CAT  >  CAT Mock Test Series  >  Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 Download as PDF

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2


Test Description

24 Questions MCQ Test CAT Mock Test Series | Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 for CAT 2022 is part of CAT Mock Test Series preparation. The Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 questions and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus.The Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 MCQs are made for CAT 2022 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 below.
Solutions of Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 questions in English are available as part of our CAT Mock Test Series for CAT & Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 solutions in Hindi for CAT Mock Test Series course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 | 24 questions in 40 minutes | Mock test for CAT preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study CAT Mock Test Series for CAT Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you?
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 1

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

For thousands of years, people have understood the pervasive hold that work has on our lives. Just this year, Netflix’s The One explicitly dramatized how the pride and power of careerism compete with love, romance, and familial pursuits. This sentiment also undergirds a standard movie trope: the father who works so much that he never sees his kids.

But while Hollywood knows that work—which is ultimately futile—is one of the chief threats to a meaningful life and a flourishing family, public policy in the United States treats both of those aspirations as irrelevant. In most advanced countries, birth rates are very low by both historical and contemporary global standards, and both ends of the political spectrum promote greater labour-force participation. Progressives focus on providing benefits explicitly aimed at supporting working parents, such as paid leave and public child care. Conservatives fixate on “welfare dependency,” and demand that the social safety net be structured to actively encourage work. From both sides, policies are being hawked to a credulous public as family-friendly, even though persuading people to focus even more on work is a terrible way to help family life.

This pervasive focus on work reflects broader attitudes in society. When countries on the whole shift toward valuing work more, birth rates fall. And, the shortfall in births will lead to significant negative economic effects. Forced to choose between the family they want and the career they want, people are opting for the latter, nudged along by policymakers hoping to encourage work. All too often, people then end up in workplaces and on career paths hostile to family, and in social spheres whose norms treat work as meaningful and family as burdensome.

In countries with low incomes and short life expectancies, more work-focused attitudes are associated with higher fertility, perhaps because in these countries, material precarity and extreme poverty are very common. In India, Brazil, or Tanzania, assigning a lot of value to work makes a lot of sense given that the life prospects of people without work in lower-income countries are extremely bad in objective terms. But in highly developed countries—defined as those with a Human Development Index greater than 0.80—the relationship flips. In countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States, placing a high importance on work is unlikely to be associated with basic material needs and more likely to be associated with finding meaning or social prestige from work. Both men and women are deriving more value from work, which often directly competes with family for time and attention.

There are other problems associated with societies placing a high value on work. Policies that try to help families by routing benefits through employment, or giving extra benefits to working parents, will sow the seeds of their own failure. While some families will use public child care or paid parental leave to ease the achievement of their family goals, others will become more deeply enmeshed in workplaces that do not value family at all. Also, parents who are not employed—and therefore are locked out of policies designed to help working parents—may correctly perceive that they are facing discrimination on the basis of their family model.

Q. Which of the following is the primary characteristic of Netflix's 'The One' because of which it has been cited in the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 1

"For thousands of years, people have understood the pervasive hold that work has on our lives. Just this year, Netflix’s The One explicitly dramatized how the pride and power of careerism compete with love, romance, and familial pursuits."

The author cites the example of 'The One' here as a recent development in a long-standing thought. The thought of work and its effects on life has been there for ages but has been raised again in a dramatized manner, making it relevant today and allowing the author to expound on the matter. If the event was not relevant, the author would not have had a recent event to cite to the readers to increase their familiarity with what the author is writing about and what triggered the author to write in the first place. Hence, 'The One' provides a recent dramatic take on an abiding thought and helps the author highlight the relevance of the subject. Option A captures this correctly and is the answer.

The author has not mentioned that the movie presents a logical argument about the matter. He simply says that a portrayal of the same has been done. Moreover, Option B does not capture the main reason why the author mentions the work. Hence Option B can be eliminated.

"This sentiment also undergirds a standard movie trope: the father who works so much that he never sees his kids."

Though it helps the author introduce the topic, 'The One' highlighting a particular genre is given as an additional feature in the above lines. Emphasizing the movie theme is not the main contention of the author. Hence Option C cannot be the answer.

Option D mentions only a part of the characteristic. It is an incomplete reason and cannot be the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 2

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

For thousands of years, people have understood the pervasive hold that work has on our lives. Just this year, Netflix’s The One explicitly dramatized how the pride and power of careerism compete with love, romance, and familial pursuits. This sentiment also undergirds a standard movie trope: the father who works so much that he never sees his kids.

But while Hollywood knows that work—which is ultimately futile—is one of the chief threats to a meaningful life and a flourishing family, public policy in the United States treats both of those aspirations as irrelevant. In most advanced countries, birth rates are very low by both historical and contemporary global standards, and both ends of the political spectrum promote greater labour-force participation. Progressives focus on providing benefits explicitly aimed at supporting working parents, such as paid leave and public child care. Conservatives fixate on “welfare dependency,” and demand that the social safety net be structured to actively encourage work. From both sides, policies are being hawked to a credulous public as family-friendly, even though persuading people to focus even more on work is a terrible way to help family life.

This pervasive focus on work reflects broader attitudes in society. When countries on the whole shift toward valuing work more, birth rates fall. And, the shortfall in births will lead to significant negative economic effects. Forced to choose between the family they want and the career they want, people are opting for the latter, nudged along by policymakers hoping to encourage work. All too often, people then end up in workplaces and on career paths hostile to family, and in social spheres whose norms treat work as meaningful and family as burdensome.

In countries with low incomes and short life expectancies, more work-focused attitudes are associated with higher fertility, perhaps because in these countries, material precarity and extreme poverty are very common. In India, Brazil, or Tanzania, assigning a lot of value to work makes a lot of sense given that the life prospects of people without work in lower-income countries are extremely bad in objective terms. But in highly developed countries—defined as those with a Human Development Index greater than 0.80—the relationship flips. In countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States, placing a high importance on work is unlikely to be associated with basic material needs and more likely to be associated with finding meaning or social prestige from work. Both men and women are deriving more value from work, which often directly competes with family for time and attention.

There are other problems associated with societies placing a high value on work. Policies that try to help families by routing benefits through employment, or giving extra benefits to working parents, will sow the seeds of their own failure. While some families will use public child care or paid parental leave to ease the achievement of their family goals, others will become more deeply enmeshed in workplaces that do not value family at all. Also, parents who are not employed—and therefore are locked out of policies designed to help working parents—may correctly perceive that they are facing discrimination on the basis of their family model.

Q. The central idea of the passage is that

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 2

At the beginning of the passage, the author mentions how the negative impact of placing a high value on work has been commonly accepted and understood. This idea has made its way into cultural elements and has been a recurrent movie trope. The author then delineates the difference between this portrayal and the public policies for the people (especially in the US). According to the author, the precedence of work over family has had a certain observable impact on society. In this regard, the discussion associated with declining birth rate is undertaken, wherein the author remarks that this might "lead to significant negative economic effects". In the penultimate para, the author attempts to rationalise the high emphasis on work in most countries. While lower-income nations attach more value to work due to material needs, the reasons for the same in developed nations could vary - social prestige being one of them. The feeling among non-employed parents of being discriminated against is another issue that the author adds. Thus, the negative impact on societies originating from the high emphasis on work is presented in the passage. The adverse social effects are mentioned and discussed briefly. Option C correctly captures this and is hence the correct choice.

 In the passage, the author attempts to relate a work-focused attitude with a drop in birth rates and outlines its social repercussions. He also talks about the role of societal institutions in the same. Hence the central idea reflects both the repercussions and societal imposition of such norms.
Comparing the options, option C correctly captures the author's idea. 
Option A is too subjective. The author does not highlight any one element of life as most valuable in the passage. Hence, option A can be eliminated.
Option B is a distortion. It talks about societies being engaged in high-value work, while the passage talks about higher value being placed on work. These two are different things. Hence B can be eliminated.
Option D highlights the current scenario in highly developed countries but fails to mention the consequences or the role of institutions. Hence D can be eliminated.
Hence, option C is the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 3

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

For thousands of years, people have understood the pervasive hold that work has on our lives. Just this year, Netflix’s The One explicitly dramatized how the pride and power of careerism compete with love, romance, and familial pursuits. This sentiment also undergirds a standard movie trope: the father who works so much that he never sees his kids.

But while Hollywood knows that work—which is ultimately futile—is one of the chief threats to a meaningful life and a flourishing family, public policy in the United States treats both of those aspirations as irrelevant. In most advanced countries, birth rates are very low by both historical and contemporary global standards, and both ends of the political spectrum promote greater labour-force participation. Progressives focus on providing benefits explicitly aimed at supporting working parents, such as paid leave and public child care. Conservatives fixate on “welfare dependency,” and demand that the social safety net be structured to actively encourage work. From both sides, policies are being hawked to a credulous public as family-friendly, even though persuading people to focus even more on work is a terrible way to help family life.

This pervasive focus on work reflects broader attitudes in society. When countries on the whole shift toward valuing work more, birth rates fall. And, the shortfall in births will lead to significant negative economic effects. Forced to choose between the family they want and the career they want, people are opting for the latter, nudged along by policymakers hoping to encourage work. All too often, people then end up in workplaces and on career paths hostile to family, and in social spheres whose norms treat work as meaningful and family as burdensome.

In countries with low incomes and short life expectancies, more work-focused attitudes are associated with higher fertility, perhaps because in these countries, material precarity and extreme poverty are very common. In India, Brazil, or Tanzania, assigning a lot of value to work makes a lot of sense given that the life prospects of people without work in lower-income countries are extremely bad in objective terms. But in highly developed countries—defined as those with a Human Development Index greater than 0.80—the relationship flips. In countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States, placing a high importance on work is unlikely to be associated with basic material needs and more likely to be associated with finding meaning or social prestige from work. Both men and women are deriving more value from work, which often directly competes with family for time and attention.

There are other problems associated with societies placing a high value on work. Policies that try to help families by routing benefits through employment, or giving extra benefits to working parents, will sow the seeds of their own failure. While some families will use public child care or paid parental leave to ease the achievement of their family goals, others will become more deeply enmeshed in workplaces that do not value family at all. Also, parents who are not employed—and therefore are locked out of policies designed to help working parents—may correctly perceive that they are facing discrimination on the basis of their family model.

Q. Which of the following is NOT a problem associated with developed societies placing a high value on work?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 3

{...Policies that try to help families by routing benefits through employment, or giving extra benefits to working parents, will sow the seeds of their own failure. While some families will use public child care or paid parental leave to ease the achievement of their family goals, others will become more deeply enmeshed in workplaces that do not value family at all...} Option A is a direct inference from the latter part of the above paragraph.
In the last paragraph, the author posits that {...parents who are not employed—and therefore are locked out of policies designed to help working parents—may correctly perceive that they are facing discrimination on the basis of their family model...} Hence, option B can be inferred.
{...When countries on the whole shift toward valuing work more, birth rates fall...} Option C can be inferred as well. 
{...But in highly developed countries—defined as those with a Human Development Index greater than 0.80—the relationship flips. In countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States, placing a high importance on work is unlikely to be associated with basic material needs and more likely to be associated with finding meaning or social prestige from work. Both men and women are deriving more value from work, which often directly competes with family for time and attention...} Option D is a distorted interpretation from the passage. The author presents how, unlike lower-income countries, individuals in developed nations are more likely to value work based on social prestige instead of material needs. No form of inverse relationship is presented in this regard. The inverse relationship is suggested regarding the importance placed on work and fertility rates. The author does not clarify that developed nations do not attach material needs to the excess emphasis on work. Hence, we cannot infer Option D as a problem associated with developed societies placing a high value on work. 

Thus, Option D is the correct choice.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 4

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

For thousands of years, people have understood the pervasive hold that work has on our lives. Just this year, Netflix’s The One explicitly dramatized how the pride and power of careerism compete with love, romance, and familial pursuits. This sentiment also undergirds a standard movie trope: the father who works so much that he never sees his kids.

But while Hollywood knows that work—which is ultimately futile—is one of the chief threats to a meaningful life and a flourishing family, public policy in the United States treats both of those aspirations as irrelevant. In most advanced countries, birth rates are very low by both historical and contemporary global standards, and both ends of the political spectrum promote greater labour-force participation. Progressives focus on providing benefits explicitly aimed at supporting working parents, such as paid leave and public child care. Conservatives fixate on “welfare dependency,” and demand that the social safety net be structured to actively encourage work. From both sides, policies are being hawked to a credulous public as family-friendly, even though persuading people to focus even more on work is a terrible way to help family life.

This pervasive focus on work reflects broader attitudes in society. When countries on the whole shift toward valuing work more, birth rates fall. And, the shortfall in births will lead to significant negative economic effects. Forced to choose between the family they want and the career they want, people are opting for the latter, nudged along by policymakers hoping to encourage work. All too often, people then end up in workplaces and on career paths hostile to family, and in social spheres whose norms treat work as meaningful and family as burdensome.

In countries with low incomes and short life expectancies, more work-focused attitudes are associated with higher fertility, perhaps because in these countries, material precarity and extreme poverty are very common. In India, Brazil, or Tanzania, assigning a lot of value to work makes a lot of sense given that the life prospects of people without work in lower-income countries are extremely bad in objective terms. But in highly developed countries—defined as those with a Human Development Index greater than 0.80—the relationship flips. In countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, and the United States, placing a high importance on work is unlikely to be associated with basic material needs and more likely to be associated with finding meaning or social prestige from work. Both men and women are deriving more value from work, which often directly competes with family for time and attention.

There are other problems associated with societies placing a high value on work. Policies that try to help families by routing benefits through employment, or giving extra benefits to working parents, will sow the seeds of their own failure. While some families will use public child care or paid parental leave to ease the achievement of their family goals, others will become more deeply enmeshed in workplaces that do not value family at all. Also, parents who are not employed—and therefore are locked out of policies designed to help working parents—may correctly perceive that they are facing discrimination on the basis of their family model.

Q. The author is most likely to agree with which of the following statements?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 4

"In countries with low incomes and short life expectancies, more work-focused attitudes are associated with higher fertility"

Option A is a distortion. Though the author says that higher fertility rates and work-focused attitudes are associated, he does not say that one leads to the other. The option also turns the speculation done by the author into a rigid argument. Hence Option A can be eliminated

In the second paragraph, the author discusses how both Progressives and Conservatives promote greater labour-force participation. And in the last line of the same paragraph, the author opines that "From both sides, policies are being hawked to a credulous public as family-friendly, even though persuading people to focus even more on work is a terrible way to help family life." Hence, the author is likely to agree with option B.

The author does not say that the relationship between the value placed on work and the attention given to family has another factor which is the country a person lives in. He merely alludes to a trend that is generally seen in developed and under-developed countries, a strict relation cannot be derived. Hence Option C is a distortion.

Option D is a distortion. Deriving less value from work does not necessarily mean that a person will be able to spend more time with their family. This is the case in poor countries, where people generally do not place a high value on work, but have to work to support material needs. Hence Option D can be eliminated.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 5

Read the passage and answer the following questions:

When people outside of Asia think of Buddhism, they tend to think about just philosophy and meditation. Buddhists are often said not to have gods, wars or empires. Their religion isn’t about ritual or belief, but a dedicated exploration into what causes suffering and how to end it through meditation and compassion. Although there’s some basis for this image, Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism have been at pains for decades to show that it’s largely untrue, or at least very partial. The Buddhism that non-Buddhists know today is less an accurate vision of its history than a creation of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In that time period, Buddhists and their sympathisers created this modernised Buddhism. They discarded from it the elements of Buddhist history that didn’t fit the rational, scientific worldview that accompanied colonisation and modernisation. In a remarkable feat of historical reinvention, Buddhism went from degraded other to uplifted saviour in a matter of decades

People who want to really understand Buddhism in all of its complexity should spend time in Buddhist countries, learn ancient and modern languages, and study the works of scholars who offer a more detailed history of Buddhism and Buddhists. But for those who are interested only in the modern version of Buddhism, I would offer this advice: take reincarnation seriously. Rethinking reincarnation isn’t unprecedented. And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara.

There’s also diversity of thought about the meaning of this cycle, but Gautama and his followers criticised a variety of their contemporaries’ ideas. One was the notion that only a few were able to leave this cycle and become part of the divine. Another was that the aim was, indeed, to become part of something. According to Gautama, everyone, regardless of their place of birth, is capable of exiting the cycle of reincarnation. And to do so doesn’t mean joining with something; it means disjoining entirely, or ‘extinguishing’ the fire of life. In one image, consciousness is like a flame being passed from candle to candle. After enlightenment, no more candles will be lit. More recently, Buddhists, as well as outsiders seeking to modernise Buddhism, have continued to reinterpret the doctrine of reincarnation for their own times.

Buddhism, then, began in part as a new set of views about reincarnation. And throughout its history, Buddhists have debated and expanded the potential for what reincarnation entails. For example, in Tibet, probably beginning in the 13th century, the doctrine of rebirth took a significant twist: it was used to identify the consciousness of a deceased monk in a newborn child, and thus grant to that child the religious and political title of the previous monk. This is the background for what became the tradition of the Dalai Lamas. Although this was based on the existing doctrine that someone who had achieved nirvana could ‘emanate’ their consciousness on Earth in order to guide humans to liberation, it took on a whole new meaning and history in Tibet.

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

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 5

Though one of the differences, we cannot say for sure that the way reincarnation is interpreted is the only difference between ancient and modern Buddhism. Hence Option A can be eliminated.

Option B mentions that the views preceding Buddhism were markedly different from the Buddist conception of reincarnation. The author comments the following: "And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara." The author adds that: "There’s also diversity of thought about the meaning of this cycle, but Gautama and his followers criticised a variety of their contemporaries’ ideas. One was the notion that only a few were able to leave this cycle and become part of the divine. Another was that the aim was, indeed, to become part of something." Hence, he presents two distinct elements associated with the Buddhist view of reincarnation and how this was markedly distinct from the prevailing belief system at that time. Hence, Option B can be inferred from the passage. 

"People who want to really understand Buddhism in all of its complexity should (...) study the works of scholars who offer a more detailed history of Buddhism and Buddhists."

The author does not recommend reading texts by scholars due to the modernised take on Buddhist doctrines in them. The detailed manner of capturing Buddist ideas is perhaps why the author recommends reading these texts. Option C introduces distortion and hence, can be eliminated. 

"Their religion isn’t about ritual or belief, but a dedicated exploration into what causes suffering and how to end it through meditation and compassion. Although there’s some basis for this image, Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism have been at pains for decades to show that it’s largely untrue, or at least very partial."

The main contention in the above lines is that Buddhism is not all about meditation and compassion but also has rituals and beliefs. This does not hint that the rituals and beliefs make up for the most part of Buddhism, just that their role is not negligible. Hence Option D can be eliminated.

Hence, Option B is the correct answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 6

Read the passage and answer the following questions:

When people outside of Asia think of Buddhism, they tend to think about just philosophy and meditation. Buddhists are often said not to have gods, wars or empires. Their religion isn’t about ritual or belief, but a dedicated exploration into what causes suffering and how to end it through meditation and compassion. Although there’s some basis for this image, Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism have been at pains for decades to show that it’s largely untrue, or at least very partial. The Buddhism that non-Buddhists know today is less an accurate vision of its history than a creation of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In that time period, Buddhists and their sympathisers created this modernised Buddhism. They discarded from it the elements of Buddhist history that didn’t fit the rational, scientific worldview that accompanied colonisation and modernisation. In a remarkable feat of historical reinvention, Buddhism went from degraded other to uplifted saviour in a matter of decades

People who want to really understand Buddhism in all of its complexity should spend time in Buddhist countries, learn ancient and modern languages, and study the works of scholars who offer a more detailed history of Buddhism and Buddhists. But for those who are interested only in the modern version of Buddhism, I would offer this advice: take reincarnation seriously. Rethinking reincarnation isn’t unprecedented. And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara.

There’s also diversity of thought about the meaning of this cycle, but Gautama and his followers criticised a variety of their contemporaries’ ideas. One was the notion that only a few were able to leave this cycle and become part of the divine. Another was that the aim was, indeed, to become part of something. According to Gautama, everyone, regardless of their place of birth, is capable of exiting the cycle of reincarnation. And to do so doesn’t mean joining with something; it means disjoining entirely, or ‘extinguishing’ the fire of life. In one image, consciousness is like a flame being passed from candle to candle. After enlightenment, no more candles will be lit. More recently, Buddhists, as well as outsiders seeking to modernise Buddhism, have continued to reinterpret the doctrine of reincarnation for their own times.

Buddhism, then, began in part as a new set of views about reincarnation. And throughout its history, Buddhists have debated and expanded the potential for what reincarnation entails. For example, in Tibet, probably beginning in the 13th century, the doctrine of rebirth took a significant twist: it was used to identify the consciousness of a deceased monk in a newborn child, and thus grant to that child the religious and political title of the previous monk. This is the background for what became the tradition of the Dalai Lamas. Although this was based on the existing doctrine that someone who had achieved nirvana could ‘emanate’ their consciousness on Earth in order to guide humans to liberation, it took on a whole new meaning and history in Tibet.

Q. Which of the following is not a defining feature of 'samsara' according to the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 6

"And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara."

In the above lines, it has been mentioned that a part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories, which had 'samsara' as a prevalent concept. Hence we can infer Options A and D from this.

The above lines also define 'samsara', which is in line with Option C. Hence C can be inferred.

From the passage, we can infer that reincarnation is a part of samsara but not enlightenment. Enlightenment is said to be part of the Buddhist ideology of rebirth - different from that of samsara. Hence, B cannot be inferred.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 7

Read the passage and answer the following questions:

When people outside of Asia think of Buddhism, they tend to think about just philosophy and meditation. Buddhists are often said not to have gods, wars or empires. Their religion isn’t about ritual or belief, but a dedicated exploration into what causes suffering and how to end it through meditation and compassion. Although there’s some basis for this image, Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism have been at pains for decades to show that it’s largely untrue, or at least very partial. The Buddhism that non-Buddhists know today is less an accurate vision of its history than a creation of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In that time period, Buddhists and their sympathisers created this modernised Buddhism. They discarded from it the elements of Buddhist history that didn’t fit the rational, scientific worldview that accompanied colonisation and modernisation. In a remarkable feat of historical reinvention, Buddhism went from degraded other to uplifted saviour in a matter of decades

People who want to really understand Buddhism in all of its complexity should spend time in Buddhist countries, learn ancient and modern languages, and study the works of scholars who offer a more detailed history of Buddhism and Buddhists. But for those who are interested only in the modern version of Buddhism, I would offer this advice: take reincarnation seriously. Rethinking reincarnation isn’t unprecedented. And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara.

There’s also diversity of thought about the meaning of this cycle, but Gautama and his followers criticised a variety of their contemporaries’ ideas. One was the notion that only a few were able to leave this cycle and become part of the divine. Another was that the aim was, indeed, to become part of something. According to Gautama, everyone, regardless of their place of birth, is capable of exiting the cycle of reincarnation. And to do so doesn’t mean joining with something; it means disjoining entirely, or ‘extinguishing’ the fire of life. In one image, consciousness is like a flame being passed from candle to candle. After enlightenment, no more candles will be lit. More recently, Buddhists, as well as outsiders seeking to modernise Buddhism, have continued to reinterpret the doctrine of reincarnation for their own times.

Buddhism, then, began in part as a new set of views about reincarnation. And throughout its history, Buddhists have debated and expanded the potential for what reincarnation entails. For example, in Tibet, probably beginning in the 13th century, the doctrine of rebirth took a significant twist: it was used to identify the consciousness of a deceased monk in a newborn child, and thus grant to that child the religious and political title of the previous monk. This is the background for what became the tradition of the Dalai Lamas. Although this was based on the existing doctrine that someone who had achieved nirvana could ‘emanate’ their consciousness on Earth in order to guide humans to liberation, it took on a whole new meaning and history in Tibet.

Q. Which of the following is a valid inference that can be drawn from the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 7

"For example, in Tibet, probably beginning in the 13th century, the doctrine of rebirth took a significant twist: it was used to identify the consciousness of a deceased monk in a newborn child, and thus grant to that child the religious and political title of the previous monk."

The above-mentioned process was specific to Tibet and cannot be generalized to Buddhism around the world. Hence, Option A cannot be inferred.

"The Buddhism that non-Buddhists know today is less an accurate vision of its history than a creation of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In that time period, Buddhists and their sympathisers created this modernised Buddhism. They discarded from it the elements of Buddhist history that didn’t fit the rational, scientific worldview that accompanied colonisation and modernisation. In a remarkable feat of historical reinvention, Buddhism went from degraded other to uplifted saviour in a matter of decades."

The above line says that the elements that did not go hand in hand with the rational and scientific ideas of colonization and modernization were removed to modernize Buddhism. This is not the same as incorporating new elements. Hence, Option B cannot be inferred.

The passage entirely talks about reincarnation as interpreted by Buddhism specifically. It does not present any commonly held interpretations of the idea. Hence, Option C cannot be inferred. 

"According to Gautama, everyone, regardless of their place of birth, is capable of exiting the cycle of reincarnation. And to do so doesn’t mean joining with something; it means disjoining entirely, or ‘extinguishing’ the fire of life. In one image, consciousness is like a flame being passed from candle to candle. After enlightenment, no more candles will be lit."

Based on the above description, Option D can be inferred. 

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 8

Read the passage and answer the following questions:

When people outside of Asia think of Buddhism, they tend to think about just philosophy and meditation. Buddhists are often said not to have gods, wars or empires. Their religion isn’t about ritual or belief, but a dedicated exploration into what causes suffering and how to end it through meditation and compassion. Although there’s some basis for this image, Buddhists and scholars of Buddhism have been at pains for decades to show that it’s largely untrue, or at least very partial. The Buddhism that non-Buddhists know today is less an accurate vision of its history than a creation of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In that time period, Buddhists and their sympathisers created this modernised Buddhism. They discarded from it the elements of Buddhist history that didn’t fit the rational, scientific worldview that accompanied colonisation and modernisation. In a remarkable feat of historical reinvention, Buddhism went from degraded other to uplifted saviour in a matter of decades

People who want to really understand Buddhism in all of its complexity should spend time in Buddhist countries, learn ancient and modern languages, and study the works of scholars who offer a more detailed history of Buddhism and Buddhists. But for those who are interested only in the modern version of Buddhism, I would offer this advice: take reincarnation seriously. Rethinking reincarnation isn’t unprecedented. And it’s worth recalling that part of the origin of Buddhism was to challenge prevailing theories of reincarnation in the place where Siddhartha Gautama was born. In these belief systems, some part of the person (which part is interpreted differently both across and within religious movements) would live on in a cycle of rebirth called samsara.

There’s also diversity of thought about the meaning of this cycle, but Gautama and his followers criticised a variety of their contemporaries’ ideas. One was the notion that only a few were able to leave this cycle and become part of the divine. Another was that the aim was, indeed, to become part of something. According to Gautama, everyone, regardless of their place of birth, is capable of exiting the cycle of reincarnation. And to do so doesn’t mean joining with something; it means disjoining entirely, or ‘extinguishing’ the fire of life. In one image, consciousness is like a flame being passed from candle to candle. After enlightenment, no more candles will be lit. More recently, Buddhists, as well as outsiders seeking to modernise Buddhism, have continued to reinterpret the doctrine of reincarnation for their own times.

Buddhism, then, began in part as a new set of views about reincarnation. And throughout its history, Buddhists have debated and expanded the potential for what reincarnation entails. For example, in Tibet, probably beginning in the 13th century, the doctrine of rebirth took a significant twist: it was used to identify the consciousness of a deceased monk in a newborn child, and thus grant to that child the religious and political title of the previous monk. This is the background for what became the tradition of the Dalai Lamas. Although this was based on the existing doctrine that someone who had achieved nirvana could ‘emanate’ their consciousness on Earth in order to guide humans to liberation, it took on a whole new meaning and history in Tibet.

Q. Which of the following can be the purpose of the author behind writing this passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 8

The author mentions the presence of complexities and changes in Buddhism to get to the concept of reincarnation, which is his prime focus. The author first highlights the changes that have taken place and how understanding reincarnation can help grasp these completely. The author then propounds on reincarnation, linking it to Buddhism. Hence, the main focus of the author is the link between the concept of reincarnation and Buddhism, and the correct option should highlight this.

The concept of reincarnation is already present in the modern form of Buddhism. So Option A is incorrect.

As explained above, Option B can be the purpose of the author behind writing the passage.

Option C talks about modern Buddhism only, which is only a part of the author's purpose. Hence Option B is still the better option.

The author does not want to propagate the concept of reincarnation. If this were the case, the author would've mentioned Buddhism as a supporting point briefly. But since the whole concept is explained in terms of Buddhism, we see that Buddhism is also a major point the author is talking about. Hence, Option D is incorrect.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 9

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Why would 12 of the richest men in football, executives paid for their supposed prowess in managing global brand names such as Barcelona and Manchester United, screw up so badly? Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor? As the European Super League plan lies in ruins, the answer is clear: capital. There’s too much of it chasing too little real economic value in the world.

Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards. A glance at the leaked details of the Super League proposal should provide a teachable moment about financialised monopoly capitalism. The aim was to create a cartel of clubs that would generate £4bn a year - double the revenue of the current European Champions League. Closing entry to the league was only half of the plan. The other half was to operate a US-style spending and salary cap, effectively forcing individual clubs and players into a semi-feudal relationship with the Super League itself. They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.

The Super League used the Spanish courts - some of the most politicised and questionable in the developed world - to prevent Fifa and Uefa from blocking the move. But when the British political elite united in condemnation of the scheme - with Boris Johnson threatening to drop a “legislative bomb” - that was decisive. English football was at the epicentre of the Super League scheme because it is the most financialised, with major clubs already grabbed by asset strippers and riddled with the dodgy money of foreign magnates. It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience.

The “super league” idea has been around for more than 20 years. It will stay around because the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice. The point about cartels, however, is that they kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure.

Q. Which of the following statements can be inferred from the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 9

{"It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience."}The author makes the above statement about the players in the English league. In the next paragraph, he highlights the plight of US gridiron football (and many other sports), which are run as cartels - {...the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice...}. Hence, the difference in the power dynamics, especially on the part of the players, is made evident. Thus, Option A can be inferred. 

{"What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure."} The author does condemn cartelization but does not advocate capitalism in its place. Instead, he advocates public ownership of football infrastructure. Hence, Option B is not a valid inference that can be drawn from the passage.

The author does not talk about ownership of the clubs. The 'capitalist communism' mentioned in the passage arises from the semi-feudal operation of the league. Hence, C is incorrect.

In the second paragraph, the author does allude to a semi-feudal relationship between European Super League and the clubs, but the information presented is insufficient to draw any conclusions on the clubs becoming sub-parts of the league. Hence Option D can be eliminated.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 10

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Why would 12 of the richest men in football, executives paid for their supposed prowess in managing global brand names such as Barcelona and Manchester United, screw up so badly? Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor? As the European Super League plan lies in ruins, the answer is clear: capital. There’s too much of it chasing too little real economic value in the world.

Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards. A glance at the leaked details of the Super League proposal should provide a teachable moment about financialised monopoly capitalism. The aim was to create a cartel of clubs that would generate £4bn a year - double the revenue of the current European Champions League. Closing entry to the league was only half of the plan. The other half was to operate a US-style spending and salary cap, effectively forcing individual clubs and players into a semi-feudal relationship with the Super League itself. They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.

The Super League used the Spanish courts - some of the most politicised and questionable in the developed world - to prevent Fifa and Uefa from blocking the move. But when the British political elite united in condemnation of the scheme - with Boris Johnson threatening to drop a “legislative bomb” - that was decisive. English football was at the epicentre of the Super League scheme because it is the most financialised, with major clubs already grabbed by asset strippers and riddled with the dodgy money of foreign magnates. It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience.

The “super league” idea has been around for more than 20 years. It will stay around because the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice. The point about cartels, however, is that they kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure.

Q. Why does the author say that the European Super League plan would have left "the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor"?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 10

"Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor?"

The author mentions in the first paragraph that the executives had messed up chasing after the European Super League. He asks a rhetorical question: why did the executives think that the fans and other entities would let them go forward with a plan that would leave an eviscerated corpse of ordinary football, along with other things. This highlights the deleterious impact of the ESL plan on ordinary football. Option D captures this point correctly.
Option A: The author does not discuss that ordinary football had undesirable elements (nor does the ESL plan claim to eliminate these). We can eliminate Option A since it contains undiscussed ideas. 
Option B: The statement here indicates that the ESL plan would have benefitted ordinary football; however, the author claims the opposite. Hence, Option B can be eliminated. 
Option C: This option talks about the loss of capital, which has not been implied in the first paragraph. Hence, we can discard Option C.

Thus, Option D is the correct choice.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 11

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Why would 12 of the richest men in football, executives paid for their supposed prowess in managing global brand names such as Barcelona and Manchester United, screw up so badly? Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor? As the European Super League plan lies in ruins, the answer is clear: capital. There’s too much of it chasing too little real economic value in the world.

Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards. A glance at the leaked details of the Super League proposal should provide a teachable moment about financialised monopoly capitalism. The aim was to create a cartel of clubs that would generate £4bn a year - double the revenue of the current European Champions League. Closing entry to the league was only half of the plan. The other half was to operate a US-style spending and salary cap, effectively forcing individual clubs and players into a semi-feudal relationship with the Super League itself. They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.

The Super League used the Spanish courts - some of the most politicised and questionable in the developed world - to prevent Fifa and Uefa from blocking the move. But when the British political elite united in condemnation of the scheme - with Boris Johnson threatening to drop a “legislative bomb” - that was decisive. English football was at the epicentre of the Super League scheme because it is the most financialised, with major clubs already grabbed by asset strippers and riddled with the dodgy money of foreign magnates. It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience.

The “super league” idea has been around for more than 20 years. It will stay around because the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice. The point about cartels, however, is that they kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure.

Q. Which of the following statements is the author LEAST likely to agree with?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 11

In the second paragraph, the author states the following- {Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards.} Hence, the money flow is not equal. Option A can be inferred.

The author states the following about revenue sharing in a cartelised competition-{They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.} Hence, the author implies that there is a lack of true competition in a cartelised sport, which will lead to many players earning the same irrespective of their individual play. Hence, Option B can be inferred.

In the last paragraph, the author asserts that cartels kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. Hence, option D can be inferred as there is less scope for innovation.

Option C talks about cartels catering to the demands/needs of their important customers. But in the last paragraph, the author posits that consumers have no choice on the matter. Hence, Option C contradicts the author's view. Option C is the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 12

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Why would 12 of the richest men in football, executives paid for their supposed prowess in managing global brand names such as Barcelona and Manchester United, screw up so badly? Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor? As the European Super League plan lies in ruins, the answer is clear: capital. There’s too much of it chasing too little real economic value in the world.

Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards. A glance at the leaked details of the Super League proposal should provide a teachable moment about financialised monopoly capitalism. The aim was to create a cartel of clubs that would generate £4bn a year - double the revenue of the current European Champions League. Closing entry to the league was only half of the plan. The other half was to operate a US-style spending and salary cap, effectively forcing individual clubs and players into a semi-feudal relationship with the Super League itself. They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.

The Super League used the Spanish courts - some of the most politicised and questionable in the developed world - to prevent Fifa and Uefa from blocking the move. But when the British political elite united in condemnation of the scheme - with Boris Johnson threatening to drop a “legislative bomb” - that was decisive. English football was at the epicentre of the Super League scheme because it is the most financialised, with major clubs already grabbed by asset strippers and riddled with the dodgy money of foreign magnates. It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience.

The “super league” idea has been around for more than 20 years. It will stay around because the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice. The point about cartels, however, is that they kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure.

Q. "Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money." Which of the following statements best captures the essence of this statement?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 12

The author supplements the statement by stating that printing more money makes borrowing cheaper. Capitalism is ultimately dependent on the supply of money from the central banks. Here we can infer that the supply of money from the central banks is crucial to capitalism.

Option A is extreme. It is not possible to conclude that capitalism would become extinct in the absence of money supply from central banks.

Option B conveys that money supplied by the central banks is crucial to capitalism's survival. It does not go to extreme ends and captures the author's stance correctly. Hence it is the answer.

Option C takes the metaphor in a literal sense. It distorts what the author wants to convey and implies that an equivalent relationship with central banks is important (the author, however, limits the functioning of capitalism with regard to the central banks). Hence C is incorrect.

Option D is out of scope. It talks about unrestrained supply of money, which has not been implied in the passage.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 13

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Why would 12 of the richest men in football, executives paid for their supposed prowess in managing global brand names such as Barcelona and Manchester United, screw up so badly? Why did they think the players, the fans, Uefa, Fifa and the national governments of Europe would let them walk away with a £4bn cartel, leaving the eviscerated corpse of ordinary football on the dressing room floor? As the European Super League plan lies in ruins, the answer is clear: capital. There’s too much of it chasing too little real economic value in the world.

Capitalism is confined within the oxygen tent of central bank money. The more central banks print money, the cheaper it is to borrow. And yet the real economy, its dynamism flattened after the 2008 crash and its capacity scarred by the Covid-19 pandemic, remains sluggish. So the free money created by governments - and yes, central banks are ultimately part of the state - can only flow upwards. A glance at the leaked details of the Super League proposal should provide a teachable moment about financialised monopoly capitalism. The aim was to create a cartel of clubs that would generate £4bn a year - double the revenue of the current European Champions League. Closing entry to the league was only half of the plan. The other half was to operate a US-style spending and salary cap, effectively forcing individual clubs and players into a semi-feudal relationship with the Super League itself. They would operate the same “capitalist communism” as the National Football League in the US - sharing the revenue more evenly than in a truly competitive competition.

The Super League used the Spanish courts - some of the most politicised and questionable in the developed world - to prevent Fifa and Uefa from blocking the move. But when the British political elite united in condemnation of the scheme - with Boris Johnson threatening to drop a “legislative bomb” - that was decisive. English football was at the epicentre of the Super League scheme because it is the most financialised, with major clubs already grabbed by asset strippers and riddled with the dodgy money of foreign magnates. It is the league in which fans have least control, but where players have gamed the system to achieve a high degree of autonomy, and political salience.

The “super league” idea has been around for more than 20 years. It will stay around because the US sports cartel model works. There is no international basketball, baseball or gridiron football for a reason: these are American-owned cartel sports, staged as a circus for global entertainment. They work because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism: the cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies more powerful than the employees (the players); and the consumers have no choice. The point about cartels, however, is that they kill capitalism, innovation, and choice. What we really need is public ownership, regulation, and control of the national football infrastructure.

Q. Which of the following is an observation made about cartels in the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 13

Option A is a distortion. In the last paragraph, the author states that "cartel is more powerful than the companies within it; the companies are more powerful than the employees (the players), and the consumers have no choice." However, it cannot be discerned with certainty that there are no other actors above cartels in the monopoly capitalist system. Hence, Statement I cannot be inferred.
In the last paragraph, the author notes that cartels kill innovation. Hence we can say that an original change to sports models would be inhibited by it. Hence, Option B is correct.
Option C is a distortion. In the last paragraph, the author states the following- {[US sports cartel model] works because they embody the essential principles of monopoly capitalism.} However, this cannot be equated to the popularity of monopoly capitalism. The author does not discuss the popular view on monopoly capitalism in the passage.
Option D can be easily eliminated as it is out of scope. The author does not make such an assertion in the passage.
Hence Option B is the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 14

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Around 2700 years ago, the Greek poet Archilochus wrote: “the fox knows many things; the hedgehog one big thing.” In the 1950s, philosopher Isaiah Berlin used that sentence as the basis of his essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox.” In it, Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints. Although Berlin later claimed the essay was not intended to be serious, it has become a foundational part of thinking about the distinction between specialists and generalists.

A generalist is a person who is a competent jack of all trades, with lots of divergent useful skills and capabilities. Specialist, on the other hand, is someone with distinct knowledge and skills related to a single area. The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example. Likewise, there is a spectrum for how generalized or specialized a certain skill is. Some skills — like the ability to focus, to read critically, or to make rational decisions — are of universal value. Others are a little more specialized but can be used in many different careers. Examples of these skills would be design, project management, and fluency in a foreign language.

Generalists have the advantage of interdisciplinary knowledge, which fosters creativity and a firmer understanding of how the world works. They have a better overall perspective and can generally perform second-order thinking in a wider range of situations than the specialist can. Generalists often possess transferable skills, allowing them to be flexible with their career choices and adapt to a changing world. Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization. And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.

When their particular skills are in demand, specialists experience substantial upsides. The scarcity of their expertise means higher salaries, less competition, and more leverage. The downside is that specialists are vulnerable to change. Many specialist jobs are disappearing as technology changes. Stockbrokers, for example, face the possibility of replacement by AI in coming years. That doesn’t mean no one will hold those jobs, but demand will decrease. Many people will need to learn new work skills, and starting over in a new field will put them back decades. That’s a serious knock, both psychologically and financially.

What’s the safest option, the middle ground? By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist. Many great thinkers are (or were) generalizing specialists. Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Kepler, and Boyd excelled by branching out from their core competencies. These men knew how to learn fast, picking up the key ideas and then returning to their specialties. Unlike their forgotten peers, they didn’t continue studying one area past the point of diminishing returns; they got back to work — and the results were extraordinary.

Q. Which of the following are examples of a generalist?
I. An eminent psychologist who works with the news media, publishes research papers and teaches a broad range of topics online.
II. A nuclear scientist specialising in the field of nuclear fusion and plasma science.
III. A manager with diverse work experience who works with a leading pharmaceutical company. 
IV. A distinguished athlete who has won 9 Olympic medals in swimming. 

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 14

A generalist should have divergent useful skills and capabilities as per the passage. Hence the example should convey that the person possesses various skills/capabilities.

The psychologist described in statement I is a generalist as he has interdisciplinary knowledge and possesses transferrable skills. Hence he can be classified as a generalist.

Since the scientist specialises in one domain, we cannot say that he is a generalist. Statement II can be eliminated.

In the third paragraph, the author states that " Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization." Hence, the manager mentioned in Statement III is a generalist.

 A swimmer specialises in one sport and therefore, we cannot say that he is a generalist. Statement IV can be eliminated.

Hence, only Statements I and III are valid. Option A is the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 15

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Around 2700 years ago, the Greek poet Archilochus wrote: “the fox knows many things; the hedgehog one big thing.” In the 1950s, philosopher Isaiah Berlin used that sentence as the basis of his essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox.” In it, Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints. Although Berlin later claimed the essay was not intended to be serious, it has become a foundational part of thinking about the distinction between specialists and generalists.

A generalist is a person who is a competent jack of all trades, with lots of divergent useful skills and capabilities. Specialist, on the other hand, is someone with distinct knowledge and skills related to a single area. The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example. Likewise, there is a spectrum for how generalized or specialized a certain skill is. Some skills — like the ability to focus, to read critically, or to make rational decisions — are of universal value. Others are a little more specialized but can be used in many different careers. Examples of these skills would be design, project management, and fluency in a foreign language.

Generalists have the advantage of interdisciplinary knowledge, which fosters creativity and a firmer understanding of how the world works. They have a better overall perspective and can generally perform second-order thinking in a wider range of situations than the specialist can. Generalists often possess transferable skills, allowing them to be flexible with their career choices and adapt to a changing world. Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization. And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.

When their particular skills are in demand, specialists experience substantial upsides. The scarcity of their expertise means higher salaries, less competition, and more leverage. The downside is that specialists are vulnerable to change. Many specialist jobs are disappearing as technology changes. Stockbrokers, for example, face the possibility of replacement by AI in coming years. That doesn’t mean no one will hold those jobs, but demand will decrease. Many people will need to learn new work skills, and starting over in a new field will put them back decades. That’s a serious knock, both psychologically and financially.

What’s the safest option, the middle ground? By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist. Many great thinkers are (or were) generalizing specialists. Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Kepler, and Boyd excelled by branching out from their core competencies. These men knew how to learn fast, picking up the key ideas and then returning to their specialties. Unlike their forgotten peers, they didn’t continue studying one area past the point of diminishing returns; they got back to work — and the results were extraordinary.

Q. Which of the following statements CANNOT be inferred from the passage?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 15

{And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.} Option A can be inferred from these lines.

{The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject.} Option B can be inferred as well.

The author remarks the following about generalizing specialists in the last paragraph- {By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist}. So, this group of people develop core competency in one area while also building a knowledge base on several general areas, i.e. interdisciplinary knowledge. Hence, Option D can be inferred.

{...And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary...} While the author presents a commonly observed trend, he does not make a conclusive distinction between generalists and specialists based on the length of their employment or project durations at a company. Hence, Option C cannot be inferred and is the correct answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 16

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Around 2700 years ago, the Greek poet Archilochus wrote: “the fox knows many things; the hedgehog one big thing.” In the 1950s, philosopher Isaiah Berlin used that sentence as the basis of his essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox.” In it, Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints. Although Berlin later claimed the essay was not intended to be serious, it has become a foundational part of thinking about the distinction between specialists and generalists.

A generalist is a person who is a competent jack of all trades, with lots of divergent useful skills and capabilities. Specialist, on the other hand, is someone with distinct knowledge and skills related to a single area. The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example. Likewise, there is a spectrum for how generalized or specialized a certain skill is. Some skills — like the ability to focus, to read critically, or to make rational decisions — are of universal value. Others are a little more specialized but can be used in many different careers. Examples of these skills would be design, project management, and fluency in a foreign language.

Generalists have the advantage of interdisciplinary knowledge, which fosters creativity and a firmer understanding of how the world works. They have a better overall perspective and can generally perform second-order thinking in a wider range of situations than the specialist can. Generalists often possess transferable skills, allowing them to be flexible with their career choices and adapt to a changing world. Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization. And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.

When their particular skills are in demand, specialists experience substantial upsides. The scarcity of their expertise means higher salaries, less competition, and more leverage. The downside is that specialists are vulnerable to change. Many specialist jobs are disappearing as technology changes. Stockbrokers, for example, face the possibility of replacement by AI in coming years. That doesn’t mean no one will hold those jobs, but demand will decrease. Many people will need to learn new work skills, and starting over in a new field will put them back decades. That’s a serious knock, both psychologically and financially.

What’s the safest option, the middle ground? By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist. Many great thinkers are (or were) generalizing specialists. Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Kepler, and Boyd excelled by branching out from their core competencies. These men knew how to learn fast, picking up the key ideas and then returning to their specialties. Unlike their forgotten peers, they didn’t continue studying one area past the point of diminishing returns; they got back to work — and the results were extraordinary.

Q. In the essay mentioned in the passage, what do the metaphors 'hedgehog' and 'fox' refer to?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 16

"...Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints..."

From the above lines, we can see that Berling mentioned 'hedgehog' and 'fox' in his essay to refer to thinkers with one perspective and thinkers with many viewpoints, respectively. Hence Option A is the answer.

Options B and D are derived later in the passage. These distinctions are not mentioned in the essay. Hence, they can be eliminated.

Option C refers to the thoughts of Archilocus on the basis of which the essay was named. But the essay by Berlin diverges from this interpretation and does not talk about knowledge but the viewpoints of thinkers. Hence Option C can be eliminated.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 17

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Around 2700 years ago, the Greek poet Archilochus wrote: “the fox knows many things; the hedgehog one big thing.” In the 1950s, philosopher Isaiah Berlin used that sentence as the basis of his essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox.” In it, Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints. Although Berlin later claimed the essay was not intended to be serious, it has become a foundational part of thinking about the distinction between specialists and generalists.

A generalist is a person who is a competent jack of all trades, with lots of divergent useful skills and capabilities. Specialist, on the other hand, is someone with distinct knowledge and skills related to a single area. The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example. Likewise, there is a spectrum for how generalized or specialized a certain skill is. Some skills — like the ability to focus, to read critically, or to make rational decisions — are of universal value. Others are a little more specialized but can be used in many different careers. Examples of these skills would be design, project management, and fluency in a foreign language.

Generalists have the advantage of interdisciplinary knowledge, which fosters creativity and a firmer understanding of how the world works. They have a better overall perspective and can generally perform second-order thinking in a wider range of situations than the specialist can. Generalists often possess transferable skills, allowing them to be flexible with their career choices and adapt to a changing world. Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization. And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.

When their particular skills are in demand, specialists experience substantial upsides. The scarcity of their expertise means higher salaries, less competition, and more leverage. The downside is that specialists are vulnerable to change. Many specialist jobs are disappearing as technology changes. Stockbrokers, for example, face the possibility of replacement by AI in coming years. That doesn’t mean no one will hold those jobs, but demand will decrease. Many people will need to learn new work skills, and starting over in a new field will put them back decades. That’s a serious knock, both psychologically and financially.

What’s the safest option, the middle ground? By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist. Many great thinkers are (or were) generalizing specialists. Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Kepler, and Boyd excelled by branching out from their core competencies. These men knew how to learn fast, picking up the key ideas and then returning to their specialties. Unlike their forgotten peers, they didn’t continue studying one area past the point of diminishing returns; they got back to work — and the results were extraordinary.

Q. Why does the author mention that "The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum"?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 17

"The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example.."

The author mentions the 'continuum' here to indicate that there are degrees of specialization in a subject, and a person can be called both a generalist and a specialist when compared to different people in the same field. Then the author gives an example that how a history teacher is a specialist in the teaching profession but more of a generalist compared to someone who exclusively teaches the history of the American Civil War. Thus the author wants to highlight that the classification of generalist and specialist is relative. Option B captures this point correctly.

The author does not mention the continuum to indicate that generalists and specialists work in similar areas. That is not the main purpose of the author. Hence Option A can be eliminated.

No contrast has been highlighted in the statement. Hence Option C can be eliminated.

The author introduces various examples to explain the point, and hence his main point was to explain how the classification of generalist and specialist is relative using examples and not the other way around. Hence Option D is a distortion and can be eliminated.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 18

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions:

Around 2700 years ago, the Greek poet Archilochus wrote: “the fox knows many things; the hedgehog one big thing.” In the 1950s, philosopher Isaiah Berlin used that sentence as the basis of his essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox.” In it, Berlin divides great thinkers into two categories: hedgehogs, who have one perspective on the world, and foxes, who have many different viewpoints. Although Berlin later claimed the essay was not intended to be serious, it has become a foundational part of thinking about the distinction between specialists and generalists.

A generalist is a person who is a competent jack of all trades, with lots of divergent useful skills and capabilities. Specialist, on the other hand, is someone with distinct knowledge and skills related to a single area. The generalist and the specialist are on the same continuum; there are degrees of specialization in a subject. There’s a difference between someone who specializes in teaching history and someone who specializes in teaching the history of the American Civil war, for example. Likewise, there is a spectrum for how generalized or specialized a certain skill is. Some skills — like the ability to focus, to read critically, or to make rational decisions — are of universal value. Others are a little more specialized but can be used in many different careers. Examples of these skills would be design, project management, and fluency in a foreign language.

Generalists have the advantage of interdisciplinary knowledge, which fosters creativity and a firmer understanding of how the world works. They have a better overall perspective and can generally perform second-order thinking in a wider range of situations than the specialist can. Generalists often possess transferable skills, allowing them to be flexible with their career choices and adapt to a changing world. Managers and leaders are often generalists because they need a comprehensive perspective of their entire organization. And an increasing number of companies are choosing to have a core group of generalists on staff, and hire freelance specialists only when necessary. The métiers at the lowest risk of automation in the future tend to be those which require a diverse, nuanced skill set.

When their particular skills are in demand, specialists experience substantial upsides. The scarcity of their expertise means higher salaries, less competition, and more leverage. The downside is that specialists are vulnerable to change. Many specialist jobs are disappearing as technology changes. Stockbrokers, for example, face the possibility of replacement by AI in coming years. That doesn’t mean no one will hold those jobs, but demand will decrease. Many people will need to learn new work skills, and starting over in a new field will put them back decades. That’s a serious knock, both psychologically and financially.

What’s the safest option, the middle ground? By many accounts, it’s being a specialist in one area, while retaining a few general iterative skills-a generalizing specialist. Many great thinkers are (or were) generalizing specialists. Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Kepler, and Boyd excelled by branching out from their core competencies. These men knew how to learn fast, picking up the key ideas and then returning to their specialties. Unlike their forgotten peers, they didn’t continue studying one area past the point of diminishing returns; they got back to work — and the results were extraordinary.

Q. Which of the following statements, if true, weakens the author's suggestion in the final paragraph?

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 18

In the last paragraph, the author posits that the safest option is a generalized specialist route. The author is majorly concerned about pay and adaptability, as discussed in the penultimate paragraph. Hence, to weaken this suggestion, we need to prove that becoming a generalized specialist does not improve the chances of retaining a job.
Option A does not weaken the author's suggestion, as the author is not advocating against generalists. He advises taking the best of both. Hence A can be eliminated.
Option B talks about an increase in demand for generalists. However, it is not clear how this affects the demand for generalized specialists and hence does not weaken the author's view.
Option C talks about the effort required. The author does not claim that the generalized specialist route is an easy one. Hence this does not weaken the author's suggestion in any manner.
Option D talks about most organizations not retaining generalizing specialists. The author proposes the generalizing specialist approach in the first place, assuming these individuals would be least vulnerable to losing their jobs. However, option D contradicts that. Hence, option D is the answer.

Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 19

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

An externality affects someone without them agreeing to it. Externalities provide useful mental models for understanding complex systems. They show us that systems don’t exist in isolation from other systems. Externalities may affect uninvolved third parties which make them a form of market failure —an inefficient allocation of resources. We both create and are subject to externalities. Most are very minor but compound over time. They can inflict numerous second-order effects. Someone reclines their seat on an airplane. They get the benefit of comfort. The person behind bears the cost of discomfort by having less space. One family member leaves their dirty dishes in the sink. They get the benefit of using the plate. Someone else bears the cost of washing it later. We can’t expect to interact with any system without repercussions. Over time, even minor externalities can cause significant strain in our lives and relationships.

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 19

In the passage, the author talks about externalities, and how it affects uninvolved third parties. He emphasises the utility of externalities as mental models for understanding complex systems and highlights how even minor externalities can cause significant strain in our lives. Option C aptly captures the ideas discussed above.

Options A and B are distortions. Option A states that the consequences are unintended, while option B states the consequences are undesired- these inferences cannot be drawn from the passage. Additionally, Option A does not factor in the effect of externalities on uninvolved third parties. At the same time, Option B misses out on the usefulness of externalities as mental models for understanding complex systems. Thus, we can eliminate them. 
Option D is out of scope. The passage does not discuss anything regarding decision-making.
Hence, Option C is the correct answer.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 20

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. And scientists, therefore, are perpetual students of nature.
  2. When evidence does not conform with our preconceived notions, we learn something new.
  3. Scientific research is fundamentally a learning experience.
  4. Experimental clues and their theoretical interpretation constitute a classroom setting for our two-way dialogue with reality.

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 20

31 form a bloc- 3 states that scientific research is a learning experience, and hence scientists, who engage in scientific research, are perpetual students, which is exactly what 1 asserts. 42 is the next bloc. 4 describes what happens in scientific research, and 2 talks about the learnings from it. 

Hence the opening sentence can be either 3 or 4. 4231 is not a coherent paragraph, as, after 2, 3 introduces a general topic about learning which 2 should have followed later. Hence for the thought flow to be correct, Statement 2 should be after Statement 3.

When we arrange the sentences as 3142, the thought flow is coherent. There is a link between 1 and 4, where 'our' in 4 refers to the scientists in 1. Hence 3142 is the correct sequence.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 21

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. This miscommunication leads to suboptimal care, decreased understanding of diseases and treatments, difficulties in shared decision-making and lower satisfaction with care.
  2. Language discordance—the situation when providers and patients speak different languages—is all too common throughout the United States.
  3. Limited English proficiency impacts the patient-physician-system interaction by undermining communication, trust and health literacy.
  4. Patient-provider language discordance is associated with worse chronic disease management, longer hospital stays and increased hospital readmission rates.

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 21

Statement 2 is an independent sentence and introduces the topic- language discordance. Hence it is the opening sentence. 3 follows 2 as it elaborates on the topic introduced in 2 and comments on its effects. 1 follows 3, as it further describes the consequences of this breakdown in communication between patients and providers mentioned in 3. And finally, 4 builds on the consequences described in 1. 1 describes consequences on an individual case level and 4 generalises it to all patients. Hence, 2314 form a coherent paragraph.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 22

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. Now a new study underscores the toll that diabetes may take on the brain.
  2. Type 2 diabetes is a chronic, progressive illness that can have devastating complications, including hearing loss, blindness, heart disease, stroke, kidney failure, and vascular damage.
  3. With type 2 diabetes, the body either doesn't produce enough insulin, or it resists insulin.
  4. It found that Type 2 diabetes is linked to an increased risk for Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia later in life.
  5. Also, the younger the age at which diabetes is diagnosed, the greater the risk.

Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 22

The passage majorly talks about Type 2 diabetes and how it's linked to health complications. It also talks about a new study that has linked the effect of type 2 on the brain. 2 is an independent sentence and hence the opener. 145 form a mandatory bloc. 1 talks about the new study that has identified the effect of type 2 diabetes on the brain. 4 and 5 discuss the study's findings. Hence, 2145 form a coherent paragraph.

Sentence 3 talks about the mechanism that takes place when a person has type 2 diabetes. This is extraneous to the discussion. The passage majorly talks about the complications of diabetes and the findings of the new study. 3 does not fit in the context. 

*Answer can only contain numeric values
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 23

Arrange the following sentences in a logical order and enter the correct order of sentences in the space provided.
(1) The cheap prices of its commodities is the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians' intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate.
(2) It compels them to introduce what it calls civilisation into their midst, i.e., to become bourgeois themselves.
(3) The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian nations into civilization.
(4) In one word, it creates a world after its own image.
(5) It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production


Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 23

The first statement of the passage should be 3, because the remaining statements contain the pronoun "it", the antecedent of which is present in 3 (the bourgeoisie.). 4 should be the last statement because it summarizes ("In one words"). With this, we have correct order as 31524.

*Answer can only contain numeric values
Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 24

Arrange the following sentences in a logical order and enter the correct order of sentences in the space provided.
(1) He that kills a breeding sow destroys all her offspring to the thousandth generation.
(2) The more there is of it, the more it produces every turning, so that the profits rise quicker and quicker.
(3) He that murders a crown destroys all that it might have produced, even scores of pounds
(4) Remember, that money is of the prolific, generating nature.
(5) Money can beget money, five shillings turned is six, turned again it is seven and three pence, andso on, till it becomes a hundred pounds.


Detailed Solution for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 - Question 24

Statement 5 should follow 4, because 4 mentions the prolific nature of money and 5 illustrates how money multiplies. Statement 2 follows 5. because 2 uses the pronoun "it", which can only refer to money in this context. Statements 1 and 3 logically complement the idea presented in statements 4, 5 and 2. Hence 1 and 3 are placed after 4,5,2

2 videos|24 docs|89 tests
Use Code STAYHOME200 and get INR 200 additional OFF
Use Coupon Code
Information about Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 Page
In this test you can find the Exam questions for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2 solved & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving Questions and answers for Test: CAT Verbal & Reading Comprehension- 2, EduRev gives you an ample number of Online tests for practice