CAT Mock Test- 1 - CAT

Read the passage and answer the following questions:

Psychopaths are sick, deranged, lacking in moral conscience. In other words, they’re nothing like you or me. This picture of psychopathy has dominated the thinking of both laypeople and researchers. It’s at once sensational and reassuring. But this is false. There’s no major ability that psychopaths lack altogether, and their deficits are often small and circumscribed. They certainly aren’t incapable of telling right from wrong, making good decisions or experiencing empathy for other people. Instead, they suffer from a host of more mundane problems - such as being overly goal-fixated, fearless and selfish. What’s more, perhaps ‘our’ reactions are closer to ‘theirs’ than we realise. Like psychopaths, we can dial our empathy up and down; and for all the praise we heap on empathy, a closer look at this emotion suggests that it’s nearer to a kind of self-preservation instinct than any ‘warm and fuzzy’ fellow-feeling.

When debating what’s wrong with psychopaths, researchers typically pitch two competing moral theories against one another. One approach, known as rationalism, holds that judging right and wrong is a matter of reason, rather than feeling. The claim that psychopaths don't show rationalism is plain wrong. Psychopaths are as logical as you and me - in fact, they outsmart us all the time, hence their everyday depiction as connivers and con artists. So the fact that they’re rational but still capable of inhuman acts shows that moral sensibility can’t be grounded in reason alone.

Psychopaths struggle with what philosophers call ‘reasons for actions’: considerations that underlie our decisions to act, such as the likelihood that what we’ll do will satisfy our goals and won’t come into conflict with other projects or aims. Psychopaths appear to be poor at integrating all the various factors that go into making good choices, and often have poor reasons for their actions. They usually attend almost exclusively to the task at hand, and ignore relevant contextual information - although when context doesn’t play a role, they do very well. Other studies have found that psychopaths have problems reversing their responses: when actions that were previously rewarded are now punished - or actions that were previously punished are rewarded - they have problems adjusting. Most people desist and find other ways to navigate their way through, psychopaths tend not to. This insensitivity extends to social threats, such as angry faces. If you show a person pictures that they find threatening, they startle much more easily in response to loud sounds. Psychopaths respond normally to direct threats, such as an image of the gaping jaw of a shark or a striking snake, but not to social threats, such as people in pain or distress.

These findings support the rationalist idea that psychopathic immorality comes down to some inability to reason well. But you might have noticed that psychopaths don’t experience fear as often, and in the same situations, as do ordinary people. Last time I looked, fear was an emotion. This brings us back into the camp of people who think that emotion, not reason, is central to ethics. Typically they focus on empathy.

Q. Which of the following statements about empathy can be inferred from the first paragraph?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The history of sport is full of suffering. In 1973, the boxer Muhammad Ali fought with a broken jaw for at least four rounds during his first historic bout with Ken Norton. In 1993, the American footballer Emmitt Smith played the entire second half of an NFL game with a first-degree separated shoulder, his arm hanging limply at his side as he ran for a heroic 168 yards. And in 1997, the basketball player Michael Jordan was delirious with fever when he scored 38 points in Game 5 of the NBA Finals; after the final buzzer, Scottie Pippen had to carry Jordan off the court because he no longer seemed able to support his own body weight.

Why such a drive to suffer and endure? A study by the medical researcher Jonas Tesarz and colleagues at the University of Heidelberg in 2012 found that athletes had significantly higher pain tolerance than normally active people. And yet both groups had similar pain thresholds, the point at which a sensation is recognisable as pain. Training can’t make athletes numb to pain, but it can condition them to tolerate it. And that kind of self-overcoming seems somehow integral to sport itself. And of course, if you’re suffering, the chances are that your opponent is, too. Indifference to pain confers a tactical advantage.

‘I remember the best race I ever had where the pain was almost enjoyable because you see other people hurt more than you,’ one Olympic athlete admitted during a study of pain tolerance. ‘If nothing is going wrong and there are no mechanical problems during the race then sometimes you can just turn the volume up a little higher and then a little higher and other people suffer and you almost enjoy it, even though you are in pain.’

Japanese trainers have gone so far as to enshrine this marriage of pain and athletic discipline in the concept of taibatsu, which translates roughly as ‘corporal punishment’. In his piece on Japanese baseball for The Japan Times last year, Robert Whiting traces the concept to one Suishu Tobita, head coach of the fabled Waseda University team in the 1920s. Tobita advocated ‘a baseball of savage pain and a baseball practice of savage treatment’. Players nicknamed his practice sessions ‘death training’: ‘If the players do not try so hard as to vomit blood in practice,’ he said, ‘then they cannot hope to win games. One must suffer to be good.’ This ethos has survived into the present day.  The Japanese-born New York Yankees pitcher Hiroki Kuroda, has admitted that there were times in elementary school when his buttocks were beaten with a baseball bat until he couldn’t sit down.

In one sense, then, it appears that sport is largely about ignoring pain. And yet pain returns to assert itself in a strange and striking way when we look at the broader category of competitive play. In a way, pain is one of the first games we learn. We live in an inverse relation to it, claiming as ideal any form of civilisation in which the possibility of experiencing pain is minimised. It is the first and most fundamental rule we learn to follow through free will, something that roots our lives in an inescapable game-like quality. We are always ruled by pain, and those capable of breaking its hold for a few moments become our heroes, role models, and victors.

Q. Why does the author cite the examples of several sportspersons in the first paragraph? 

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The history of sport is full of suffering. In 1973, the boxer Muhammad Ali fought with a broken jaw for at least four rounds during his first historic bout with Ken Norton. In 1993, the American footballer Emmitt Smith played the entire second half of an NFL game with a first-degree separated shoulder, his arm hanging limply at his side as he ran for a heroic 168 yards. And in 1997, the basketball player Michael Jordan was delirious with fever when he scored 38 points in Game 5 of the NBA Finals; after the final buzzer, Scottie Pippen had to carry Jordan off the court because he no longer seemed able to support his own body weight.

Why such a drive to suffer and endure? A study by the medical researcher Jonas Tesarz and colleagues at the University of Heidelberg in 2012 found that athletes had significantly higher pain tolerance than normally active people. And yet both groups had similar pain thresholds, the point at which a sensation is recognisable as pain. Training can’t make athletes numb to pain, but it can condition them to tolerate it. And that kind of self-overcoming seems somehow integral to sport itself. And of course, if you’re suffering, the chances are that your opponent is, too. Indifference to pain confers a tactical advantage.

‘I remember the best race I ever had where the pain was almost enjoyable because you see other people hurt more than you,’ one Olympic athlete admitted during a study of pain tolerance. ‘If nothing is going wrong and there are no mechanical problems during the race then sometimes you can just turn the volume up a little higher and then a little higher and other people suffer and you almost enjoy it, even though you are in pain.’

Japanese trainers have gone so far as to enshrine this marriage of pain and athletic discipline in the concept of taibatsu, which translates roughly as ‘corporal punishment’. In his piece on Japanese baseball for The Japan Times last year, Robert Whiting traces the concept to one Suishu Tobita, head coach of the fabled Waseda University team in the 1920s. Tobita advocated ‘a baseball of savage pain and a baseball practice of savage treatment’. Players nicknamed his practice sessions ‘death training’: ‘If the players do not try so hard as to vomit blood in practice,’ he said, ‘then they cannot hope to win games. One must suffer to be good.’ This ethos has survived into the present day.  The Japanese-born New York Yankees pitcher Hiroki Kuroda, has admitted that there were times in elementary school when his buttocks were beaten with a baseball bat until he couldn’t sit down.

In one sense, then, it appears that sport is largely about ignoring pain. And yet pain returns to assert itself in a strange and striking way when we look at the broader category of competitive play. In a way, pain is one of the first games we learn. We live in an inverse relation to it, claiming as ideal any form of civilisation in which the possibility of experiencing pain is minimised. It is the first and most fundamental rule we learn to follow through free will, something that roots our lives in an inescapable game-like quality. We are always ruled by pain, and those capable of breaking its hold for a few moments become our heroes, role models, and victors.

Q. Which of the following is NOT a valid inference based on the passage?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The history of sport is full of suffering. In 1973, the boxer Muhammad Ali fought with a broken jaw for at least four rounds during his first historic bout with Ken Norton. In 1993, the American footballer Emmitt Smith played the entire second half of an NFL game with a first-degree separated shoulder, his arm hanging limply at his side as he ran for a heroic 168 yards. And in 1997, the basketball player Michael Jordan was delirious with fever when he scored 38 points in Game 5 of the NBA Finals; after the final buzzer, Scottie Pippen had to carry Jordan off the court because he no longer seemed able to support his own body weight.

Why such a drive to suffer and endure? A study by the medical researcher Jonas Tesarz and colleagues at the University of Heidelberg in 2012 found that athletes had significantly higher pain tolerance than normally active people. And yet both groups had similar pain thresholds, the point at which a sensation is recognisable as pain. Training can’t make athletes numb to pain, but it can condition them to tolerate it. And that kind of self-overcoming seems somehow integral to sport itself. And of course, if you’re suffering, the chances are that your opponent is, too. Indifference to pain confers a tactical advantage.

‘I remember the best race I ever had where the pain was almost enjoyable because you see other people hurt more than you,’ one Olympic athlete admitted during a study of pain tolerance. ‘If nothing is going wrong and there are no mechanical problems during the race then sometimes you can just turn the volume up a little higher and then a little higher and other people suffer and you almost enjoy it, even though you are in pain.’

Japanese trainers have gone so far as to enshrine this marriage of pain and athletic discipline in the concept of taibatsu, which translates roughly as ‘corporal punishment’. In his piece on Japanese baseball for The Japan Times last year, Robert Whiting traces the concept to one Suishu Tobita, head coach of the fabled Waseda University team in the 1920s. Tobita advocated ‘a baseball of savage pain and a baseball practice of savage treatment’. Players nicknamed his practice sessions ‘death training’: ‘If the players do not try so hard as to vomit blood in practice,’ he said, ‘then they cannot hope to win games. One must suffer to be good.’ This ethos has survived into the present day.  The Japanese-born New York Yankees pitcher Hiroki Kuroda, has admitted that there were times in elementary school when his buttocks were beaten with a baseball bat until he couldn’t sit down.

In one sense, then, it appears that sport is largely about ignoring pain. And yet pain returns to assert itself in a strange and striking way when we look at the broader category of competitive play. In a way, pain is one of the first games we learn. We live in an inverse relation to it, claiming as ideal any form of civilisation in which the possibility of experiencing pain is minimised. It is the first and most fundamental rule we learn to follow through free will, something that roots our lives in an inescapable game-like quality. We are always ruled by pain, and those capable of breaking its hold for a few moments become our heroes, role models, and victors.

Q. The author mentions Japanese-born New York Yankees pitcher Hiroki Kuroda to

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The history of sport is full of suffering. In 1973, the boxer Muhammad Ali fought with a broken jaw for at least four rounds during his first historic bout with Ken Norton. In 1993, the American footballer Emmitt Smith played the entire second half of an NFL game with a first-degree separated shoulder, his arm hanging limply at his side as he ran for a heroic 168 yards. And in 1997, the basketball player Michael Jordan was delirious with fever when he scored 38 points in Game 5 of the NBA Finals; after the final buzzer, Scottie Pippen had to carry Jordan off the court because he no longer seemed able to support his own body weight.

Why such a drive to suffer and endure? A study by the medical researcher Jonas Tesarz and colleagues at the University of Heidelberg in 2012 found that athletes had significantly higher pain tolerance than normally active people. And yet both groups had similar pain thresholds, the point at which a sensation is recognisable as pain. Training can’t make athletes numb to pain, but it can condition them to tolerate it. And that kind of self-overcoming seems somehow integral to sport itself. And of course, if you’re suffering, the chances are that your opponent is, too. Indifference to pain confers a tactical advantage.

‘I remember the best race I ever had where the pain was almost enjoyable because you see other people hurt more than you,’ one Olympic athlete admitted during a study of pain tolerance. ‘If nothing is going wrong and there are no mechanical problems during the race then sometimes you can just turn the volume up a little higher and then a little higher and other people suffer and you almost enjoy it, even though you are in pain.’

Japanese trainers have gone so far as to enshrine this marriage of pain and athletic discipline in the concept of taibatsu, which translates roughly as ‘corporal punishment’. In his piece on Japanese baseball for The Japan Times last year, Robert Whiting traces the concept to one Suishu Tobita, head coach of the fabled Waseda University team in the 1920s. Tobita advocated ‘a baseball of savage pain and a baseball practice of savage treatment’. Players nicknamed his practice sessions ‘death training’: ‘If the players do not try so hard as to vomit blood in practice,’ he said, ‘then they cannot hope to win games. One must suffer to be good.’ This ethos has survived into the present day.  The Japanese-born New York Yankees pitcher Hiroki Kuroda, has admitted that there were times in elementary school when his buttocks were beaten with a baseball bat until he couldn’t sit down.

In one sense, then, it appears that sport is largely about ignoring pain. And yet pain returns to assert itself in a strange and striking way when we look at the broader category of competitive play. In a way, pain is one of the first games we learn. We live in an inverse relation to it, claiming as ideal any form of civilisation in which the possibility of experiencing pain is minimised. It is the first and most fundamental rule we learn to follow through free will, something that roots our lives in an inescapable game-like quality. We are always ruled by pain, and those capable of breaking its hold for a few moments become our heroes, role models, and victors.

Q.  The central idea of the passage is that

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Fantasy politics starts from the expectation that wishes should come true, that the best outcome imaginable is not just possible but overwhelmingly likely. The great appeal of fantasy politics is that it puts you in complete control. Using the power of your imagination, you get to control not only what you will do but also how everyone else will react. Everyone recognises your awesomeness and competes to serve your interests, whether motivated by admiration or fear. 

Why is fantasy politics so popular these days? One reason is that it is so much easier than real politics. In real politics, we try to address multiple, intersecting, complicated collective action problems - like the high cost of housing or sexism in the labour market - while at the same time grappling with the deep diversity of beliefs, values, and interests within and between societies. Real politics is a difficult and time-consuming activity that usually requires dissatisfactory compromise with reality and what other people want. It is much easier to make-believe our way to our favoured outcomes.

Fantasy politics is also much more inherently satisfying than real politics. It gives us the opportunity to express our political values and loyalties and this is something that feels good in itself and has an immediate psychic payoff, regardless of whether anything we are doing is actually contributing to bringing about the outcome we claim to want. Raising the stakes in our imagination, for example by elevating a mundane legislative election to a decisive battle between good and evil, immediately makes us feel more vital and significant. Conspiracy theorising similarly raises the stakes, casting us in the role of a band of heroes, such as QAnon followers, fighting to bring to light and bring down depraved evil. All this contrasts with the meagre psychic rewards of participating in real politics, as merely one voice among millions of equals no more special than anyone else. 

The psychic benefits of fantasy politics seem especially attractive to those who feel neglected and unheard by the political system, such as the white working class in towns left behind by the modern economy. For these losers, animated by grievance, fantasy politics offers their only way to feel politically significant. Moreover, like the victim’s dreams of revenge against their bully, these resentment driven fantasies are not kind. In the mid-term, the failure of populist fantasies like Brexit (a classic example of fantasy politics) will no doubt reinforce their followers' cynicism and alienation.

It should also be mentioned that fantasy politics is everywhere these days because fantasy itself is so popular. The kookiness of America’s gun rights movement, for example, has a lot to do with its animating hero fantasy of the regular guy standing up against the bad guys or evil government. In these movie screenplays that they write themselves, the good guy never misses and the bad guys never manage to shoot straight; and when the police arrive they can immediately tell who the good guys are.

Finally, demand creates its own supply. Political entrepreneurs like Trump or Farage or Boris come out of the woodwork and start pitching more fantasy products for voters to buy- so long as large numbers of our fellow citizens are disinterested in outcomes and prefer wallowing in fantasy, populist politicians will make hay.

Q. The author ascribes the pervasiveness of fantasy politics today to all of the following factors EXCEPT:

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Fantasy politics starts from the expectation that wishes should come true, that the best outcome imaginable is not just possible but overwhelmingly likely. The great appeal of fantasy politics is that it puts you in complete control. Using the power of your imagination, you get to control not only what you will do but also how everyone else will react. Everyone recognises your awesomeness and competes to serve your interests, whether motivated by admiration or fear. 

Why is fantasy politics so popular these days? One reason is that it is so much easier than real politics. In real politics, we try to address multiple, intersecting, complicated collective action problems - like the high cost of housing or sexism in the labour market - while at the same time grappling with the deep diversity of beliefs, values, and interests within and between societies. Real politics is a difficult and time-consuming activity that usually requires dissatisfactory compromise with reality and what other people want. It is much easier to make-believe our way to our favoured outcomes.

Fantasy politics is also much more inherently satisfying than real politics. It gives us the opportunity to express our political values and loyalties and this is something that feels good in itself and has an immediate psychic payoff, regardless of whether anything we are doing is actually contributing to bringing about the outcome we claim to want. Raising the stakes in our imagination, for example by elevating a mundane legislative election to a decisive battle between good and evil, immediately makes us feel more vital and significant. Conspiracy theorising similarly raises the stakes, casting us in the role of a band of heroes, such as QAnon followers, fighting to bring to light and bring down depraved evil. All this contrasts with the meagre psychic rewards of participating in real politics, as merely one voice among millions of equals no more special than anyone else. 

The psychic benefits of fantasy politics seem especially attractive to those who feel neglected and unheard by the political system, such as the white working class in towns left behind by the modern economy. For these losers, animated by grievance, fantasy politics offers their only way to feel politically significant. Moreover, like the victim’s dreams of revenge against their bully, these resentment driven fantasies are not kind. In the mid-term, the failure of populist fantasies like Brexit (a classic example of fantasy politics) will no doubt reinforce their followers' cynicism and alienation.

It should also be mentioned that fantasy politics is everywhere these days because fantasy itself is so popular. The kookiness of America’s gun rights movement, for example, has a lot to do with its animating hero fantasy of the regular guy standing up against the bad guys or evil government. In these movie screenplays that they write themselves, the good guy never misses and the bad guys never manage to shoot straight; and when the police arrive they can immediately tell who the good guys are.

Finally, demand creates its own supply. Political entrepreneurs like Trump or Farage or Boris come out of the woodwork and start pitching more fantasy products for voters to buy- so long as large numbers of our fellow citizens are disinterested in outcomes and prefer wallowing in fantasy, populist politicians will make hay.

Q. The author is likely to agree with all of the following statements, EXCEPT

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Fantasy politics starts from the expectation that wishes should come true, that the best outcome imaginable is not just possible but overwhelmingly likely. The great appeal of fantasy politics is that it puts you in complete control. Using the power of your imagination, you get to control not only what you will do but also how everyone else will react. Everyone recognises your awesomeness and competes to serve your interests, whether motivated by admiration or fear. 

Why is fantasy politics so popular these days? One reason is that it is so much easier than real politics. In real politics, we try to address multiple, intersecting, complicated collective action problems - like the high cost of housing or sexism in the labour market - while at the same time grappling with the deep diversity of beliefs, values, and interests within and between societies. Real politics is a difficult and time-consuming activity that usually requires dissatisfactory compromise with reality and what other people want. It is much easier to make-believe our way to our favoured outcomes.

Fantasy politics is also much more inherently satisfying than real politics. It gives us the opportunity to express our political values and loyalties and this is something that feels good in itself and has an immediate psychic payoff, regardless of whether anything we are doing is actually contributing to bringing about the outcome we claim to want. Raising the stakes in our imagination, for example by elevating a mundane legislative election to a decisive battle between good and evil, immediately makes us feel more vital and significant. Conspiracy theorising similarly raises the stakes, casting us in the role of a band of heroes, such as QAnon followers, fighting to bring to light and bring down depraved evil. All this contrasts with the meagre psychic rewards of participating in real politics, as merely one voice among millions of equals no more special than anyone else. 

The psychic benefits of fantasy politics seem especially attractive to those who feel neglected and unheard by the political system, such as the white working class in towns left behind by the modern economy. For these losers, animated by grievance, fantasy politics offers their only way to feel politically significant. Moreover, like the victim’s dreams of revenge against their bully, these resentment driven fantasies are not kind. In the mid-term, the failure of populist fantasies like Brexit (a classic example of fantasy politics) will no doubt reinforce their followers' cynicism and alienation.

It should also be mentioned that fantasy politics is everywhere these days because fantasy itself is so popular. The kookiness of America’s gun rights movement, for example, has a lot to do with its animating hero fantasy of the regular guy standing up against the bad guys or evil government. In these movie screenplays that they write themselves, the good guy never misses and the bad guys never manage to shoot straight; and when the police arrive they can immediately tell who the good guys are.

Finally, demand creates its own supply. Political entrepreneurs like Trump or Farage or Boris come out of the woodwork and start pitching more fantasy products for voters to buy- so long as large numbers of our fellow citizens are disinterested in outcomes and prefer wallowing in fantasy, populist politicians will make hay.

Q. Which of the following is a valid inference from the passage?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Fantasy politics starts from the expectation that wishes should come true, that the best outcome imaginable is not just possible but overwhelmingly likely. The great appeal of fantasy politics is that it puts you in complete control. Using the power of your imagination, you get to control not only what you will do but also how everyone else will react. Everyone recognises your awesomeness and competes to serve your interests, whether motivated by admiration or fear. 

Why is fantasy politics so popular these days? One reason is that it is so much easier than real politics. In real politics, we try to address multiple, intersecting, complicated collective action problems - like the high cost of housing or sexism in the labour market - while at the same time grappling with the deep diversity of beliefs, values, and interests within and between societies. Real politics is a difficult and time-consuming activity that usually requires dissatisfactory compromise with reality and what other people want. It is much easier to make-believe our way to our favoured outcomes.

Fantasy politics is also much more inherently satisfying than real politics. It gives us the opportunity to express our political values and loyalties and this is something that feels good in itself and has an immediate psychic payoff, regardless of whether anything we are doing is actually contributing to bringing about the outcome we claim to want. Raising the stakes in our imagination, for example by elevating a mundane legislative election to a decisive battle between good and evil, immediately makes us feel more vital and significant. Conspiracy theorising similarly raises the stakes, casting us in the role of a band of heroes, such as QAnon followers, fighting to bring to light and bring down depraved evil. All this contrasts with the meagre psychic rewards of participating in real politics, as merely one voice among millions of equals no more special than anyone else. 

The psychic benefits of fantasy politics seem especially attractive to those who feel neglected and unheard by the political system, such as the white working class in towns left behind by the modern economy. For these losers, animated by grievance, fantasy politics offers their only way to feel politically significant. Moreover, like the victim’s dreams of revenge against their bully, these resentment driven fantasies are not kind. In the mid-term, the failure of populist fantasies like Brexit (a classic example of fantasy politics) will no doubt reinforce their followers' cynicism and alienation.

It should also be mentioned that fantasy politics is everywhere these days because fantasy itself is so popular. The kookiness of America’s gun rights movement, for example, has a lot to do with its animating hero fantasy of the regular guy standing up against the bad guys or evil government. In these movie screenplays that they write themselves, the good guy never misses and the bad guys never manage to shoot straight; and when the police arrive they can immediately tell who the good guys are.

Finally, demand creates its own supply. Political entrepreneurs like Trump or Farage or Boris come out of the woodwork and start pitching more fantasy products for voters to buy- so long as large numbers of our fellow citizens are disinterested in outcomes and prefer wallowing in fantasy, populist politicians will make hay.

Q. The author’s tone towards followers of fantasy politics can best be described as being:

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Fantasy politics starts from the expectation that wishes should come true, that the best outcome imaginable is not just possible but overwhelmingly likely. The great appeal of fantasy politics is that it puts you in complete control. Using the power of your imagination, you get to control not only what you will do but also how everyone else will react. Everyone recognises your awesomeness and competes to serve your interests, whether motivated by admiration or fear. 

Why is fantasy politics so popular these days? One reason is that it is so much easier than real politics. In real politics, we try to address multiple, intersecting, complicated collective action problems - like the high cost of housing or sexism in the labour market - while at the same time grappling with the deep diversity of beliefs, values, and interests within and between societies. Real politics is a difficult and time-consuming activity that usually requires dissatisfactory compromise with reality and what other people want. It is much easier to make-believe our way to our favoured outcomes.

Fantasy politics is also much more inherently satisfying than real politics. It gives us the opportunity to express our political values and loyalties and this is something that feels good in itself and has an immediate psychic payoff, regardless of whether anything we are doing is actually contributing to bringing about the outcome we claim to want. Raising the stakes in our imagination, for example by elevating a mundane legislative election to a decisive battle between good and evil, immediately makes us feel more vital and significant. Conspiracy theorising similarly raises the stakes, casting us in the role of a band of heroes, such as QAnon followers, fighting to bring to light and bring down depraved evil. All this contrasts with the meagre psychic rewards of participating in real politics, as merely one voice among millions of equals no more special than anyone else. 

The psychic benefits of fantasy politics seem especially attractive to those who feel neglected and unheard by the political system, such as the white working class in towns left behind by the modern economy. For these losers, animated by grievance, fantasy politics offers their only way to feel politically significant. Moreover, like the victim’s dreams of revenge against their bully, these resentment driven fantasies are not kind. In the mid-term, the failure of populist fantasies like Brexit (a classic example of fantasy politics) will no doubt reinforce their followers' cynicism and alienation.

It should also be mentioned that fantasy politics is everywhere these days because fantasy itself is so popular. The kookiness of America’s gun rights movement, for example, has a lot to do with its animating hero fantasy of the regular guy standing up against the bad guys or evil government. In these movie screenplays that they write themselves, the good guy never misses and the bad guys never manage to shoot straight; and when the police arrive they can immediately tell who the good guys are.

Finally, demand creates its own supply. Political entrepreneurs like Trump or Farage or Boris come out of the woodwork and start pitching more fantasy products for voters to buy- so long as large numbers of our fellow citizens are disinterested in outcomes and prefer wallowing in fantasy, populist politicians will make hay.

Q. Why does the author cite QAnon followers in the passage?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The most well-understood dimension of racism involves taking actions that people of colour view as overtly prejudiced—policing black citizens much differently than whites, calling the police on a black bird-watcher in Central Park who is asking you to obey the law, calling somebody the N-word to show them who is boss. This is racism in the first degree. If officers anticipated that they would be held fully accountable for bad policing, they would do more good policing and we could begin healing the wounds they’ve inflicted on black people for centuries.

Then there is opposing or turning one’s back on anti-racism efforts, often justified by the demonization of the people courageously tackling racist behaviour. I call this racism in the second degree, akin to aiding and abetting.
The final, most pernicious category undergirds the everyday black experience. When employers, educational institutions, and governmental entities do not unwind practices that disadvantage people of colour in the competition with whites for economic and career mobility, that is fundamentally racist—not to mention cancerous to our economy and inconsistent with the American dream. For example, the majority of white executives operate as if there is a tension between increasing racial diversity and maintaining the excellence-based “meritocracies” that have made their organizations successful. After all, who in their right mind would argue against the concept of meritocracy?

Employers whose efforts to increase diversity lack the same analytical and executional rigour that is taken for granted in every other part of their business engage in practices that disadvantage black people in the competition for economic opportunity. By default, this behaviour protects white people’s positions of power.

We can increase the cost of this behaviour by calling on major employers to sign on to basic practices that demonstrate that black lives matter to them. Companies that sign on will be recognized and celebrated. Senior management teams that decline to take these basic steps will no longer be able to hide, and they will struggle to recruit and retain top talent of all colours who will prefer firms that have signed on. Then more people of colour will become economically mobile, organizations will become more diverse and competitive, and there will be a critical mass of black leaders whose institutional influence leads to more racially equitable behaviour. These leaders will also have the economic power to further elevate the cost of all other types of racist behaviour, in policing, criminal justice, housing, K-12 education, and health care—systems that for decades have been putting knees on the necks of our most vulnerable citizens and communities.

Third-degree racism can be deadly. For at least the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated that in order to get tested, you had to go to a primary care doctor to get a prescription and then, in some areas, also get a referral to a specialist who could approve a test, because they were in limited supply. That process made it much harder for minorities to access tests because they are much less likely to have primary-care physicians. If the people who designed that process knew upfront that they would be exposed as racist, fired, and ostracized if their approach put minorities at a greater health risk than white people, they would have designed it differently and saved black lives. Just having a critical mass of minorities in decision-making roles regarding that test-qualification process would have also saved many lives.

Q. Which of the following is an example of second-degree racism?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The most well-understood dimension of racism involves taking actions that people of colour view as overtly prejudiced—policing black citizens much differently than whites, calling the police on a black bird-watcher in Central Park who is asking you to obey the law, calling somebody the N-word to show them who is boss. This is racism in the first degree. If officers anticipated that they would be held fully accountable for bad policing, they would do more good policing and we could begin healing the wounds they’ve inflicted on black people for centuries.

Then there is opposing or turning one’s back on anti-racism efforts, often justified by the demonization of the people courageously tackling racist behaviour. I call this racism in the second degree, akin to aiding and abetting.
The final, most pernicious category undergirds the everyday black experience. When employers, educational institutions, and governmental entities do not unwind practices that disadvantage people of colour in the competition with whites for economic and career mobility, that is fundamentally racist—not to mention cancerous to our economy and inconsistent with the American dream. For example, the majority of white executives operate as if there is a tension between increasing racial diversity and maintaining the excellence-based “meritocracies” that have made their organizations successful. After all, who in their right mind would argue against the concept of meritocracy?

Employers whose efforts to increase diversity lack the same analytical and executional rigour that is taken for granted in every other part of their business engage in practices that disadvantage black people in the competition for economic opportunity. By default, this behaviour protects white people’s positions of power.

We can increase the cost of this behaviour by calling on major employers to sign on to basic practices that demonstrate that black lives matter to them. Companies that sign on will be recognized and celebrated. Senior management teams that decline to take these basic steps will no longer be able to hide, and they will struggle to recruit and retain top talent of all colours who will prefer firms that have signed on. Then more people of colour will become economically mobile, organizations will become more diverse and competitive, and there will be a critical mass of black leaders whose institutional influence leads to more racially equitable behaviour. These leaders will also have the economic power to further elevate the cost of all other types of racist behaviour, in policing, criminal justice, housing, K-12 education, and health care—systems that for decades have been putting knees on the necks of our most vulnerable citizens and communities.

Third-degree racism can be deadly. For at least the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated that in order to get tested, you had to go to a primary care doctor to get a prescription and then, in some areas, also get a referral to a specialist who could approve a test, because they were in limited supply. That process made it much harder for minorities to access tests because they are much less likely to have primary-care physicians. If the people who designed that process knew upfront that they would be exposed as racist, fired, and ostracized if their approach put minorities at a greater health risk than white people, they would have designed it differently and saved black lives. Just having a critical mass of minorities in decision-making roles regarding that test-qualification process would have also saved many lives.

Q. Why does the author cite the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's COVID-19 pandemic response in the final paragraph?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The most well-understood dimension of racism involves taking actions that people of colour view as overtly prejudiced—policing black citizens much differently than whites, calling the police on a black bird-watcher in Central Park who is asking you to obey the law, calling somebody the N-word to show them who is boss. This is racism in the first degree. If officers anticipated that they would be held fully accountable for bad policing, they would do more good policing and we could begin healing the wounds they’ve inflicted on black people for centuries.

Then there is opposing or turning one’s back on anti-racism efforts, often justified by the demonization of the people courageously tackling racist behaviour. I call this racism in the second degree, akin to aiding and abetting.
The final, most pernicious category undergirds the everyday black experience. When employers, educational institutions, and governmental entities do not unwind practices that disadvantage people of colour in the competition with whites for economic and career mobility, that is fundamentally racist—not to mention cancerous to our economy and inconsistent with the American dream. For example, the majority of white executives operate as if there is a tension between increasing racial diversity and maintaining the excellence-based “meritocracies” that have made their organizations successful. After all, who in their right mind would argue against the concept of meritocracy?

Employers whose efforts to increase diversity lack the same analytical and executional rigour that is taken for granted in every other part of their business engage in practices that disadvantage black people in the competition for economic opportunity. By default, this behaviour protects white people’s positions of power.

We can increase the cost of this behaviour by calling on major employers to sign on to basic practices that demonstrate that black lives matter to them. Companies that sign on will be recognized and celebrated. Senior management teams that decline to take these basic steps will no longer be able to hide, and they will struggle to recruit and retain top talent of all colours who will prefer firms that have signed on. Then more people of colour will become economically mobile, organizations will become more diverse and competitive, and there will be a critical mass of black leaders whose institutional influence leads to more racially equitable behaviour. These leaders will also have the economic power to further elevate the cost of all other types of racist behaviour, in policing, criminal justice, housing, K-12 education, and health care—systems that for decades have been putting knees on the necks of our most vulnerable citizens and communities.

Third-degree racism can be deadly. For at least the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated that in order to get tested, you had to go to a primary care doctor to get a prescription and then, in some areas, also get a referral to a specialist who could approve a test, because they were in limited supply. That process made it much harder for minorities to access tests because they are much less likely to have primary-care physicians. If the people who designed that process knew upfront that they would be exposed as racist, fired, and ostracized if their approach put minorities at a greater health risk than white people, they would have designed it differently and saved black lives. Just having a critical mass of minorities in decision-making roles regarding that test-qualification process would have also saved many lives.

Q. Which of the following is the author of the passage most likely to agree with?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The most well-understood dimension of racism involves taking actions that people of colour view as overtly prejudiced—policing black citizens much differently than whites, calling the police on a black bird-watcher in Central Park who is asking you to obey the law, calling somebody the N-word to show them who is boss. This is racism in the first degree. If officers anticipated that they would be held fully accountable for bad policing, they would do more good policing and we could begin healing the wounds they’ve inflicted on black people for centuries.

Then there is opposing or turning one’s back on anti-racism efforts, often justified by the demonization of the people courageously tackling racist behaviour. I call this racism in the second degree, akin to aiding and abetting.
The final, most pernicious category undergirds the everyday black experience. When employers, educational institutions, and governmental entities do not unwind practices that disadvantage people of colour in the competition with whites for economic and career mobility, that is fundamentally racist—not to mention cancerous to our economy and inconsistent with the American dream. For example, the majority of white executives operate as if there is a tension between increasing racial diversity and maintaining the excellence-based “meritocracies” that have made their organizations successful. After all, who in their right mind would argue against the concept of meritocracy?

Employers whose efforts to increase diversity lack the same analytical and executional rigour that is taken for granted in every other part of their business engage in practices that disadvantage black people in the competition for economic opportunity. By default, this behaviour protects white people’s positions of power.

We can increase the cost of this behaviour by calling on major employers to sign on to basic practices that demonstrate that black lives matter to them. Companies that sign on will be recognized and celebrated. Senior management teams that decline to take these basic steps will no longer be able to hide, and they will struggle to recruit and retain top talent of all colours who will prefer firms that have signed on. Then more people of colour will become economically mobile, organizations will become more diverse and competitive, and there will be a critical mass of black leaders whose institutional influence leads to more racially equitable behaviour. These leaders will also have the economic power to further elevate the cost of all other types of racist behaviour, in policing, criminal justice, housing, K-12 education, and health care—systems that for decades have been putting knees on the necks of our most vulnerable citizens and communities.

Third-degree racism can be deadly. For at least the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated that in order to get tested, you had to go to a primary care doctor to get a prescription and then, in some areas, also get a referral to a specialist who could approve a test, because they were in limited supply. That process made it much harder for minorities to access tests because they are much less likely to have primary-care physicians. If the people who designed that process knew upfront that they would be exposed as racist, fired, and ostracized if their approach put minorities at a greater health risk than white people, they would have designed it differently and saved black lives. Just having a critical mass of minorities in decision-making roles regarding that test-qualification process would have also saved many lives.

Q. According to the passage, which of the following will NOT be a impact of an increase in the numbers of black policymakers?

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

The most well-understood dimension of racism involves taking actions that people of colour view as overtly prejudiced—policing black citizens much differently than whites, calling the police on a black bird-watcher in Central Park who is asking you to obey the law, calling somebody the N-word to show them who is boss. This is racism in the first degree. If officers anticipated that they would be held fully accountable for bad policing, they would do more good policing and we could begin healing the wounds they’ve inflicted on black people for centuries.

Then there is opposing or turning one’s back on anti-racism efforts, often justified by the demonization of the people courageously tackling racist behaviour. I call this racism in the second degree, akin to aiding and abetting.
The final, most pernicious category undergirds the everyday black experience. When employers, educational institutions, and governmental entities do not unwind practices that disadvantage people of colour in the competition with whites for economic and career mobility, that is fundamentally racist—not to mention cancerous to our economy and inconsistent with the American dream. For example, the majority of white executives operate as if there is a tension between increasing racial diversity and maintaining the excellence-based “meritocracies” that have made their organizations successful. After all, who in their right mind would argue against the concept of meritocracy?

Employers whose efforts to increase diversity lack the same analytical and executional rigour that is taken for granted in every other part of their business engage in practices that disadvantage black people in the competition for economic opportunity. By default, this behaviour protects white people’s positions of power.

We can increase the cost of this behaviour by calling on major employers to sign on to basic practices that demonstrate that black lives matter to them. Companies that sign on will be recognized and celebrated. Senior management teams that decline to take these basic steps will no longer be able to hide, and they will struggle to recruit and retain top talent of all colours who will prefer firms that have signed on. Then more people of colour will become economically mobile, organizations will become more diverse and competitive, and there will be a critical mass of black leaders whose institutional influence leads to more racially equitable behaviour. These leaders will also have the economic power to further elevate the cost of all other types of racist behaviour, in policing, criminal justice, housing, K-12 education, and health care—systems that for decades have been putting knees on the necks of our most vulnerable citizens and communities.

Third-degree racism can be deadly. For at least the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated that in order to get tested, you had to go to a primary care doctor to get a prescription and then, in some areas, also get a referral to a specialist who could approve a test, because they were in limited supply. That process made it much harder for minorities to access tests because they are much less likely to have primary-care physicians. If the people who designed that process knew upfront that they would be exposed as racist, fired, and ostracized if their approach put minorities at a greater health risk than white people, they would have designed it differently and saved black lives. Just having a critical mass of minorities in decision-making roles regarding that test-qualification process would have also saved many lives.

Q. Which of the following cannot be inferred from the passage?

I. Employers who strive to improve racial diversity in their organizations do so because they understand that an excellence-based meritocracy system is flawed.

II. Perpetrators of third-degree racism are unwitting participants in a system designed to disadvantage black people.

III. Racism is categorized into different degrees based on the severity of the impact on the Black community.

IV. Institutional influence of black people is crucial to ensuring equitable outcomes for the Black community. 

The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures the author’s position.

A virus that kills too efficiently doesn’t get to be a virus for very long, because dead hosts can’t walk around breathing on uninfected-but-susceptible suckers. So one hypothesis says that successful mutations are mostly changes in the way the virus infects. That is, they improve the way the virus gets into a human, or gets into a human cell, or reproduces in that cell. If the best outcome for the virus is the same as that of humans, the eventual outcome for both species is going to be co-existence. Even if no vaccine were discovered, this would be the eventual end. Many viruses began as killers and then became harmless. But that is only at a species level. Evolution doesn’t really care for individuals. This is why you should still get vaccinated.

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

1. These views are largely impervious to argument or appearance and have some resonance with our deeply polarized society today.
2. When believers and nonbelievers discuss or witness a seemingly miraculous event, they find little common ground, as if one is speaking French and the other Swahili.
3. And yet, surprisingly, some recent proposals in physics reveal that believers and nonbelievers may have more in common than they think.
4. Such radically different attitudes represent radically different views of the world.

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

1. But alas,in the battle for knowledge and power in Antarctica, the land itself is losing.
2. Activity that might seem inconsequential—leaving a footprint or watching penguins from feet away to study their behaviour—can influence the area in ways that we can’t always see immediately.
3. Antarctic land and the animals that live on it, like other largely untouched environments, are extremely sensitive.
4. Researchers have also found that tourists or other visitors have inadvertently brought invasive species, such as annual bluegrass, to the continent.

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

1. We’ve also learned much about cognition and the investment of the whole body in thought and action.
2. But that isn’t the case.
3. These many biological routes to attention gift us our selfhood.
4. We now know we’re animals, related to all other life on our planet.
5. As such, we might expect attitudes to have changed.

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

1. It’s not binary, it’s not completely quantifiable.
2. The early stages of mental disorders are much more subtle and varied, and there is less agreement between clinicians.
3. I make this judgment based on a history from someone who knows the patient well largely to rule out other causes.
4. I can diagnose diabetes based on a number on a blood test: it is binary and quantifiable.
5. When I diagnose dementia, it’s based on my subjective judgment that the person’s cognition has declined. 

Directions : Rearrange the following sentences
A. A man who teaches political economy and sociology must read the most recent books on these themes both in Europe and America—nay, he must read the newspapers and study the markets, or he will be outstripped by his own pupils.
B. And yet, when the teacher of literature devotes a small portion of the time of his pupils to the contemplation of contemporary poets, novelists, and dramatists, he is not only blamed for doing so, but some teachers who are ignorant of the writers of their own day boast of their ignorance with true academic pride. 
C. A man who teaches drawing and painting should not only know the history of art, but its latest developments. 
D. A man who teaches physics and chemistry is supposed to be familiar not only with the history of his subject, but its latest manifestations; with the work of his contemporaries.  

Employees of an MNC company were asked about their Food preferences. They had to select among Italian, Chinese, and Continental. Once the survey was done, the following things were observed

1. Number of male employees liking none of the options is the same as the number of female employees liking all of the three options
2. 175 of the employees like exactly one of the 3 options
3. The number of women who like at least 2 out of 3 preferences are 65
4. Total number of male employees is 7 times the number of male employees who like only Continental.
5. 55 Women only like Italian. Overall 25 employees like only Chinese out of which 40% are male .
6. Number of male employees liking only Italian is same the number of male liking Chinese and Continental but not Italian
7. 20% of the female employees did not like any of the 3 options which is double the number of male employees who did not like any of the 3 options.
8. Number of Employees liking only Continental is the same as the number of women liking only Italian. Number of male employees liking only continental  is 30.

Q. What is the number of male employees who do not like Italian ?

Employees of an MNC company were asked about their Food preferences. They had to select among Italian, Chinese, and Continental. Once the survey was done, the following things were observed

1. Number of male employees liking none of the options is the same as the number of female employees liking all of the three options
2. 175 of the employees like exactly one of the 3 options
3. The number of women who like at least 2 out of 3 preferences are 65
4. Total number of male employees is 7 times the number of male employees who like only Continental.
5. 55 Women only like Italian. Overall 25 employees like only Chinese out of which 40% are male .
6. Number of male employees liking only Italian is same the number of male liking Chinese and Continental but not Italian
7. 20% of the female employees did not like any of the 3 options which is double the number of male employees who did not like any of the 3 options.
8. Number of Employees liking only Continental is the same as the number of women liking only Italian. Number of male employees liking only continental  is 30.

Q. What can be the maximum number of employees who like Continental and Chinese foods but not Italian food?

Employees of an MNC company were asked about their Food preferences. They had to select among Italian, Chinese, and Continental. Once the survey was done, the following things were observed

1. Number of male employees liking none of the options is the same as the number of female employees liking all of the three options
2. 175 of the employees like exactly one of the 3 options
3. The number of women who like at least 2 out of 3 preferences are 65
4. Total number of male employees is 7 times the number of male employees who like only Continental.
5. 55 Women only like Italian. Overall 25 employees like only Chinese out of which 40% are male .
6. Number of male employees liking only Italian is same the number of male liking Chinese and Continental but not Italian
7. 20% of the female employees did not like any of the 3 options which is double the number of male employees who did not like any of the 3 options.
8. Number of Employees liking only Continental is the same as the number of women liking only Italian. Number of male employees liking only continental  is 30.

Q. How many male employees like Italian?

Employees of an MNC company were asked about their Food preferences. They had to select among Italian, Chinese, and Continental. Once the survey was done, the following things were observed

1. Number of male employees liking none of the options is the same as the number of female employees liking all of the three options
2. 175 of the employees like exactly one of the 3 options
3. The number of women who like at least 2 out of 3 preferences are 65
4. Total number of male employees is 7 times the number of male employees who like only Continental.
5. 55 Women only like Italian. Overall 25 employees like only Chinese out of which 40% are male .
6. Number of male employees liking only Italian is same the number of male liking Chinese and Continental but not Italian
7. 20% of the female employees did not like any of the 3 options which is double the number of male employees who did not like any of the 3 options.
8. Number of Employees liking only Continental is the same as the number of women liking only Italian. Number of male employees liking only continental  is 30.

Q. If 100 of the male employees like Chinese, what is the number of the male employees who like both continental and Italian but not Chinese

Manisha is a kindergarten class teacher who planned a schedule for the incoming batch of students. The classes were supposed to be held from Monday to Friday. Each day has four slots named A, B, C, and D in that order. Slot A starts from 8:00, Slot B from 09:00, slot C from 10:00, and slot D from 11:00. The classes are English, Counting, Dancing, Painting, Singing and Physical Education.

There are 3 types of categories in which classes are distributed. The details of the category are as follows::

a) Compulsory: Classes which happen 4 days a week

b) Optional: Classes which happen 2 times a week

c) Necessary: Classes which happen once a week.

Each of the 3 categories has at least 1 of the 6 subjects in them.

Furthermore, the following things are known:

1. No subject happened in the same slot or the same day twice. None of the subjects belonging to the Optional category happened on Friday.
2. Every day exactly 1 slot had to be free. Slot A had classes on all days.
3. Overall 3 classes each happened in the B and C slots throughout the week. 
4. Painting was taught on Wednesday's C slot. Exactly one of the optional subjects was not taught on consecutive days.
5. Counting was taught on Monday. The Singing class did not happen on Tuesday.
6. There were 2 instances where the free period was in the same slot as the preceding day.
7. Physical Education only happened in the A slot. Slot D of Monday was a free slot
8. Week started with teaching English.  Dance was not taught on Thursday.
9. On a particular day, Singing happened after a free slot
10. On one particular day, Physical Education, Dance, and English were taught in that order. Slot C was a free slot that day.

Q. Which of the following can not be a subject of the Optional Category?

Manisha is a kindergarten class teacher who planned a schedule for the incoming batch of students. The classes were supposed to be held from Monday to Friday. Each day has four slots named A, B, C, and D in that order. Slot A starts from 8:00, Slot B from 09:00, slot C from 10:00, and slot D from 11:00. The classes are English, Counting, Dancing, Painting, Singing and Physical Education.

There are 3 types of categories in which classes are distributed. The details of the category are as follows::

a) Compulsory: Classes which happen 4 days a week

b) Optional: Classes which happen 2 times a week

c) Necessary: Classes which happen once a week.

Each of the 3 categories has at least 1 of the 6 subjects in them.

Furthermore, the following things are known:

1. No subject happened in the same slot or the same day twice. None of the subjects belonging to the Optional category happened on Friday.
2. Every day exactly 1 slot had to be free. Slot A had classes on all days.
3. Overall 3 classes each happened in the B and C slots throughout the week. 
4. Painting was taught on Wednesday's C slot. Exactly one of the optional subjects was not taught on consecutive days.
5. Counting was taught on Monday. The Singing class did not happen on Tuesday.
6. There were 2 instances where the free period was in the same slot as the preceding day.
7. Physical Education only happened in the A slot. Slot D of Monday was a free slot
8. Week started with teaching English.  Dance was not taught on Thursday.
9. On a particular day, Singing happened after a free slot
10. On one particular day, Physical Education, Dance, and English were taught in that order. Slot C was a free slot that day.

Q. In how many ways can the time-table be drawn?

Manisha is a kindergarten class teacher who planned a schedule for the incoming batch of students. The classes were supposed to be held from Monday to Friday. Each day has four slots named A, B, C, and D in that order. Slot A starts from 8:00, Slot B from 09:00, slot C from 10:00, and slot D from 11:00. The classes are English, Counting, Dancing, Painting, Singing and Physical Education.

There are 3 types of categories in which classes are distributed. The details of the category are as follows::

a) Compulsory: Classes which happen 4 days a week

b) Optional: Classes which happen 2 times a week

c) Necessary: Classes which happen once a week.

Each of the 3 categories has at least 1 of the 6 subjects in them.

Furthermore, the following things are known:

1. No subject happened in the same slot or the same day twice. None of the subjects belonging to the Optional category happened on Friday.
2. Every day exactly 1 slot had to be free. Slot A had classes on all days.
3. Overall 3 classes each happened in the B and C slots throughout the week. 
4. Painting was taught on Wednesday's C slot. Exactly one of the optional subjects was not taught on consecutive days.
5. Counting was taught on Monday. The Singing class did not happen on Tuesday.
6. There were 2 instances where the free period was in the same slot as the preceding day.
7. Physical Education only happened in the A slot. Slot D of Monday was a free slot
8. Week started with teaching English.  Dance was not taught on Thursday.
9. On a particular day, Singing happened after a free slot
10. On one particular day, Physical Education, Dance, and English were taught in that order. Slot C was a free slot that day.

Q. How many days both English and Dance classes were held?

Manisha is a kindergarten class teacher who planned a schedule for the incoming batch of students. The classes were supposed to be held from Monday to Friday. Each day has four slots named A, B, C, and D in that order. Slot A starts from 8:00, Slot B from 09:00, slot C from 10:00, and slot D from 11:00. The classes are English, Counting, Dancing, Painting, Singing and Physical Education.

There are 3 types of categories in which classes are distributed. The details of the category are as follows::

a) Compulsory: Classes which happen 4 days a week

b) Optional: Classes which happen 2 times a week

c) Necessary: Classes which happen once a week.

Each of the 3 categories has at least 1 of the 6 subjects in them.

Furthermore, the following things are known:

1. No subject happened in the same slot or the same day twice. None of the subjects belonging to the Optional category happened on Friday.
2. Every day exactly 1 slot had to be free. Slot A had classes on all days.
3. Overall 3 classes each happened in the B and C slots throughout the week. 
4. Painting was taught on Wednesday's C slot. Exactly one of the optional subjects was not taught on consecutive days.
5. Counting was taught on Monday. The Singing class did not happen on Tuesday.
6. There were 2 instances where the free period was in the same slot as the preceding day.
7. Physical Education only happened in the A slot. Slot D of Monday was a free slot
8. Week started with teaching English.  Dance was not taught on Thursday.
9. On a particular day, Singing happened after a free slot
10. On one particular day, Physical Education, Dance, and English were taught in that order. Slot C was a free slot that day.

Q. Which of the following subject was not conducted in D slot?

A group of 8 friends is supposed to sit around a square table with 2 chairs on each side of the table. The name of the 8 friends is P, Q, R, S T, U, V, and W. Each one of them was either a Doctor, Designer, Dancer, Drummer or Dermatologist.

Each of them ordered a unique food item among Burger, Pizza, Patties, Samosa, Pastry, Vadapav, Dosa, and Chaat. The following things are known about their sitting arrangement

1. P who ordered a Pizza sat next to a Doctor and a Dancer
2. None of the Designers had Dancer as their neighbour. The designers had either Samosa or Dosa.
3. Any of the three consecutive people have different jobs.
4. One side of the table had a Dermatologist and a Designer.
5. A Drummer who ordered Patties is sitting right of V. Both of them are on the same side of the table
6. U is sitting in one place left of a Drummer. 3 places right of V is not a Doctor
7. U is the only  Dancer among the friends and he sat straight opposite to Designer named V. Also U had a Burger.
8. T had a Dosa. S who is not a Doctor had Pastry and sat straight opposite of R who had Vadapav.

Q. How many possible arrangements can be made with the above information?

A group of 8 friends is supposed to sit around a square table with 2 chairs on each side of the table. The name of the 8 friends is P, Q, R, S T, U, V, and W. Each one of them was either a Doctor, Designer, Dancer, Drummer or Dermatologist.

Each of them ordered a unique food item among Burger, Pizza, Patties, Samosa, Pastry, Vadapav, Dosa, and Chaat. The following things are known about their sitting arrangement

1. P who ordered a Pizza sat next to a Doctor and a Dancer
2. None of the Designers had Dancer as their neighbour. The designers had either Samosa or Dosa.
3. Any of the three consecutive people have different jobs.
4. One side of the table had a Dermatologist and a Designer.
5. A Drummer who ordered Patties is sitting right of V. Both of them are on the same side of the table
6. U is sitting in one place left of a Drummer. 3 places right of V is not a Doctor
7. U is the only  Dancer among the friends and he sat straight opposite to Designer named V. Also U had a Burger.
8. T had a Dosa. S who is not a Doctor had Pastry and sat straight opposite of R who had Vadapav.

Q. If it is given that Q had a Chaat, Which of the following can be a Drummer?

A group of 8 friends is supposed to sit around a square table with 2 chairs on each side of the table. The name of the 8 friends is P, Q, R, S T, U, V, and W. Each one of them was either a Doctor, Designer, Dancer, Drummer or Dermatologist.

Each of them ordered a unique food item among Burger, Pizza, Patties, Samosa, Pastry, Vadapav, Dosa, and Chaat. The following things are known about their sitting arrangement

1. P who ordered a Pizza sat next to a Doctor and a Dancer
2. None of the Designers had Dancer as their neighbour. The designers had either Samosa or Dosa.
3. Any of the three consecutive people have different jobs.
4. One side of the table had a Dermatologist and a Designer.
5. A Drummer who ordered Patties is sitting right of V. Both of them are on the same side of the table
6. U is sitting in one place left of a Drummer. 3 places right of V is not a Doctor
7. U is the only  Dancer among the friends and he sat straight opposite to Designer named V. Also U had a Burger.
8. T had a Dosa. S who is not a Doctor had Pastry and sat straight opposite of R who had Vadapav.

Q. What among the following can be the job of S?

A group of 8 friends is supposed to sit around a square table with 2 chairs on each side of the table. The name of the 8 friends is P, Q, R, S T, U, V, and W. Each one of them was either a Doctor, Designer, Dancer, Drummer or Dermatologist.

Each of them ordered a unique food item among Burger, Pizza, Patties, Samosa, Pastry, Vadapav, Dosa, and Chaat. The following things are known about their sitting arrangement

1. P who ordered a Pizza sat next to a Doctor and a Dancer
2. None of the Designers had Dancer as their neighbour. The designers had either Samosa or Dosa.
3. Any of the three consecutive people have different jobs.
4. One side of the table had a Dermatologist and a Designer.
5. A Drummer who ordered Patties is sitting right of V. Both of them are on the same side of the table
6. U is sitting in one place left of a Drummer. 3 places right of V is not a Doctor
7. U is the only  Dancer among the friends and he sat straight opposite to Designer named V. Also U had a Burger.
8. T had a Dosa. S who is not a Doctor had Pastry and sat straight opposite of R who had Vadapav.

Q. What can be the profession of the person who had Chaat?

Two players are playing a game called 'Pick an alpha'. In this game, there are 2 variables, the first one is 'a', the starting alphabet, and the second one 'n' the maximum range of alphabets starting from 'a'. The game proceeds as follows. One of the players picks an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from 'a',  say 'm', now the second player has to pick an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from the alphabet just after 'm', and in a similar way, it continues till one player picks the alphabet Z. The player to choose Z loses the game. If at any point during the game, less than n alphabets remain, the player has to choose from these remaining alphabets. Both the players pick alphabets that maximise their chance to win. 

Suppose, the value of 'a' is G and the value of n is 3. So, the first player has to pick an alphabet among G, H, I. Suppose he picks I. Then the second player has to pick among J, K and L. It continues in a similar fashion.

Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.

Q. If a = A and n = 5, what should the player starting the game choose initially so that he will definitely win the game?

Two players are playing a game called 'Pick an alpha'. In this game, there are 2 variables, the first one is 'a', the starting alphabet, and the second one 'n' the maximum range of alphabets starting from 'a'. The game proceeds as follows. One of the players picks an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from 'a',  say 'm', now the second player has to pick an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from the alphabet just after 'm', and in a similar way, it continues till one player picks the alphabet Z. The player to choose Z loses the game. If at any point during the game, less than n alphabets remain, the player has to choose from these remaining alphabets. Both the players pick alphabets that maximise their chance to win. 

Suppose, the value of 'a' is G and the value of n is 3. So, the first player has to pick an alphabet among G, H, I. Suppose he picks I. Then the second player has to pick among J, K and L. It continues in a similar fashion.

Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.

Q. If the game is being played between Simon and Billy, and Simon gets the first chance, what should he pick in the first chance so that he wins the game definitely? a = D, n = 8.

Two players are playing a game called 'Pick an alpha'. In this game, there are 2 variables, the first one is 'a', the starting alphabet, and the second one 'n' the maximum range of alphabets starting from 'a'. The game proceeds as follows. One of the players picks an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from 'a',  say 'm', now the second player has to pick an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from the alphabet just after 'm', and in a similar way, it continues till one player picks the alphabet Z. The player to choose Z loses the game. If at any point during the game, less than n alphabets remain, the player has to choose from these remaining alphabets. Both the players pick alphabets that maximise their chance to win. 

Suppose, the value of 'a' is G and the value of n is 3. So, the first player has to pick an alphabet among G, H, I. Suppose he picks I. Then the second player has to pick among J, K and L. It continues in a similar fashion.

Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.

Q. If the game is played between Sheldon and Howard and Sheldon gets to start the game, in which of the following games does Sheldon not get to win, no matter which alphabet he picks in the first chance?

Two players are playing a game called 'Pick an alpha'. In this game, there are 2 variables, the first one is 'a', the starting alphabet, and the second one 'n' the maximum range of alphabets starting from 'a'. The game proceeds as follows. One of the players picks an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from 'a',  say 'm', now the second player has to pick an alphabet from the first n alphabets starting from the alphabet just after 'm', and in a similar way, it continues till one player picks the alphabet Z. The player to choose Z loses the game. If at any point during the game, less than n alphabets remain, the player has to choose from these remaining alphabets. Both the players pick alphabets that maximise their chance to win. 

Suppose, the value of 'a' is G and the value of n is 3. So, the first player has to pick an alphabet among G, H, I. Suppose he picks I. Then the second player has to pick among J, K and L. It continues in a similar fashion.

Based on the information given above, answer the questions that follow.

Q. Suppose the rules of the game are changed such that the one who picks Z wins. What should the player who is starting the game pick in his first chance so that he definitely wins? a = A, n = 4.

An autobiographical numbers are special types of numbers whose structure describes itself. Each of the autobiographical number's digit indicates how many times the digit corresponding to that position occurs within the number. The first digit from the left indicates the quantity of zeroes in the number. The second digit indicates the number of 1s, the third digit indicates the number of 2s and so on until the end. 1210 is one such 4 digit autobiographical number and 3211000 is another 7 digit autobiographical number.

It so happens that there is only one 10 digit auto-biographical number such that-

1. The number has 10 digits.

2. The first digit from the left indicates the number of zeroes in the number.

3. For position 'n' from the beginning, the digit represents the number of times the number 'n-1' occurs in the number. 

Q. How many different digits are used in the 10 digit number?

An autobiographical numbers are special types of numbers whose structure describes itself. Each of the autobiographical number's digit indicates how many times the digit corresponding to that position occurs within the number. The first digit from the left indicates the quantity of zeroes in the number. The second digit indicates the number of 1s, the third digit indicates the number of 2s and so on until the end. 1210 is one such 4 digit autobiographical number and 3211000 is another 7 digit autobiographical number.

It so happens that there is only one 10 digit auto-biographical number such that-

1. The number has 10 digits.

2. The first digit from the left indicates the number of zeroes in the number.

3. For position 'n' from the beginning, the digit represents the number of times the number 'n-1' occurs in the number. 

Q. How many times was the digit 0 repeated in the number?

WXCD, UVEF, STGH, QRIJ, ?

Which year has the same calendar as 1700 ? 

Average of 20 distinct natural number are 19.25. 10 more natural numbers are added such that each of the newly added number is greater than 19 and the average increases to 20.1. What is the maximum possible value of the number which is added to the original set?

Solution A and solution B are 2 solutions of orange such that the concentration of orange juice is 64% in solution A and the concentration of water is 20% in solution B. Solution A and B are mixed in a ratio x:y such they form a 20 liter solution which has 6 litres of water. What is the value of 3x+2y if it is known that x and y are co-prime?

Ram bought 3 types of wheat flour which are type A, type B and type C. The cost of type A flour is Rs 38/kg. The cost of type B is flour is Rs 45/kg and the cost of type C flour is Rs 50/kg. He mixes flour of each type in such a way that he gets a profit of 14 2/7 % when he sells it for  Rs 48/kg. If a sample of the mixture is taken such that amount of type B is 12 kgs and the amount of the other two types of flour are also positive integers, then which of the following can not be the weight of the sample?

The following graph depicts function f(x) in the domain of x ∈ [−2,2]

To describe the value of f(x) for integers, a blue filled circle is given. For example, f(0) = 0, f(1) = 1.

Which of the following represents f(x)?

Here [x] : Greatest integer function. It is defined as the greatest integer less than or equal to x

         {x} : Fractional part function. It is defined as x - [x]

Find the number of integral values of x that satisfy

|x² + 3x - 1| < 2|x| + 5

How many triangles with integer sides and a semi-perimeter value of 9.5 units are possible?

The following figure depicts 2 circles C₁​ and C_2​ which touch at C. AC is the diameter of C₁​ and BC is the diameter of C₂​. A tangent is drawn from A to a point D on C2​, such that AD = 12 metres. Also, the radii of the circles(in metres)  are integer values and the difference between their radii is at least 4 metres. 

2 athletes A and B start running from C along the circumferences of C_1C1​ and C_2C2​ such that both reach C for the first time simultaneously. Find the ratio of speeds of A and B.

2 positive numbers x and y are such that  p. If N is the  maximum possible integral value of pp such that this inequality holds for all the values of xx and yy. How many factors does N² has?

If log 70 = p, log 30 = q, log 105 = r, find the value of log 28/27.

Let (a,b) be 2 numbers such that their lcm is  300. How many such ordered pairs are possible?

Find the number of unordered pairs of 2-digit numbers, such that their LCM is twice their HCF.

How many 4-digit numbers have at least one 8 or at least one 9 in them, but not both?

Sita bought mangoes from a whole-seller and transports the mangoes to her shop. The transporation incurred 20% of the cost she had spent to buy the mangoes. While transporting the mangoes to her shop one-eighth of her stock got squished and generally would not be sold at the same price as that of good quality mangoes. She sold the squished mangoes at 40% of her cost price. By approximately, how much must she markup the price of good quality mangoes such that she receives 10% profit on the overall transaction?

Ananth wanted to buy a car. The cost of the car was Rs 4,50,000. He was supposed to make 8 equal instalments divided uniformly in 2 years and was charged 16% per annum compounded quarterly. What is the approximate amount he has to pay in each instalments?

A dishonest shopkeeper adulterates the black pepper with papaya seeds. For each 1000 grams of real pepper, he adds 100 grams of papaya seeds. On top of that, he markups the price by 20% and then offers a discount of 15%. What is his profit % from the resulting sales?

Assume that the cost of papaya seeds is negligible.

Ram bought pens from a wholesaler at Rs. 200 per pen. For every additional pen sold by Ram after the first one, the selling price of the pen becomes Rs.5 less than the selling price of the previous pen. Using this strategy, Ram makes a 145% profit by selling 5 pens. What is the maximum number of pens a customer can buy in a single transaction such that Ram makes a profit on every pen sold?

A dishonest cloth merchant marks up the price of his cloth by 20%, and does not offer any discount unless asked for. Also, while selling, he uses a metre scale, whose actual length is 80cm. One fine day, an old woman visits his shop to buy some cloth. She is good at bargaining and consequently manages to buy the cloth at a price such that the merchant's net profit or loss is zero. What is the discount percentage she managed to get on the marked price while buying the cloth?

Series 1: 11, 2, -7, -16, -25,...... upto 1000 terms

Series 2: 25, 15, 5, -5, -15,........ upto 1000 terms

What is the sum of all the terms common to both series?

Find the highest power of 30 in 50!

A train 540 meters long is running with a speed of 54 kmph. The time taken by it to cross a tunnel 180 meters long is?

A, B and C invested Rs.6300, Rs. 4200 and Rs.10500 respectively, in a partnership business. Find the share of A in profit of Rs.12100 after a year? (profit is shared according to the invested amount)

A and B entered into a partnership investing Rs.25000 and Rs. 30000 respectively. After 4 months C also joined the business with an investment of Rs. 35000 . What is the share of C in an annual profit of Rs. 47000 ?