All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an ex... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans. 
Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.
Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the  phrase “moral superstructure”?
  • a)
    The morality underlying sexist behaviour.
  • b)
    The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.
  • c)
    The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.
  • d)
    The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.
  • e)
    The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and ...
The author refers to “moral superstructure” in the context of having to warrant the difference in the treatment of the privileged and the non-privileged class on the basis of a rationale. The author expects this rationale to be dependent on morality. Only option 3 points out to this explanation. While option 1 is partially correct, morality is not limited only to differences between sexes but also to other distinctions. Option 2 is extremely vague and seems incomplete and hence, can be eliminated.
The author does not refer to logic as the grounds for differentiation and hence, option 4 can be eliminated.
While the author does state that distinguishing characteristics should be able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class, this justification must be based on morality which has not been brought out in option 5. Eliminate option 5.
Hence, the correct answer is option 3.
View all questions of this test
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What can be understood by the statement - “Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal...” ?

Group QuestionA passage is followed by questions pertaining to the passage. Read the passage and answer the questions. Choose the most appropriate answer.Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What is the central focus of the passage?

Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. On the basis of this passage, what could the term male chauvinism most likely mean?

The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question. Dogs are able to follow human pointing gestures to find hidden food, and they can indicate successfully to their owners by their own pointing actions where a hidden toy is located. Under certain circumstances, dogs understand that a human who cannot see them (because, for example, she is blindfolde d) is less likely to respond to begging with a tasty treat than a person whose vision is not obscured. Dogs are also more likely to obey a command to leave something desirable alone if their master stays in the room than if he steps out. And yet attempts to view canine smarts as cut from the same cloth as human intelligence gloss over a lot of the details about how dogs and humans operate. We have found that people remain somewhat mysterious to dogs for the first five months of life, and dogs at our local pound lag considerably behind house dogs when it comes to understanding human beings. Recent research by Alexandra Horowitz at Barnard College in New York accentuates the “talking past each other” that sometimes goes on between humans and dogs. Horowitz asked owners to forbid their dogs to take a biscuit and then briefly leave the room. When the owners returned, some were told that their dogs had been naughty and eaten the forbidden food. Others were told their dog had been good and left the biscuit alone. If the dog had misbehaved, the owner was given a moment to berate his pet for its misdeed. The owners were then asked whether their dog looked guilty. The twist in the tale was that only half of the owners were correctly informed. When Horowitz asked each owner whether his dog looked guilty, she could consider whether the owner’s report of “guilty looks” actually had to do with the facts of the matter - whether the dog had taken the forbidden treat - or whether it reflected nothing more than whether the owner had chastised his hound. The results showed clearly that “guilty looks” came about because the dog was being scolded. This does not mean that we should not chastise our dogs (or praise them). All it means is that, if we want to live harmoniously with another species in our most intimate places, we must recognize that some of the time our preferred modes of reasoning are not theirs. We must try to understand dogs on their own terms, and help them to understand us Q. Five sentences are given below labeled (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5). Of these, four sentences need to be arranged in a logical order to form a coherent paragraph/passage. Pick out the sentence that does not fit the sequence. 1. Solitary confinement is the practice of isolating people in closed cells for twenty-two to twenty-four hours a day, virtually free of human contact, for periods of time ranging from days to decades. 2. Solitary confinement cells generally measure from six by nine to eight by ten feet. 3. Over the past thirty years, in the wake of deinstitutionalization, prisons and jails have become the nation’s largest inpatient psychiatric centers. 4. Some have bars, but more often they have solid metal doors. Many do not have windows. 5. Meals generally come through slots in these doors, as do any communications with prison staff. There may be showers within the cells, or inhabitants may be taken, in shackles, to shower two or three times a week.

Read the passage carefully and answer the following questions.Dancing is a human universal, but why? It is present in human cultures old and new; central to those with the longest continuous histories; evident in the earliest visual art on rock walls from France to South Africa to the Americas, and enfolded in the DNA of every infant who invents movements in joyful response to rhythm and song, long before she can walk, talk or think of herself as an ‘I’. Dancing remains a vital, generative practice around the globe into the present in urban neighbourhoods, on concert stages, as part of healing rituals and in political revolutions. Despite efforts waged by Christian European and American colonists across six continents over 500 years to eradicate indigenous dance traditions and to marginalise dancing within their own societies, dancing continues wherever humans reside. Any answer to the question of why humans dance must explain its ubiquity and tenacity. In so doing, any answer will challenge Western notions of human being that privilege mind over body as the seat of agency and identity.Current explanations for why humans dance tend to follow one of two approaches. The first, seen in psychological and some philosophical circles, begins with a human as an individual person who chooses to dance (or not) for entertainment, exercise, artistic expression or some other personal reason. Such approaches assume that dance is one activity among others offering benefits to an individual that may be desirable, but not necessary, for human well being. Alternatively, a raft of sociological and anthropological explanations focus on community, asserting that dancing is one of the first means by which the earliest humans solidified strong social bonds irrespective of bloodlines. In these accounts, dancing is eventually replaced by more rational and effective means of social bonding that the dancing itself makes possible, such as language, morality and religion. While the first type of reasoning struggles to explain why so many humans choose to dance, the second struggles to explain why humans continue to dance. What is missing from these accounts?What if humans are the primates whose capacity to dance (shared by some birds and mammals) was the signature strategy enabling the evolution of a distinctively large and interconnected brain, empathic heart and ecological adaptability? And what if dancing plays this role for humans not just in prehistoric times, but continuing into the present? What if humans are creatures who evolved to dance as the enabling condition of their own bodily becoming?Recent evidence for such a thesis is gathering across scientific and scholarly disciplines. Time and again, researchers are discovering the vital role played by bodily movement not only in the evolution of the human species, but in the present-day social and psychological development of healthy individuals.Q.Which of the following is the author most likely to support?

Top Courses for CATView all

Top Courses for CAT

Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Chauvinism, in its original meaning, is an exaggerated patriotism and a belligerent belief in national superiority and glory. Its eponym is a seemingly apocryphal French soldier Nicholas Chauvin. By extension, it has come to include an extreme and unreasoning partisanship on behalf of any group to which one belongs, especially when the partisanship includes malice and hatred towards rival groups. In our enlightened times, when most forms of chauvinism have been abandoned, at least in theory, by those who consider themselves progressive, Western ethics still appears to retain, at its very heart, a fundamental form of chauvinism, namely, human chauvinism. For both popular Western thought and most Western ethical theories assume that both value and morality can ultimately be reduced to matters of interest or concern to the class of humans.Chauvinists are always anxious to stress distinguishing points between the privileged class and those outside it and there is no lack of characteristics which distinguish humans from non-humans, at least functioning healthy adult ones. The point is that these distinctions usually do not warrant the sort of radically inferior treatment for which they are proposed as a rationale. On the basis of the characteristics, then, the proposed radical difference in treatment between the privileged and non-privileged class and the purely instrumental treatment of the non-privileged class, must be warranted, that is, the distinguishing characteristics must be able to carry the moral superstructure placed upon them.Q. What does the author hint upon through the usage of the phrase “moral superstructure”?a)The morality underlying sexist behaviour.b)The responsibility that humans possess as rational beings.c)The righteous grounds on which the weight of difference in treatment between individuals must rest.d)The rationale of the distinction between humans and non-humans must be based on logic.e)The ability of distinguishing characteristics being able to warrant the inferior treatment of the non-privileged class.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup