and so bit by bit the civilized empire grows at the expense of the home taxpayers, without any intention or approval on their own country, their own rulers, and their own religious faith; they find that the centre of their beloved realm has shifted to the other hemisphere. That is how we in the British Islands have found our centre moved from London to the Suez Canal, and are now in the position that out of every hundred of our fellow-subjects, in whose defence we are expected to shed the last drop of our blood, only 11 are whites or even Christians. In our bewilderment some of us declare that the Empire is a burden and a blunder, whilst others glory in it as triumph. You and I need not argue with them just now, our point for the moment being that, whether blunder or glory. The British Empire was quite unintentional. What should have been undertaken only as most carefully considered political development has been a series of commercial adventures thrust on us by capitalists forced by their own system to cater to foreign customers before their own country’s need were one-tenth satisfied.

Q. Which of the following may be called the main complaint of the author?

Solution:

He says that the civilized empire grows at the expense of the home tax payers, without any intention or approval on their parts.

QUESTION: 13

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

If you don’t believe in anything supernatural – gods, ghosts, immaterial souls and spirits – then you subscribe to naturalism, the idea that nature is all there is. The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts. Kept honest by philosophy and critical thinking, science reveals a single manifold of existence, what we call nature, containing an untold myriad of interconnected phenomena, from quarks to quasars. Nature is simply what we have good reason to believe exists.

We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency. Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity. As naturalists, we might not always like what science reveals about ourselves or our situation, but that’s the psychological price of being what we might call cognitively responsible, of assuming our maturity as a species capable of representing reality.

To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon. Just as science shows no evidence for a supernatural god “up there”, there’s no evidence for an immaterial soul or mental agent “in here”, supervising the body and brain. So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules. We aren’t exempt from the various law-like regularities science discovers at the physical, chemical, biological, psychological and behavioral levels. The naturalistic understanding and acceptance of our fully caused, interdependent nature is directly at odds with the widespread belief (even among many freethinkers) that human beings have supernatural, contra-causal free will, and so are in but not fully of this world.

The naturalist understands not only that we are not exceptions to natural laws, but that we don’t need to be in order to secure any central value (freedom, human rights, morality, moral responsibility) or capacity (reason, empathy, ingenuity, originality). We can positively affirm and celebrate the fact that nature is enough. Indeed, the realization that we are fully natural creatures has profoundly positive effects, increasing our sense of connection to the world and others, fostering tolerance, compassion and humility, and giving us greater control over our circumstances. This realization supports a progressive and effective engagement with the human condition in all its dimensions. So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. By staying true to science, our most reliable means of representing reality, naturalists find themselves at home in the cosmos, astonished at the sheer scope and complexity of the natural world, and grateful for the chance to participate in the grand project of nature coming to know herself.

Q. The author of the passage implies the beliefs of naturalists as:

I. Observed
II. Non-partisan
III. Corroborated

Solution:

The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts.

Keep the following in the mind:

  • Observed is a synonym for empirical
  • Non-partisan is a synonym for objective.
  • Corroborated is the opposite of uncorroborated.

Thus, all of the words given in the question are derived from the passage itself. This makes option 4 the right answer in the given case.

QUESTION: 14

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

If you don’t believe in anything supernatural – gods, ghosts, immaterial souls and spirits – then you subscribe to naturalism, the idea that nature is all there is. The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts. Kept honest by philosophy and critical thinking, science reveals a single manifold of existence, what we call nature, containing an untold myriad of interconnected phenomena, from quarks to quasars. Nature is simply what we have good reason to believe exists.

We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency. Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity. As naturalists, we might not always like what science reveals about ourselves or our situation, but that’s the psychological price of being what we might call cognitively responsible, of assuming our maturity as a species capable of representing reality.

To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon. Just as science shows no evidence for a supernatural god “up there”, there’s no evidence for an immaterial soul or mental agent “in here”, supervising the body and brain. So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules. We aren’t exempt from the various law-like regularities science discovers at the physical, chemical, biological, psychological and behavioral levels. The naturalistic understanding and acceptance of our fully caused, interdependent nature is directly at odds with the widespread belief (even among many freethinkers) that human beings have supernatural, contra-causal free will, and so are in but not fully of this world.

The naturalist understands not only that we are not exceptions to natural laws, but that we don’t need to be in order to secure any central value (freedom, human rights, morality, moral responsibility) or capacity (reason, empathy, ingenuity, originality). We can positively affirm and celebrate the fact that nature is enough. Indeed, the realization that we are fully natural creatures has profoundly positive effects, increasing our sense of connection to the world and others, fostering tolerance, compassion and humility, and giving us greater control over our circumstances. This realization supports a progressive and effective engagement with the human condition in all its dimensions. So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. By staying true to science, our most reliable means of representing reality, naturalists find themselves at home in the cosmos, astonished at the sheer scope and complexity of the natural world, and grateful for the chance to participate in the grand project of nature coming to know herself.

Q. The primary purpose of the author is to:

Solution:

In this problem, you need to really careful about the implied meaning of the author of the passage. The author of the passage supports naturalism (this is very clear), he explains the core ideas of naturalism and contrasts these with those of supernaturalism. Keeping this in mind, this makes option 2 the correct answer.

Option 1 is incorrect as he does not mention that naturalism is the most superior form of thought.

Option 3 is incorrect as we do not know whether naturalism appeals to a wide number of people.

Option 4 is incorrect as the critics of naturalism are not mentioned in the passage.

QUESTION: 15

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

If you don’t believe in anything supernatural – gods, ghosts, immaterial souls and spirits – then you subscribe to naturalism, the idea that nature is all there is. The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts. Kept honest by philosophy and critical thinking, science reveals a single manifold of existence, what we call nature, containing an untold myriad of interconnected phenomena, from quarks to quasars. Nature is simply what we have good reason to believe exists.

We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency. Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity. As naturalists, we might not always like what science reveals about ourselves or our situation, but that’s the psychological price of being what we might call cognitively responsible, of assuming our maturity as a species capable of representing reality.

To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon. Just as science shows no evidence for a supernatural god “up there”, there’s no evidence for an immaterial soul or mental agent “in here”, supervising the body and brain. So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules. We aren’t exempt from the various law-like regularities science discovers at the physical, chemical, biological, psychological and behavioral levels. The naturalistic understanding and acceptance of our fully caused, interdependent nature is directly at odds with the widespread belief (even among many freethinkers) that human beings have supernatural, contra-causal free will, and so are in but not fully of this world.

The naturalist understands not only that we are not exceptions to natural laws, but that we don’t need to be in order to secure any central value (freedom, human rights, morality, moral responsibility) or capacity (reason, empathy, ingenuity, originality). We can positively affirm and celebrate the fact that nature is enough. Indeed, the realization that we are fully natural creatures has profoundly positive effects, increasing our sense of connection to the world and others, fostering tolerance, compassion and humility, and giving us greater control over our circumstances. This realization supports a progressive and effective engagement with the human condition in all its dimensions. So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. By staying true to science, our most reliable means of representing reality, naturalists find themselves at home in the cosmos, astonished at the sheer scope and complexity of the natural world, and grateful for the chance to participate in the grand project of nature coming to know herself.

Q. Each of the following is true as per the passage except:

Solution:

Refer to this line: So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. This clearly implies that even though these two worldviews are different, there is a similarity between the two. Effectively, 'worldview naturalism = supernatural worldviews minus illusions'. This makes option 3 incorrect in nature.

Option 1 can be derived from the lines: To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon.

Option 2 can be derived from the lines: So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules.

Option 4 can be derived from the lines: We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency.

QUESTION: 16

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

If you don’t believe in anything supernatural – gods, ghosts, immaterial souls and spirits – then you subscribe to naturalism, the idea that nature is all there is. The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts. Kept honest by philosophy and critical thinking, science reveals a single manifold of existence, what we call nature, containing an untold myriad of interconnected phenomena, from quarks to quasars. Nature is simply what we have good reason to believe exists.

We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency. Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity. As naturalists, we might not always like what science reveals about ourselves or our situation, but that’s the psychological price of being what we might call cognitively responsible, of assuming our maturity as a species capable of representing reality.

To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon. Just as science shows no evidence for a supernatural god “up there”, there’s no evidence for an immaterial soul or mental agent “in here”, supervising the body and brain. So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules. We aren’t exempt from the various law-like regularities science discovers at the physical, chemical, biological, psychological and behavioral levels. The naturalistic understanding and acceptance of our fully caused, interdependent nature is directly at odds with the widespread belief (even among many freethinkers) that human beings have supernatural, contra-causal free will, and so are in but not fully of this world.

The naturalist understands not only that we are not exceptions to natural laws, but that we don’t need to be in order to secure any central value (freedom, human rights, morality, moral responsibility) or capacity (reason, empathy, ingenuity, originality). We can positively affirm and celebrate the fact that nature is enough. Indeed, the realization that we are fully natural creatures has profoundly positive effects, increasing our sense of connection to the world and others, fostering tolerance, compassion and humility, and giving us greater control over our circumstances. This realization supports a progressive and effective engagement with the human condition in all its dimensions. So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. By staying true to science, our most reliable means of representing reality, naturalists find themselves at home in the cosmos, astonished at the sheer scope and complexity of the natural world, and grateful for the chance to participate in the grand project of nature coming to know herself.

Q. With reference to each other, the beliefs of the naturalists and super-naturalists:

Solution:

In the given case, the views naturalists and super-naturalists contradict each other and are in opposition to each other. Options 1 and 4 imply similarity of views and hence are ruled out. Options 2 and 3 require careful consideration. Let's have a look at the meanings of the given words:

1. Anomalousness: Deviation from the normal or common order or form or rule.
2. Dichotomous: Divided or dividing into two sharply distinguished parts or classifications.

We can clearly see that dichotomy is the correct choice in the given case.

Also, refer to the lines: We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency.

Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity.

QUESTION: 17

Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

If you don’t believe in anything supernatural – gods, ghosts, immaterial souls and spirits – then you subscribe to naturalism, the idea that nature is all there is. The reason you’re a naturalist is likely that, wanting not to be deceived, you put stock in empirical, evidence-based ways of justifying beliefs about what’s real, as for instance exemplified by science. You probably (and rightly) hold that such beliefs are usually more reliable and more objective than those based in uncorroborated intuition, revelation, religious authority or sacred texts. Kept honest by philosophy and critical thinking, science reveals a single manifold of existence, what we call nature, containing an untold myriad of interconnected phenomena, from quarks to quasars. Nature is simply what we have good reason to believe exists.

We can see, therefore, that naturalism as a metaphysical thesis is driven by a desire for a clear, reliable account of reality and how it works, a desire that generates an unflinching commitment to objectivity and explanatory transparency. Supernaturalism, on the other hand, thrives on non-scientific, non-empirical justifications for beliefs that allow us to project our hopes and fears onto the world, the opposite of objectivity. As naturalists, we might not always like what science reveals about ourselves or our situation, but that’s the psychological price of being what we might call cognitively responsible, of assuming our maturity as a species capable of representing reality.

To be a thorough-going naturalist is to accept yourself as an entirely natural phenomenon. Just as science shows no evidence for a supernatural god “up there”, there’s no evidence for an immaterial soul or mental agent “in here”, supervising the body and brain. So naturalism involves a good deal more than atheism or skepticism – it’s the recognition that we are full-fledged participants in the natural order and as such we play by nature’s rules. We aren’t exempt from the various law-like regularities science discovers at the physical, chemical, biological, psychological and behavioral levels. The naturalistic understanding and acceptance of our fully caused, interdependent nature is directly at odds with the widespread belief (even among many freethinkers) that human beings have supernatural, contra-causal free will, and so are in but not fully of this world.

The naturalist understands not only that we are not exceptions to natural laws, but that we don’t need to be in order to secure any central value (freedom, human rights, morality, moral responsibility) or capacity (reason, empathy, ingenuity, originality). We can positively affirm and celebrate the fact that nature is enough. Indeed, the realization that we are fully natural creatures has profoundly positive effects, increasing our sense of connection to the world and others, fostering tolerance, compassion and humility, and giving us greater control over our circumstances. This realization supports a progressive and effective engagement with the human condition in all its dimensions. So we can justly call it worldview naturalism: an overarching cognitive, ethical and existential framework that serves the same function as supernatural worldviews, but without trafficking in illusions. By staying true to science, our most reliable means of representing reality, naturalists find themselves at home in the cosmos, astonished at the sheer scope and complexity of the natural world, and grateful for the chance to participate in the grand project of nature coming to know herself.

Q. The tone and attitude exhibited by the author of the passage can be identified as:

Solution:

In order to identify the answers, you need to know the meanings of the individual words:

  • Affirmative: Expressing or manifesting praise or approval
  • Purposeful: Having meaning through having an aim
  • Insightful: Exhibiting insight or clear and deep perception
  • Inconclusive: Not conclusive; not putting an end to doubt or question
  • Thoughtful: Having intellectual depth
  • Depreciatory: Tending to diminish or disparage
  • Precise: Sharply exact, accurate or delimited
  • Inchoate: Only partly in existence; imperfectly formed 

We can see from the meanings above that option 1 is the perfect fit in the given case.

QUESTION: 18

Four sentences related to a topic are given below. Three of them can be put together  to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your answer and key it in.

Solution:

The rest three option are connected together and form a trio as the other three are talking about the ''Evil human nature'' whereas 1 talks of ''innocence''.The order will be 324. Statement 1 does not fit anywhere.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 19

Four sentences related to a topic are given below. Three of them can be put together  to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your answer and key it in.(numerical value)

1. Being “all in” or “all out” are two unproductive ways of finding a work-life balance in a family business
2. Indeed, they can cause problems when it comes to succession or when boundaries cut across customer needs or reduce operational efficiencies
3. Neither alternative allows the family member room to sculpt a satisfying role in the family business system
4. Of course, finding a balance is difficult in a publicly-traded company, too, but in a family business the boundary between professional and personal lives is often fuzzy


Solution:

► The paragraph is talking about family business.

► Neither alternative in statement 3 refers to “all in” or “all out” that is talked about in statement 1.

Statement 4 continues with the balance idea of statement 1

► In statement 2, there is a pronoun 'they' which doesn’t refer to anything in any of the other sentences.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 20

Four sentences related to a topic are given below. Three of them can be put together  to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your answer and key it in. (numerical value)

1. Smart businessmen aren't interested in putting their efforts into business plans dependant on laws which, not only haven't been passed yet, but haven't even been introduced.
2. Smart Congressmen aren't interested in putting their efforts into introducing legislation to create industries that businessmen aren't even talking about yet.
3. It would make a huge difference if someone capable of operating at that level, such as a really big investor or a Fortune 500 company, took the time to think carefully about the economics and realized how profitable owning land on the Moon could be and talked of the necessary legal eco-system.
4. Of course, the Congress would give the idea much more credibility if they heard someone representing Boeing or Lockheed tell them that passing a land claims recognition law would lead to a serious privately funded space development effort but the problem, unfortunately, has been like the classic "which comes first: the chicken or the egg?"


Solution:

The lines 2, 3 and 4 given here are interlinked as they all talk of the idea of the Congress enabling suitable laws to make possible the ownership of land in the outer space.

Contrastingly, statement 1 talks of businessmen''s reluctance to venture into something unless it has the enabling legal provisions.

QUESTION: 21

Identify the most appropriate summary for the paragraph.

Of all the uncertainties in our halting economic recovery, the housing market may be the most confusing of all. At times, real estate seems to be in the early stages of a severe double dip. Home sales plunged in July, and some analysts are now predicting that the market will struggle for years, if not decades. Others argue that the worst is over. As Karl Case, the eminent real estate economist, recently wrote, “Buying a house now can make a lot of sense.” I can’t claim to clear up all the uncertainty. But I do want to suggest a framework for figuring out whether you lean bearish or less bearish: do you believe that housing is a luxury good and that societies spend more on it as they get richer?

Solution:

► Option 2 represents the balanced answer to this question as it covers all the important aspects of the paragraph.

► Option 1 is vague and unclear. It also deviates from the main topic of the paragraph.

Option 3 is incorrect as it the second half misses out the reference to the important question that is provided by the author at the end of the paragraph.

► Option 4 introduces content which is not present in the paragraph. Also, its judgment about the current status of the housing market is unfounded.

QUESTION: 22

Identify the most appropriate summary for the paragraph.

The man of science knows, in one aspect, that the world is not merely what it appears to be to our senses; he knows that earth and water are really the play of forces that manifest themselves to us as earth and water—how, we can but partially apprehend. Likewise the man who has his spiritual eyes open knows that the ultimate truth about earth and water lies in our apprehension of the eternal will which works in time and takes shape in the forces we realise under those aspects. This is not mere knowledge, as science is, but it is a preception of the soul by the soul. This does not lead us to power, as knowledge does, but it gives us joy, which is the product of the union of kindred things. The man whose acquaintance with the world does not lead him deeper than science leads him, will never understand what it is that the man with the spiritual vision finds in these natural phenomena. The water does not merely cleanse his limbs, but it purifies his heart; for it touches his soul. The earth does not merely hold his body, but it gladdens his mind; for its contact is more than a physical contact—it is a living presence.

Solution:

In the given case, options 1,3 and 4 commit the common mistake of only focusing on the man of science.

Option 2 provides the other side as well and is the only complete option in the given case.

QUESTION: 23

Identify the most appropriate summary for the paragraph.

The year 2013 was one of the ten hottest on record. So was 2010. So were 2009, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2003, 2002, and 1998. Last year, with its polar vortex and biting winter, seemed to bring relief to North America. Except it also brought temperatures of over 120ºF to Australia, massive flooding to Malaysia, and the third harrowing year of drought to California. As it turns out, 2014 was the hottest single year since meteorologists started measuring in 1850. By now, we’ve raised the average global temperature a little less than one degree Celsius since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The best predictions suggest that we will raise it somewhere between four and six degrees by 2100. With the heat will also come side effects: fiercer and more frequent storms, droughts, acidifying oceans, melting glaciers, and the loss of species. And the bad news is, that’s not even the bad news. Each drought, each megastorm, each scorching summer puts a strain on the complex systems that provide us with water, food, and power and that keep disease and disorder at bay. These systems can often endure a single crisis—one Sandy, one Katrina. The problem is what happens when the Sandys and Katrinas start coming back to back, piling up on each other. That’s when the money runs out, the electricity goes off, and everyone starts wondering where to find water. If true catastrophe arrives, it will not come gradually but, as the historian Nils Gilman writes, “as a series of radical discontinuities—a series of bewildering ‘oh shit’ events.” Welcome to the future. Oh shit.

Solution:

In the given case, only option 2 captures the true essence of the passage. The passage predicts what is going to happen in the future, on the basis of the present changes that are taking place on planet earth. The catastrophe the planet might face in the future is because of the series of events it will go through and how these add up. This sentiment is best reflected by option 2.

► Option 1 talks about a certain sequence of events. Though casually related with the passage, this is not directly stated in the given paragraph.

Option 3 talks about the true catastrophe striking the planet shortly. This is clearly not mentioned in the passage.

Option 4 talks about the fate of earth resting in the hands of man. This is again something not mentioned in the paragraph.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 24

DIRECTIONS for the question: The five sentences (labelled 1,2,3,4, and 5) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper order for the sentence and key in this sequence of five numbers as your answer.

1. ‘What kind of materials?’ The bank officer looked puzzled, as if this were some sort of new game whose rules he was not familiar with. He let me speak out of common respect for a University department head, but he was clearly lost.

2. ‘What can I do for you, sir?’

3. The Chittagong University branch of the Janata Bank was housed in a single square room. The manager, sitting at the back to the left, under a ceiling fan, greeted me politely and invited me to sit down.

4. ‘Well, some make bamboo stools; others weave mats, or drive a rickshaw.... If they borrowed from a bank at commercial rates, they could sell their products on the open market and make a decent profit that would allow them to live.

5. ‘The last time I borrowed from you was to finance the Three-Share Programme. Now I have a new proposal. I want you to lend money to the poor people in Jobra. The amount involved is very small. I have already-done it myself. I have lent $27 to forty-two people. There will be many more poor people who will need money. They need this money to carry on their work, to buy raw materials and supplies.’ 


Solution:

► The para talks about a client visiting a bank for loan.

► The para starts with place of conversation - statement 3

► Statement 2 begins the conversation 5 provides us with answer to question asked in 2

► 5 and 1 are connected by word materials.

► 4 provides explanation as in statement 1 mgr was ''lost''

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 25

DIRECTIONS for the question: The five sentences (labelled 1,2,3,4, and 5) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper order for the sentence and key in this sequence of five numbers as your answer.

1. They simply followed the trail blazed by mainstream mortgage lenders in the 1980s.

2. But that did not worry the subprime lenders.

3. As a business model subprime lending worked beautifully – as long as interest rates stayed low, as long as people kept their jobs and as long as real estate prices continued to rise.

4. Instead of putting their own money at risk, they pocketed fat commissions on signature of the original loan con­tracts and then resold their loans in bulk to Wall Street banks.

5. Of course, such conditions could not be relied upon to last, least of all in a city like Detroit.


Solution:

► 3 introduces the topic - subprime lending.

► 3-5 are linked as ''such conditions'' in 5 refers to conditions in 3.

► ''such conditions could not be relied upon to last'' in 5 did not worry the lenders in 2.

► 2 introduces subprime lenders referred to as ''they'' in 1.

► Trail blazed by mortgage lenders in 1 detailed in 4.

QUESTION: 26

Analyse the graph/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The graph shows the market supply of stainless steel and cast iron over different quarters of three years in millions tonnes.

 

Q. In which of the given years was the market supply of Stainless Steel and Cast Iron, in million tonnes, the highest?

Solution:

Using value from the graph , we can make the following tables.

The supply of Stainless Steel and Cast Iron was the highest in 2000 at 135.5 million tonnes.

Hence the answer is option A

QUESTION: 27

Analyse the graph/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The graph shows the market supply of stainless steel and cast iron over different quarters of three years in millions tonnes.

Q. From 2001 to 2002, the supply of Stainless Steel increased by approximately

Solution:

Using value from the graph, we can make the following tables.

From 2001 to 2002, the supply of Stainless Steel has decreased

Now as there is a decrease the answer will be none of these.

QUESTION: 28

Analyse the graph/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The graph shows the market supply of stainless steel and cast iron over different quarters of three years in millions tonnes.

Q. In 2000, 29% of the supply of Stainless Steel and 31% of the supply of Cast Iron was from Imports. Approximately what percent of the total supply of Stainless Steel and Cast Iron was constituted of imports?

Solution:

Using values from graph, we can make the following tables.

We can answer this question by calculating the actual values and dividing by the total. However, logically, the overall average cannot be less than 29% and not more than 31%. so the best answer is 30%.

QUESTION: 29

Analyse the graph/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The graph shows the market supply of stainless steel and cast iron over different quarters of three years in millions tonnes.

Q. In which quarter, as compared to the previous one, did the total supply of Stainless Steel and Cast Iron, in million tonnes, fall the most?

Solution:

Using values from the graph, we can make the following tables.

From Q4, 2000 to Q1, 2001, the total supply increased from 33 to 36.5 million tommes.

From Q2, 2000 Q3, 2000, the total supply fell from 35 to 31 by 4 million tonnes.

From Q2, 2001 to Q3, 2002, the total supply fell from 36 to 30 by 6 million tonnes.

From Q2, 2002 to Q3, 2002, the total supply fell from 36.5 to 31.5 by 5 million tonnes.

From Q3, 2002 to Q4, 2002, the total supply fell from 31.5 to 29.5 by 2 million tonnes.
So the steepest fall was in Q3, 2001.

Hence the answer is option C

QUESTION: 30

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Six teams – Brazil, Argentina, Germany, France, Italy and Portugal – participated in the ‘Super Six’, Football Tournament held in Brazil. The tournament comprised five rounds, such that every team played exactly one match in every round and by the end of the five rounds, every team played exactly one match with every other team. For every win, a team got 5 points. If the team won by a margin of 2 or more goals, it got another bonus point. For a draw, the team got 2 points and for a loss, it did not get any points. However, if a team lost by a margin of 2 or more goals, a point was deducted.

The following table gives the tally of the goals scored, goals conceded and the points earned by the teams after the first two rounds of the tournament.  

 

It is also known that the hosts, Brazil, lost their first round match. However, they scored at least one goal in every match that they played.

Q. Which of the following statements is/are true of the two matches played by Brazil?

I. It won a match and lost a match without gaining or conceding bonus points in either match.
II. It won a match by gaining a bonus point and lost a match by conceding a bonus point.
III. It lost its first round match to Argentina by 1 goal to 4 goals.

Solution:

From the tally of the total points given in the table.

The possible outcomes of the matches of each of the teams are tabulated, below


(W)      →   Won (5 points)
(WB)    →   Won gaining bonus points (6 points)
(L)       →    Lost (0 points)
(LB)     →    Lost earning negative points (-1 point)
(D)       →    Draw (2 points)

Now, the result of Brazil’s matches could have been one win (W) + one loss (L)
OR
one win with a bonus point (WB) + one loss by giving the opponent bonus points (LB) if it is (W) + (L), then the goals scored by Brazil must be same as that it conceded (because then the win and loss should have been by exactly one goal each). But in the table the goals scored by Brazil are less than the goals it conceded. Hence the result of Brazil matches is (WB) + (LB). And the margin with which it lost one game must be one more than the margin with which it won the other game.

Now, referring to the table above the only possibility is that Brazil should have played its first round match against Argentina.

The margin with which Brazil won one game can be 2 or 3 and the margin with which Brazil lost the other game can be 3 or 4 respectively. Difference in the number of goals scored by Brazil compared to that scored by the opponent (margins) can be

-3     2  or  -4    +3

As there are no bonus points in one of the matches, Argentina won that match with a margin of only one goal and it should have won the other match with a margin of 3 goals.
Margins of Argentina must be
+3    +1

Hence Brazil lost its first round match to Argentina by 1 – 4. Hence, we can see that only statements II and III are true.

QUESTION: 31

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Six teams – Brazil, Argentina, Germany, France, Italy and Portugal – participated in the ‘Super Six’, Football Tournament held in Brazil. The tournament comprised five rounds, such that every team played exactly one match in every round and by the end of the five rounds, every team played exactly one match with every other team. For every win, a team got 5 points. If the team won by a margin of 2 or more goals, it got another bonus point. For a draw, the team got 2 points and for a loss, it did not get any points. However, if a team lost by a margin of 2 or more goals, a point was deducted.

The following table gives the tally of the goals scored, goals conceded and the points earned by the teams after the first two rounds of the tournament.  
 

It is also known that the hosts, Brazil, lost their first round match. However, they scored at least one goal in every match that they played.

Q. Which of the following statements is/are true?

I. Portugal lost its second round match to Brazil by conceding a bonus point.
II. Portugal, in its first round match, played against neither France nor Italy but scored 4 goals.
III. Argentina played against France in its second round match.

Solution:

Germany lost both the matches but it did not give any bonus points to the opponents. Hence, the margins with which it lost games are

-1-1

France scored two points in both the matches together. Hence, the only possibility is 1 loss + 1 draw

The margins of the drawn match will be zero.

∴ the margin of the match that it lost is -1.

0-1

Italy scored 7 points, the only possibility is (1 draw + 1 win). The margin for a draw will be zero and the margin for a win is one.

+10

Portugal scored 4 points, the possibilities are 2 draws
(or)
1 win +1 loss by giving bonus points to the opponent.
If it is two draws, the number of goals scored by Portugal must be equal to the number of goals it conceded. But in the given data the number of goals scored is one less than that conceded. Hence, the only possibility is
1W + 1 LB
The possible margins are

Now if we tabulate the possible margins of each team,

As already concluded from the above table, Argentina won over Brazil 1 – 4.
∴ Brazil won the other match against Portugal with a margin of +2 goals i.e. it won with the score 2 – 0.

Portugal scored 4 – 3 in the other match played by it.

But it cannot be against France or Italy.
∴ As none of the teams has conceded goals in two matches together also. Hence, Portugal won 4 – 3 against Germany. Germany lost the other game 0 – 1. That cannot be against Argentina as Argentina won the other game with 2 -1.

∴ Germany must play against Italy.
Italy has a draw in the other match with a score 1 – 1. The following table will be obtained if all the results are tabulated.

Hence we can see that all the three statements are true.

QUESTION: 32

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Six teams – Brazil, Argentina, Germany, France, Italy and Portugal – participated in the ‘Super Six’, Football Tournament held in Brazil. The tournament comprised five rounds, such that every team played exactly one match in every round and by the end of the five rounds, every team played exactly one match with every other team. For every win, a team got 5 points. If the team won by a margin of 2 or more goals, it got another bonus point. For a draw, the team got 2 points and for a loss, it did not get any points. However, if a team lost by a margin of 2 or more goals, a point was deducted.

The following table gives the tally of the goals scored, goals conceded and the points earned by the teams after the first two rounds of the tournament.  
 

It is also known that the hosts, Brazil, lost their first round match. However, they scored at least one goal in every match that they played.

Q. By the end of the first round, which of the following teams is in the last position in terms of the points scored?

Solution:

After the first round, Brazil stood the last.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 33

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

16 contestants enrolled for a U-16 tennis tournament. The contestants are divided into two pools of 8 players each. In the first round, each player plays a match with every other player in her pool. The top four players from each pool advance to the next round, where the winner of a match advances to the next round while the loser is out of the tournament, and so on till one of the players wins the tournament. At each stage of the tournament, a match is made up of three sets, and the player who wins two sets out of three is declared the winner of the match. If a player wins two consecutive sets, she is declared the winner and the match is over. For each match, the winner is awarded 10 points and the loser gets 3 points. No set or match ends in a tie.

Q. What is the total number of matches played? (numerical value)


Solution:

Correct Answer :- 63

Explanation : In the 1st round, each pool has 8 players. So, the number of matches played in each pool will be (7 × 8)/2 

= 56/2

= 28.

Thus 56 matches will be played in the 1st round.

The 2nd round will have 4 matches, the 3rd round will have 2 matches and the last round will have 1 match.

Thus the total number of matches in the tournament is 56 + 7 = 63.

QUESTION: 34

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

16 contestants enrolled for a U-16 tennis tournament. The contestants are divided into two pools of 8 players each. In the first round, each player plays a match with every other player in her pool. The top four players from each pool advance to the next round, where the winner of a match advances to the next round while the loser is out of the tournament, and so on till one of the players wins the tournament. At each stage of the tournament, a match is made up of three sets, and the player who wins two sets out of three is declared the winner of the match. If a player wins two consecutive sets, she is declared the winner and the match is over. For each match, the winner is awarded 10 points and the loser gets 3 points. No set or match ends in a tie.

Q. Shweta, who won the tournament, defeated each of her opponents from the second round onwards by winning two consecutive sets in each match. Which of the following cannot be the total number of sets played by Shweta in the tournament?

Solution:

In the 2nd, 3rd and 4th round, Shweta plays 1 match each. So the number of sets she plays from the 2nd round onwards is 2 × 3 = 6.

In the 1st round, she plays 7 matches. She will have to play a minimum of 2 sets per match and a maximum of 3 sets per match.

So, she must play a minimum of 14 sets and a maximum of 21 sets in the 1st round.

Thus the total number of sets ranges from 20 to 27.

Hence the answer will be 29.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 35

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

16 contestants enrolled for a U-16 tennis tournament. The contestants are divided into two pools of 8 players each. In the first round, each player plays a match with every other player in her pool. The top four players from each pool advance to the next round, where the winner of a match advances to the next round while the loser is out of the tournament, and so on till one of the players wins the tournament. At each stage of the tournament, a match is made up of three sets, and the player who wins two sets out of three is declared the winner of the match. If a player wins two consecutive sets, she is declared the winner and the match is over. For each match, the winner is awarded 10 points and the loser gets 3 points. No set or match ends in a tie.

Q. Sheetal was the Runner Up in the tournament. In two of her last three matches, she played three sets each. What is the difference between the maximum and minimum number of sets played by Sheetal? (numerical value)


Solution:

Correct Answer :- 8

Explanation : Sheetal will play 7 matches in the 1st round and 1 match in each of the remaining 3 rounds.

Of these 10 matches, we know that she plays 3 sets in 2 matches. In the remaining 8 matches, she can play a minimum of 16 sets and a maximum of 24 sets.

So the minimum and maximum number of sets she plays is 22 and 30 respectively.

Thus the required difference is 30 –22 = 8.

QUESTION: 36

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

● All north- south streets are numbered consecutively, starting at the westernmost street as 1st street.
● All even numbered streets are one way, going towards north.
● All odd numbered streets are one way, going towards south.
● All east-west streets are named by consecutive letters of alphabets, starting at the northernmost street as M street.
● M street is a one-way street going east.
● N street is a two-way street.
● O street is a one-way street going west.
● There are traffic signals at the intersection of 10th and O, of 11th and O and of 12th and N.
● Drivers always obey traffic laws.

Q. A driver who is travelling west on an east-west street could not be at the intersection of

Solution:

From the given information, we can draw the following street network.

Since M is an east-bound street, the driver cannot be at the intersection of 11th and M.

Hence the answer is option B

QUESTION: 37

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

● All north- south streets are numbered consecutively, starting at the westernmost street as 1st street.
● All even numbered streets are one way, going towards north.
● All odd numbered streets are one way, going towards south.
● All east-west streets are named by consecutive letters of alphabets, starting at the northernmost street as M street.
● M street is a one-way street going east.
● N street is a two-way street.
● O street is a one-way street going west.
● There are traffic signals at the intersection of 10th and O, of 11th and O and of 12th and N.
● Drivers always obey traffic laws.

Q. A driver travelling west on an east-west street may take a right turn on any of the following intersections except

Solution:

From the given information, we can draw the following street network.

Since the driver is travelling west, he could be on N or O. Since 11th street is south-bound, the driver cannot take a right turn at the intersection of 11th and O.

Hence the answer is option C

QUESTION: 38

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

● All north- south streets are numbered consecutively, starting at the westernmost street as 1st street.
● All even numbered streets are one way, going towards north.
● All odd numbered streets are one way, going towards south.
● All east-west streets are named by consecutive letters of alphabets, starting at the northernmost street as M street.
● M street is a one-way street going east.
● N street is a two-way street.
● O street is a one-way street going west.
● There are traffic signals at the intersection of 10th and O, of 11th and O and of 12th and N.
● Drivers always obey traffic laws.

Q. If a driver is at the intersection of 12th and O and wants to go to the intersection of 10th and M and pass through only one intersection with a traffic signal, then which of the following routes can she take?

Solution:

From the given information, we can draw the following street network.

Since 11th street is south-bound, the driver can never turn north on 11th street. So options 1 and 3 are not possible. In option 4, the driver will have to go through two traffic signals.
So option 2 is the correct answer.

QUESTION: 39

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

A committee of eight people is in charge of the Ganesh festival celebrations in a housing complex. The committee of eight is made up of three children – Chitra, Dinesh and Pranav, two women – Mrs. Shah and Mrs. Taneja, and three men – Mr. Acharya, Mr. Mahajan and Mr. Raikar. The eight committee members are to be divided into three teams such that each member is on exactly one of the three teams, no team has more than three members and each team must have at least one child. Pranav does not want to be on the same team as his mother, Mrs. Shah. Mr. Raikar and his son, Dinesh must be on the same team. Mr. Acharya and Mr. Mahajan, who work in the same office, do not want to be on the same team.

Q. If Mrs. Shah and Dinesh are on the same team, which of the following could be true?

Solution:

If Mrs. Shah and Dinesh are on the same team, then they form a team of 3 which also includes Mr. Raikar. The other two children must be on two separate teams. Mr. Acharya and Mr. Mahajan will also be on two separate teams. Mrs. Taneja can therefore be on any of these two teams to make it a team of three people. So, Mrs. Taneja could be on the same team as Mr. Acharya.

QUESTION: 40

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

A committee of eight people is in charge of the Ganesh festival celebrations in a housing complex. The committee of eight is made up of three children – Chitra, Dinesh and Pranav, two women – Mrs. Shah and Mrs. Taneja, and three men – Mr. Acharya, Mr. Mahajan and Mr. Raikar. The eight committee members are to be divided into three teams such that each member is on exactly one of the three teams, no team has more than three members and each team must have at least one child. Pranav does not want to be on the same team as his mother, Mrs. Shah. Mr. Raikar and his son, Dinesh must be on the same team. Mr. Acharya and Mr. Mahajan, who work in the same office, do not want to be on the same team.

Q. If Mrs. Shah and Mrs. Taneja are on the same team, who of the following must be on a two-member team?

Solution:

Mr. Raikar and Dinesh are on one team and Mrs. Shah and Mrs. Taneja are on one team. Now, Chitra and Pranav must be on two different teams and Pranav cannot be on the same team as Mrs. Shah. Also we cannot have 4 member team. So, Chitra is on the same team as Mrs. Shah and Mrs. Taneja. Also, Mr. Acharya and Mr. Mahajan are on two different teams. So, Pranav and either of mr. Mahajan or mr. Acharya must be on a two member team.

QUESTION: 41

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Four identical duffel bags belonging to Brijesh, Ranjit, Vivek and Girish were mixed up in the lockers of a gymnasium. The duffel bags contained a pair of jeans, a T-shirt, a pair of sneakers and a tracksuit. The items in the duffel bags were red, blue, green and violet in colour. None of the boys owned an item whose colour started with the same letter as the boy’s initial. The four boys made statements that were either entirely true or entirely false. Brijesh never tells a lie.

Vivek: The duffel bags contain a pair of red jeans, a pair of green sneakers, a violet T-shirt and a blue tracksuit.
Girish: The duffel bags contain a pair of violet jeans, a pair of blue sneakers, a green T-shirt and a red tracksuit.
Ranjit: Both Vivek and Girish are totally wrong; my duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers.
Brijesh: Ranjit is totally correct; my duffel bag contains the T-shirt.

Q. Vivek’s duffel bag contains the

Solution:

Since Brijesh never tells a lie, we know that his bag contains the T-shirt and Ranjit is telling the truth.

So, we know that Ranjit's bag contains the pair of sneakers and the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false.

Since the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false, we can conclude that the pair of jeans must be either blue or green. The T-shirt must be either red or blue, the pair of sneakers must be either red or violet and the tracksuit must be either green or violet. We know that the colour of an item owned by a boy starts with a letter other than the initial of the boy.

Since Brijesh's duffel bag contains the T-shirt, its colour cannot be blue and must be red.

Similarly, Ranjit's duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers, which cannot be red and must be violet.

So, the other two duffel bags must contain the green tracksuit and the pair of blue jeans.

We can then conclude that Girish's duffel bag contains the pair of blue jeans and Vivek's duffel bag contains the green tracksuit. We can match the information as:

Vivek’s duffel bag contains the green tracksuit.

QUESTION: 42

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Four identical duffel bags belonging to Brijesh, Ranjit, Vivek and Girish were mixed up in the lockers of a gymnasium. The duffel bags contained a pair of jeans, a T-shirt, a pair of sneakers and a tracksuit. The items in the duffel bags were red, blue, green and violet in colour. None of the boys owned an item whose colour started with the same letter as the boy’s initial. The four boys made statements that were either entirely true or entirely false. Brijesh never tells a lie.

Vivek: The duffel bags contain a pair of red jeans, a pair of green sneakers, a violet T-shirt and a blue tracksuit.
Girish: The duffel bags contain a pair of violet jeans, a pair of blue sneakers, a green T-shirt and a red tracksuit.
Ranjit: Both Vivek and Girish are totally wrong; my duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers.
Brijesh: Ranjit is totally correct; my duffel bag contains the T-shirt.

Q. What is the colour of the pair of sneakers?

Solution:

Since Brijesh never tells a lie, we know that his bag contains the T-shirt and Ranjit is telling the truth.

So, we know that Ranjit's bag contains the pair of sneakers and the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false.

Since the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false, we can conclude that the pair of jeans must be either blue or green. The T-shirt must be either red or blue, the pair of sneakers must be either red or violet and the tracksuit must be either green or violet.

We know that the colour of an item owned by a boy starts with a letter other than the initial of the boy. Since Brijesh's duffel bag contains the T-shirt, its colour cannot be blue and must be red.

Similarly, Ranjit's duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers, which cannot be red and must be violet.

So, the other two duffel bags must contain the green tracksuit and the pair of blue jeans.

We can then conclude that Girish's duffel bag contains the pair of blue jeans and Vivek's duffel bag contains the green tracksuit. We can match the information as:

Ranjit’s duffel bag contains the pair of violet sneakers

QUESTION: 43

Read the information given below and answer the question that follows.

Four identical duffel bags belonging to Brijesh, Ranjit, Vivek and Girish were mixed up in the lockers of a gymnasium. The duffel bags contained a pair of jeans, a T-shirt, a pair of sneakers and a tracksuit. The items in the duffel bags were red, blue, green and violet in colour. None of the boys owned an item whose colour started with the same letter as the boy’s initial. The four boys made statements that were either entirely true or entirely false. Brijesh never tells a lie.

Vivek: The duffel bags contain a pair of red jeans, a pair of green sneakers, a violet T-shirt and a blue tracksuit.
Girish: The duffel bags contain a pair of violet jeans, a pair of blue sneakers, a green T-shirt and a red tracksuit.
Ranjit: Both Vivek and Girish are totally wrong; my duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers.
Brijesh: Ranjit is totally correct; my duffel bag contains the T-shirt.

Q. Which of the following statements is true?

Solution:

Since Brijesh never tells a lie, we know that his bag contains the T-shirt and Ranjit is telling the truth.

So, we know that Ranjit's bag contains the pair of sneakers and the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false.

Since the statements made by Vivek and Girish are false, we can conclude that the pair of jeans must be either blue or green. The T-shirt must be either red or blue, the pair of sneakers must be either red or violet and the tracksuit must be either green or violet.

We know that the colour of an item owned by a boy starts with a letter other than the initial of the boy.

Since Brijesh's duffel bag contains the T-shirt, its colour cannot be blue and must be red.

Similarly, Ranjit's duffel bag contains the pair of sneakers, which cannot be red and must be violet.

So, the other two duffel bags must contain the green tracksuit and the pair of blue jeans.

We can then conclude that Girish's duffel bag contains the pair of blue jeans and Vivek's duffel bag contains the green tracksuit. We can match the information as:

Brijesh’s duffel bag contains the red T-shirt.

QUESTION: 44

Go through the pie chart/s given below and answer the question that follows.​

The Foreign Direct Investment this year has been $1.4 billion. Next year it is slated to increase by 40%.

Q. The amount invested in the Telecom sector has been equal to which two sectors taken together, in the same year?

Solution:

Expected FDI investment in Telecom next year is 8% this is the same as Textiles (4%) and Engineering (4%) taken together.

QUESTION: 45

Go through the pie chart/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The Foreign Direct Investment this year has been $1.4 billion. Next year it is slated to increase by 40%.

Q. Which of the following can be inferred from the data?

I. The proportion of Foreign Direct Investments in Services this year is the same as that expected in Textiles, Engineering and Telecom, next year.
II. This year, the allocation to “Others” is same as the allocation to Electronics, Food Processing and Pharmaceuticals.

Solution:

FDI investment in Services this year is 16% This is same as the total expected investments in Textiles (4%), Engineering (4%) and Telecom (8%) next year. So statement I is true.

This year the allocation to Others is 22%. This is the same as the total allocation for Electronics (9%), Food Processing (9%) and Pharmaceuticals (4%) this year. So statement II is true.

QUESTION: 46

Go through the pie chart/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The Foreign Direct Investment this year has been $1.4 billion. Next year it is slated to increase by 40%.

Q. By how many percent has the direct investment in the Food Processing industry changed?

Solution:

FDI this year is $1.4 billion. FDI next year will be 1.4 x 1.4 = $1.96 billion

FDI investment in Food Processing this year is 0.09 x $1.4 billion = $0.126 billion.

The corresponding value next year is 0.05 x $ 1.96 billion. This is a decrease of

 

QUESTION: 47

Go through the pie chart/s given below and answer the question that follows.

The Foreign Direct Investment this year has been $1.4 billion. Next year it is slated to increase by 40%.

Q. In the year after next, if the Foreign Direct Investment increases by 20% over its previous year and the proportional allocation remains the same, what will be amount in $ billion allocated to the Textile Industry?

Solution:

FDI this year is $1.4 billion. FDI next year will be 1.4 x 1.4 = $1.96 billion

FDI investment in Food Processing this year is 1.2 x $1.96 billion = $2.352 billion.

The callocation of textile industry will be  0.04 x $ 2.352 billion = $0.09408 billion.  

QUESTION: 48

Study the following Graph & table given below and answer the question that follows.

A total of 150 questions were asked in an exam which comprised five sections – VA, RC, QA, DI and LA – of 30 questions each. The table below shows the number of questions attempted correctly in each section by 15 different candidates. Each person attempted all the 150 questions in the exam.

Q. if the number of questions that were answered correctly by both candidate X and candidate Y is n, then n is

Solution:

To calculate the maximum value of n, the sum of the minimum’s of the correct attempts by two candidates must be the highest possible. By observation Alisha and Astha are the possible pair.
Alisha, Astha
→ min(21, 22) + min(16, 11) + min(12, 18) + min(18, 14) + min(16, 20) = 21 + 11 + 12 + 14 + 16 = 74
Note: The minimum common correct attempts can be zero also. This can be seen if Amol and Amit are considered.

QUESTION: 49

Study the following table and answer the questions based on it.

Expenditures of a Company (in Lakh Rupees) per Annum Over the given Years.

Q. What is the average amount of interest per year which the company had to pay during this period?

Solution:

Average amount of interest paid by the Company during the given period

= Rs. 36.66 lakhs.

QUESTION: 50

​Study the following Graph & table given below and answer the question that follows.

A total of 150 questions were asked in an exam which comprised five sections – VA, RC, QA, DI and LA – of 30 questions each. The table below shows the number of questions attempted correctly in each section by 15 different candidates. Each person attempted all the 150 questions in the exam.

Q. If there are exactly 8 DI questions which were answered correctly by Aatish but incorrectly by Abhilash, then the number of candidates, who correctly answered at least 9 of the DI questions that were answered correctly by Abhilash and at least 10 of the DI questions that were answered incorrectly by Aatish, is

Solution:

Consider the venn diagram given below, which represents the DI section along with the correct attempts of Aatish and Abhilash.(Total = 30)

Now the number of questions outside the set of Aatish (as drawn above) are the only 10 questions attempted incorrectly by Aatish and of these, 7 questions were attempted correctly by Abhilash.

In order to attempt at least 9 questions that were attempted correctly by Abhilash, one must attempt another two questions from the common area (in the diagram).

Hence 10 + 2 = 12. Any candidate who attempts at least 12 questions of DI could possibly meet the required criteria. There are exactly eight such candidates.

However, unless someone attempted all 30 questions of DI correctly, it is not necessary that the candidate meet the criteria.

Hence at most eight and at least 0 candidates may meet the criteria.

QUESTION: 51

Find the number of 4 × 4 arrays whose elements belong to { 0, 1, 2, 3}. This is also mentioned that sum of the numbers in each row & each column is divisible by 4. (4 × 4 array means arrangement of 16 elements arranged in 4 rows & 4 columns.)

Solution:

We will fill up the 3 × 3  array at the left top as shown in the figure (represented by*)

For every *, there are 4 choices (i.e., 0, 1, 2, 3). So, this 3 × 3 array can be filled in 49 choices.

For remaining places (represented by dot) •, there is always a unique choice.

Example: if any row of 3×3 array is say [0, 1, 2] or its any permutation, 4th entry of this row can be only 1 possibilities i.e., it can be 1 only.

Similarly, for (0,1, 3), 4th entry will be 0,  so on.
So, Answer is = 49

QUESTION: 52

In the figure below, not drawn to scale, PQ and QR are parallel to the co-ordinate axes. Point A, with co-ordinate (-3, 12) lies on line L. Which of the following can be the lengths of the sides of  PQR?

Solution:

If we drop perpendicular AB to the X-axis, we will get a right-angled ΔABO, with arms AB = 12, BO = 3 and hypotenuse AO = √153.

ΔPQR ≈ ΔABO.
So, the ratio of sides of these triangles will be constant.

Only option 1 satisfies this condition as (6, 24, √612) = 2 × (3, 12, √153).

Hence the answer is option A

QUESTION: 53

A merchant sold an article at a profit of 40%. Had he bought the article for 20% less and sold it at a discount of 20%, he would have gained Rs. 224. What was the merchant’s profit from the sale of the article?

Solution:

Suppose the cost of the article is 100.

The merchant gains 40 and sells it for 140.

Had he bought is for 20% less, the article would have cost him 80 and he would sold it for 140-20% x 140 = 112 to gain 32.

From the given information, 32 = Rs. 224.

So, in the earlier case, 
the merchant would have gained (40 x 224)/32 = Rs. 280

Hence the answer is option B

QUESTION: 54

Abhinav is practicing for the Asian Games by shooting at a circular target of diameter 32”. If the target is divided into nine concentric circular regions of equal area, what is the radius of the innermost region?

Solution:

Suppose the radii of the innermost to the outermost circles are r1, r2, r3, …, r9. It is given that r9 = 16”.

Since the circular regions have equal areas, r12 = (r22 – r12) = (r32 – r22) = … = (r92 – r82).

Since r12 = (r22 – r12), we get 2r12 = r22 ⇒ r2 = r1√2.

Since r12 = (r32 – r22) and r22 = 2r12,

we get r32 = 3r12  ⇒ r3 = r1√3.

Since r12 = (r42 – r32) and r32 = 3r12,

we get r42 = 4r12  ⇒ r4 = r1√4 = 2r1.

From this, we can conclude that the radii of the innermost to the outermost circles are r1, r1√2, r1√3, r1√4, …, r1√9.

Since r9 = r1√9 = 3r1 = 16,

we get r1 = 16/3 = 5⅓”.

Hence the answer is option A

QUESTION: 55

N! is ending with x zeroes. (N + 3)! is ending with (x + 2) zeroes. How many such N's will exist, given N is a two-digit number?

Solution:

Since we need 2 zeroes extra ⇒ (n + 3)! Should contain a multiple of 25.
So,  

So, There will exist 3 values of N corresponding to every multiple of 25.
So, N = 22, 23, 24, 47, 48, 49, 72, 73, 74, 97, 98, 99
Hence the answer is 12.

QUESTION: 56

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

Miss Sheetal received Rs. 1 crore as retirement benefits when she retired as the CEO of a marketing firm. She has a choice between depositing the money in her savings account that gives her simple interest at 10% per annum or depositing the money in a fixed deposit that gives her compound interest at the same rate. She calculates that the difference between the simple and compound interest for three years is Rs. 310,000 and decides to invest her money in the fixed deposit for 4 years. What will be the difference between the interest for the third year and the fourth year?

Solution:

At 10%, the interest for the 1st year is 1,000,000.

So, the principal for the 2nd year is ₹ 11,000,000.

At 10%, the interest for the 2nd year is ₹ 1,100,000.

So the principal for the 3rd year is ₹ 12,100,000.

At 10%, the interest for the 3rd year is ₹ 1,210,000.

So, the principal for the 4th year is ₹ 13,310,000.

At 10% the interest for the 4th year is ₹ 1,331,000.

So, the difference between the interest for the 4th year and the 3rd year is ₹ 1331000 - 1210000 = ₹ 121,000

Hence, the answer is option D

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 57

A contractor undertook a project of building a canal 150 m long in 110 days and employed 160 men. However he found that after half the number of days 80 % of the work was completed. How many men will he discharge now so that the work will be finished in time? (in numerical value)


Solution:

160 men in 55 days (i.e. half of 110 days) completed 80 % of the work.

Suppose for the remaining 55 days, ‘m’ men completed the work,

∴ (160 × 55) / 80 = (m × 55) / 20
thus, m = 40.

Thus 160 – 40 = 120 men will be discharged.

QUESTION: 58

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

Two trains T1 and T2 are entering on either sides of platform P from opposite ends. Trains T1 and T2 take 20 seconds each to cross the platform and 10 seconds to cross each other. Which of the following could represent the lengths of T1, T2 and P respectively?

Solution:

Suppose the speeds of T1 and T2 are S1 and S2 respectively. Then

 and

So, T1 + P = 20S1, T2+P = 20S2 = 10(S1+S2).
Adding the first two equations gives T1 + T2 + 2P = 20(S1+S2).

The third equation states that 2(T1+T2) = 20(S1+S2).

Combining these equations, we get 20(S1+S2) = T1+T2+2P = 2(T1+T2).

From this, we get T1+T2 = 2P.

Checking the answer choices, we get T= 225, T2 = 375 and P = 300

QUESTION: 59

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

In two alloys A and B, the ratio of zinc to tin is 5 : 2 and 3 : 4 respectively. Seven kg of the alloy A and 21 kg of the alloy B are mixed together to form a new alloy. What will be the ratio of zinc and tin in the new alloy?

Solution:

Alloy A : which weighted 7 kg has zinc & tin in ratio = 5 : 2 i.e Zinc in alloy A = 5 kg & tin in alloy A = 2kg 

Alloy B : which weighted 21 kg has zinc & tin in ratio = 3 : 4 i.e Zinc in alloy B = 9 kg & tin in alloy B = 12kg 

Hence, total Zinc : total tin = 14 : 14 = 1 : 1

So, answer is option D.

QUESTION: 60

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

What is the value of log√3√15 + log √15√3 ?

Solution:

The given expression can be rewritten as

Now, log 15 = log 3 + log 5 = log 3 + log 10 – log 2.

Since log 3 = 0.4771 and
log 2 = 0.3010,
log 15 = 0.4771 + 1 – 0.3010 = 1.1761.

Substituting these values, we get (1.1761/0.4771) + (0.4771/1.1761)
≈ (1.175/0.47) + (0.47/1.175)
= 2.5 + (1/2.5)
= 7.25/2.5
= 2.9.
The best answer is 2.87.

QUESTION: 61

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

A watch gains 3 minutes every hour. If it is set right at 11 a.m. on February 21st, 2012, when will the hour hand of this defective watch and a correct watch be at the same position?

Solution:

If the defective and the correct watch show the same time, the defective watch will have gained 12 hours, i.e., 720 minutes.

Since it gains 3 minutes every hour, it will need 720 / 3 = 240 hours to gain 12 hours.

In other words, both watches will show the same time after 10 days.

Counting from 11 a.m. on February 21st, 2012, both watches will show the same time at 11 a.m. on March 2nd, 2012.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 62

Find the no. of Lattice points on the boundary and inside the region bounded by x axis, x = 4 and y = x2. (Lattice points are points with coordinates as integers) [x = 0 included] (in numerical value)


Solution:

► On line x = 4, integer coordinates are 0,1,2, --------- 16
► X = 3 → 0,1,2--------9
► X = 2 → 0, 1,2,3,4
► X = 1 → 0,1
► X = 0 → 0

No. of lattice points  = 17 + 10 + 5+ 2 + 1 = 35

QUESTION: 63

Two right angled triangles are congruent if : 
I. The hypotenuse of one triangle is equal to the hypotenuse of the other. 
II. A side for one triangle is equal to the corresponding side of the other. 
III. Sides of the triangles are equal. 
IV. An angles of the triangle are equal. 
Of these statements, the correct ones are combination of:

Solution:

Two right angled triangle are congruent if the hypotenuse of one triangle is equal to the hypotenuse of the other and a side of one triangle is equal to the corresponding side of the other triangle.

QUESTION: 64

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

The four walls of a room have equal dimensions. On the first day, A and B together paint the first wall in x minutes and leave. The next day, A does not turn up and B paints the second wall in 5 minutes more than the time taken to paint the wall on the previous day. On the third day, B does not turn up and A paints the third wall in 40 minutes more than the time taken to paint the wall on the previous day. In how much time would A and B together have painted the four walls?

Solution:

Both together complete the wall in x min.

∴ In one minute both together will complete 1/x part of the wall.
B completes the wall in (x + 5) min

∴  In one minute he will complete 1/(x + 5) th part of the wall.

A completes the wall in (x + 45) min

∴  In one minute he will complete 1/(x + 45) th part of the wall.

Hence, {1/(x + 5)} + {1/(x + 45)} = 1/x

On solving, we get x2 – 152 = 0
Hence x = 15.

Thus, working together, they can paint the four walls in 4 × 15 = 60 minutes or 1 hour.

QUESTION: 65

Answer the following question as per the best of your judgement

If (x2)1/3 + x1/3 - 2 ≤ 0, then the value of x is:

Solution:

Taking  x1/3 = y,
equation will be y+ y - 2
Factorizing we get (y + 2) (y - 1) → y = -2, 1
Now resubstituing the values, x1/3 = -2,1.
So, x = -8 & 1


Since the equation is less than equal to zero so the solution region will be -8 to 1

QUESTION: 66

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

Let fn + 1(x) = fn(x) + 1, if n is odd;
                   = fn(x) + 2, if n is even.
If f1(x) = 1, then what is the value of f100(x)?

Solution:

The values for the function for n = 1, 2, 3 …. will be respectively

f(x) = 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17…
So, the pattern for even numbered terms can be assessed as

► f2(x) = 2 + 0,
► f4(x) = 4 + 1,
► f6(x) = 6 + 2,
► f8(x) = 8 + 3…
► f2n(x) = 2n + (n – 1)

Thus, f100(x) = 100 + (50 – 1) = 149.

Alternate solution:

From values of fn(x) for n = 1, 2, 3, ..., 8, it is easy to see that alternate terms form APs with common difference 3.
So, f100(x) is the 50th term of the AP with a = 2 and d = 3.

Thus, f100(x) = 2 + (49 × 3) = 149.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
QUESTION: 67

The arms of an isosceles right triangle are 1 cm each. With the hypotenuse as the base, another right triangle of height 1 cm is drawn. With the hypotenuse of the second triangle as the base, a third triangle of height 1 cm is drawn. This process is repeated as shown, till the 100th such triangle. What is the area of the 100th triangle? (write the answer option)

1. 3√11/2 cm2                     
2.  3√2 cm2                       
3. 10 cm2                        
4. 5 cm2


Solution:

The hypotenuse of the 1st triangle is √2.

This is the base of the 2nd triangle.

So, the hypotenuse of the second triangle is √3 which is the base of the 3rd triangle, and so on.

So, the base of the 100th triangle will be √100 =10 and height = 1 cm (given). So the area of this triangle is ½ × 1 × 10 = 5 cm2.

QUESTION: 68

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

A dealer offered a machine for sale for Rs. 27500 but even if he had charged 10% less, he would have made a profit of 10%. The actual cost of the machine is

Solution:

Original selling price of the machine = 27500. 

New selling price is 10% ie 90/100 × 27500 = 24750.

Now still he make profit at 10% cost price = 100 / 110 × 24750 = Rs. 22500

QUESTION: 69

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

Two vessels contain milk and water in the ratio 3:2 and 7:3. Find the respective ratio in which the contents of the two vesels have to be mixed to get a new mixture in which the ratio of milk and water is 2 : 1.

Solution:

QUESTION: 70

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

A man leaves his estate to his wife and two sons. If the wife receives two-third of the estate and each son receives half of the remainder. Find the value of the entire estate in rupees if each son receives Rs. 40000 as his share?

Solution:

QUESTION: 71

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

There are 60 students in a class. These students are divided into three groups A, B and C of 15, 20 and 25 students each. The groups A and C are combined to form group D.

If one student from group A is shifted to group B, which of the following will be true?

Solution:

Although one student is shifted from group A to group B, the number of students in the class and the total weight of the students remain the same. Therefore, the average weight of the class remains the same.

QUESTION: 72

Answer the following question as per the best of your judgment.

Find the sum 1 + 4/5 + 9/25 + 16/125 + ……….

Solution:

Since Tn = n2/5n – 1
Let S = 1 + 4/5 + 9/25 + 16/125 +..........

Multiply both sides by 1/5  ⇒ S/5 = 1/5 + 4/25 + 9/125 +........ S − S/5 = 4S/5 = 1 + 3/5 + 5/25 + 7/125 +...........(I)

Multiply both sides by 1/5   4S/25 = 1/5 + 3/25 + 5/125 + ...........................   (II)

Subtracting 4S/5 − 4S/25 = 16S/25 = 1 + 2/5 + 2/25 + 2/125 + ....... or, 16S/25 = 1 + 2(1/5 + 1/25 + 1/125 + ......) = 1 + 2(1/4) = 3/2.

So, S = 75/32 

QUESTION: 73

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

If mx2 – 2(m + 2)x + m + 2 = 0 has two real roots, one positive and one negative, what is the range of values of m?

Solution:

Since the given expression has two real roots, we know that:
[–2(m + 2)]2 – 4m(m + 2) > 0.

⇒ 4m2 + 16m + 16 – 4m2 – 8m  i.e.  8m + 16 > 0
⇒  8m ≥ –16 
⇒  m ≥  –2.

Since one root is positive and the other negative, we know that the product ac in the quadratic expression ax2 + bx + c = 0 must be negative.

So, m(m + 2) < 0

⇒ –2 < m < 0.

QUESTION: 74

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

In a cube of side 10, what is the length of the line joining the centre of any face and a vertex of the cube not contained in the plane of that face?

Solution:

Suppose C is the centre of a face and D is the mid-point of one of the sides of that face.

CD = 5 and ΔCDB is an isosceles right triangle.

So, CB = 5√2.

ΔABC is also a right triangle.

So, AC2 = (5√2)2 + 102 = 150 ⇒ AC = 5√6.

QUESTION: 75

Solve the following question and mark the best possible option.

Three numbers, x, y and z are in arithmetic progression while x2, y2 and z2 are in geometric progression. If x < y < z and x + y + z = 3/2, what is the value of x?

Solution:

Suppose x, y and z are rewritten as y - d and y + d. Where d is the common difference of the AP
the sum of these 3 numbers is 3y = 3/2 ⇒ y = 1/2. Since x2, y2 and z2 are in GP
We know that y4 = x2 z2

⇒ y4 = (y - d)2 (y + d)2
⇒ y4 = (y2 + d2 - 2yd)(y2 + d2 + 2yd)
⇒ y4 = (y+ d2)2 - (2yd)2
⇒ y4 = y+ 2y2 d2 + d4 - 4y2d2
⇒ y4 = y4 + d4 - 2y2d2
⇒ d4 = 2y2d2
⇒ d2 = 2y2

Substituting y = 1/2 we get d2 = 1/2 ⇒ d = 1/√2
thus,

Related tests