CAT Previous Year Questions 2021: Reading Comprehension | Verbal Ability (VA) & Reading Comprehension (RC) PDF Download

The author supplements the example of the i-phone with a pertinent question: " Does it have personhood (if at all) because it is connected to me, drawing this resource from me as an owner or source?" He proceeds to then highlight the key takeaway from the example: " For the Maya (who did have plenty of other communicating objects, if not smartphones), the answer was no. Nonhuman persons were not tethered to specific humans, and they did not derive their personhood from a connection with a human." The end idea: the personhood of an object is not a function of its utility or attachment to humans {an object can be categorised as a person based on certain distinct variables aside from its relation to a human}. The only relevant information invalidating this portrayal is in Option D: if the personhood of the incense burner or stone chopper is dependent on their usefulness to humans, the purpose of presenting the example and the associated idea is undermined.
It is unclear how Options A and B invalidate the purpose of the example. Option C aligns with the author's assertions and does not touch upon the idea emphasised by the example.
Hence, Option D is the correct choice.

The author highlights multiple elements that constitute the Classic Mayan worldview pertaining to personhood:
"Nonhuman persons were not tethered to specific humans, and they did not derive their personhood from a connection with a human. "
"The Maya saw personhood as ‘activated’ by experiencing certain bodily needs and through participation in certain social activities. For example, among the faced objects that I examined, persons are marked by personal requirements (such as hunger, tiredness, physical closeness), and by community obligations (communication, interaction, ritual observance)"
"Personhood was a nonbinary proposition for the Maya. Entities were able to be persons while also being something else...With these Maya examples, we are challenged to discard the person/nonperson binary that constitutes our basic ontological outlook"
Inspecting the options using the above ideas as filters, we notice that Option B is closest to the Classic Mayan worldview. A tribe that "perceives plants as person-plants because they form an ecosystem and are marked by needs of nutrition" acknowledges the two elementary variables for defining personhood - personal requirements and community obligations.
Options A and C tether the personhood of the objects to their utility to humans - this does not coincide with the Classic Mayan belief. Although Option D mentions bodily needs, the interpretation of the term 'functionality' remains unclear. Hence, we can eliminate Option D.

One additional complexity: the incense burner (which would have been made of clay, and decorated with spiky appliques representing the sacred ceiba tree found in this region) is categorised as a person - but also as a tree.
The additional complexity that the author talks about here is the addition of another layer in the non-binary understanding of personhood. The incense burner was already classified as a person, but now it has also been classified as a tree. Hence, we have Options A and C. Note that the third category, that is tree, has a relation with the previous two categories. The boundary separating tree and person is porous. And since the incense burner has been categorized as a tree too, the relationship between them is porous too. Hence, we can infer that the third category shares a similar relationship with the previous two categories, and A is the correct answer.
The author is not exemplifying an exception but citing an additional complexity that is present in the definition. Hence, B can be eliminated.
The author does not establish the porosity of the divine and the profane. Hence, Option D is out of the scope of the passage.

The idea concerning the democratising potential can be retraced to the first paragraph wherein the author states: " Nonhuman persons were not tethered to specific humans, and they did not derive their personhood from a connection with a human. . . . It’s a profoundly democratising way of understanding the world. Humans are not more important persons - we are just one of many kinds of persons who inhabit this world"
Option A: Considering proximity as an idea would undermine the portrayal of the Classic Mayan worldview. The author presents the example of the I-phone to convey how the personhood of an object is not a function of its utility or attachment to humans. If true, the statement in A would counter the premise of this example. Hence, we can eliminate this choice.
Option B: the assessment here is quite similar to Option A; if we create distinctions within the realm of inanimate objects, this will weaken the Mayan worldview. It would diminish the democratising potential of such a viewpoint by introducing specific barriers or criteria for the classification of personhood.
Option C: The claim here runs against the Mayan idea of personhood being nonbinary. Thus, we can eliminate it since it undermines the democratising potential of the Classic Mayan worldview.
Hence, Option D is the correct choice.

Options A, C and D have been explicitly stated in the passage (refer to the second paragraph):
A: "...children between age four and six with one marshmallow. He told them that if they waited 15 minutes and didn’t eat it, he would give them a second marshmallow..." Thus, children were the subject under observation in the original marshmallow experiment, while cuttlefish were studied in the modified version of the same.
C: "...Since the researchers couldn’t explain to the cuttlefish that they would need to wait for their shrimp, they trained them to recognize certain shapes that indicated when a food item would become available..." Option C merely rephrase this excerpt.
D: "...A long-term follow-up study showed that the children who waited for the second marshmallow had more success later in life.. ." Given that the researchers undertook a long term study to map the successes of children showcasing self-control, we can safely conclude that the cuttlefish-version of the experiment was undertaken over a relatively shorter period.
Option B cannot be inferred from the discussion - there is no correlation between selfcontrol and survival advantages. Hence, B is the correct choice.

Option A: {Each time the cuttlefish showed it could wait, the researchers tacked another ten seconds on to the next round of waiting before releasing the shrimp. The longest that a cuttlefish waited was 130 seconds.} The results of Schnell's experiment indicated that cuttlefish exhibit self-restraint. This was shown to be the case with few children in the original marshmallow experiments. Hence, Option A is correct. 
Option B: {Not every species can use self-control, but most of the animals that can share another trait in common: long, social lives.} The author does not imply causation between intelligence and sociability. He merely highlights these two attributes: self-control is considered indicative of intelligence, and most such organisms showcase social lives as well. Hence, B is a distortion and cannot be inferred.  
Option C: {Preliminary experiments showed that cuttlefishes’ favorite food is live grass shrimp, while raw prawns are so-so and Asian shore crab is nearly unacceptable.} The above lines depict a preference for certain kinds of food; thus, C is true.  
Option D: {Schnell [says] that the cuttlefish usually sat at the bottom of the tank and looked at the two food items while they waited, but sometimes, they would turn away from the king prawn “as if to distract themselves from the temptation of the immediate reward.”} Exerting self-control through distractions has also been presented as a behavioural trait of the cuttlefish. 
Hence, Option B is the correct choice.

Option A: If true, this would weaken the findings of the experiments. The methodology used to establish the trait of self-restraint in cuttlefish is based on the premise that cuttlefish prefer one specific kind of food over another. If we demonstrate that cuttlefish are equally fond of live grass shrimp and raw prawn, then the observations made in the study become invalid. Therefore, we can eliminate Option A.
Option B: If true, the finding here would support the comments made in the final paragraph. The author states the following: {Not every species can use self-control, but most of the animals that can share another trait in common: long, social lives.} If it is proved that cuttlefish fulfils this ancillary criterion of sociability, the primary claim made in the passage is strengthened. 
Option C: If true, the statement here bears no significance to the passage’s findings. [We already know that "..the longest that a cuttlefish waited was 130 seconds..."] 
Option D: If true, this would weaken the findings of the experiments. Similar to Option A, the methodology used to establish the trait of self-restraint in cuttlefish is based on the premise that cuttlefish can distinguish between geometrical shapes. If we demonstrate that this information is false, then the observations made in the study become invalid. Therefore, we can eliminate Option D.
Hence, Option B is the correct choice. 

The question tests our understanding of the experiment stated in the second paragraph. The key highlights of the modified cuttlefish experiment are:
(a) Food choice: 1st preference - live grass shrimp; 2nd preference - raw prawns; 3rd preference - Asian shore crab 
(b) Symbol based training: Circle - immediate availability; Triangle - delayed availability; Square - never available
(c) Observations: in the absence of 1st preference ---> cuttlefish will go for 2nd preference {applies to all such scenarios involving only one food choice};  in the presence of multiple food choices, cuttlefish will wait ---> if 1st pref is available and associated with either Circle or Triangle
Based on the above, we can filter out the given options:
Option A: We know that raw prawns and Asian shore crab are not the primary preference of the cuttlefish. Additionally, we know that live grass shrimp (1st presence) is available for delayed consumption {associated with a Triangle}. If the cuttlefish waits for one minute to consume live grass shrimp and ignores the other two food choices, this definitively showcases that cuttlefish exert self-control. Hence, Option A is a strong candidate for the correct choice since it supplements the experiment's findings.   

Option B: In this case, the cuttlefish will go for the raw prawns since it has been conditioned to understand that the box labelled with Square will never open. This does not contribute to establishing self-control in cuttlefish. Thus, we can reject this choice. 

Option C: In this case, the cuttlefish will go for the raw prawns and avoid the Asian shore crab irrespective of the box it is placed in. This is because raw prawns fare more favourably as a food choice than Asian shore crab. {We know from points (a) and (c) that the cuttlefish will go for the 2nd preference over the 3rd} This does not contribute to establishing self-control in cuttlefish. Thus, we can reject this choice.

Option D: In this case, the cuttlefish will go for the live grass shrimp and avoid the raw prawns irrespective of the box it is placed in. This is because live grass shrimp fares more favourably as a food choice than raw prawns. {We know from points (a) and (c) that the cuttlefish will go for the 1st preference over the 2nd} This does not contribute to establishing self-control in cuttlefish. Therefore, we can reject this choice.
Hence, the correct answer is Option A.

Option A: The author does not discuss a utopian narrative that involves a society without laws or social structure. Instead, he talks about regulations that curb individuality and promote homogeneity. Hence, we can eliminate Option A as a potential choice.
Option B: The second paragraph relays the following idea: "The passions are regulated, and inequalities of wealth and distinction are minimized. Needs, vanity, and emulation are restrained, often by prizing equality and holding riches in contempt. The desire for public power is curbed" Given that public power is not looked at favourably, the entire debate on the mechanism to attain this facet (public power) becomes irrelevant. Thus, we can eliminate Option B.
Option C: "Such a conclusion might be fortified by examining selectively the tradition which follows More on these points. This often portrays societies where . . . 'it would be almost impossible for man to be depraved, or wicked'. . . . This is achieved both through institutions and mores, which underpin the common life" From the above excerpt, it is clarified that the utopian doctrines are enforced by institutions present in the society; additionally, the author mentions in the preceding paragraph that security in a utopian setting is attained through the curtailment of privacy. Hence, Option C is likely to be the correct choice.   
Option D: There is no mention of regulating homogeneity through promoting competitive heterogeneity. We can, therefore, eliminate this choice.
Hence, Option C is the correct choice.

The passage begins by portraying a utopian society. The author then discusses the difference in perspective concerning the underlying elements of such a society. A disagreement originates about the perception of security - while the people part of the utopia might find the shackles on their freedom to be reasonable, modern readers perceive this as suppression of heterogeneity and violation of privacy. This is presented with the intention to direct attention towards the tradeoff that exists between security and certain other essential variables. It additionally puts the spotlight on the thin line that exists between a utopia and a dystopia. The author then cites other works in literary history that depict a utopian setting along with certain key attributes that one might stumble upon in such narratives. Homogeneity comes across as a prominent idea  (a set of beliefs are considered acceptable, and the masses are expected to conform to the same). Towards the end of the discussion, the author reiterates the thin film that separates a utopia from a dystopia. He adds that while many individuals might be tempted to use these two ideas interchangeably, this shouldn't be the case. According to the author, the assertion that "all utopias are, or tend to produce, dystopias" is fallacious. He presents justification concerning the same: there are many utopian settings wherein conformity to doctrines or sacrifice of individuality is intentional - the person voluntarily submits to the group's norms for the greater good. This resonates with the term intentional community stated in the options. Option A aptly captures these principal themes. 

Option A: The statement here appears to be a distortion. The author says: "In More’s time, for much of the population, given the plenty and security on offer, such restraints would not have seemed overly unreasonable." It is being conveyed that the form of restrictions discussed at the beginning of the passage would not seem unreasonable to the citizens/members of More's utopia. However, the author feels that the opinions of modern readers would be drastically different. 

Option B: "For we have only to acknowledge the existence of thousands of successful intentional communities in which a cooperative ethos predominates and where harmony without coercion is the rule to set aside such an assertion. Here the individual’s submersion in the group is consensual (though this concept is not unproblematic). It results not in enslavement but voluntary submission to group norms. Harmony is achieved without . . . harming others." Towards the end of the discussion, the author indicates that homogeneity and stability (that often constitute a utopian universe) need not be achieved via coercion. Members of many communities voluntarily concede to the group's norms at the cost of their individuality. 

Option C: The statement here correlates to the assertion made by the author in the second paragraph: "Such a conclusion might be fortified by examining selectively the tradition which follows More on these points. This often portrays societies where . . . 'it would be almost impossible for man to be depraved, or wicked'. . . . This is achieved both through institutions and mores, which underpin the common life."

Option D: The introductory segment of the discussion highlights the restraints placed on individual freedom in a utopian society. Furthermore, the author mentions that many most utopian narratives in literary history are built on a premise devoid of individuality or diversity, as stated in the following excerpt: "People become more alike in appearance, opinion, and outlook than they often have been. Unity, order, and homogeneity thus prevail at the cost of individuality and diversity. This model, as J. C. Davis demonstrates, dominated early modern utopianism. . . . And utopian homogeneity remains a familiar theme well into the twentieth century."

Hence, Option A is the correct choice. 

Indeed, they might be twins, the progeny of the same parents. Insofar as this proves to be the case, my linkage of both here will be uncomfortably close for some readers.
The above excerpt implies that utopia and dystopia might be twins. The level of certainty is not absolute. However, Option A goes one step further to assert that they are twins and the progeny of the same parents. Hence, A cannot be inferred and is the answer.
'Insofar as this proves to be the case' can cause confusion while answering. But note that the case the author is talking about is the level of similarity between the two. Hence, what is being proven is that the two are quite similar to each other, and hence some would presume that they are twins. The excerpt, however, does not support that they actually are.
Option B: The whole passage supports the inference that utopias can be perceived as dystopias by different people. E.g. The author mentions that where some people push for relentless transparency so that they are secure, some people would perceive this as a breach of their privacy. Hence, a utopia for the former would be a dystopia for the latter.
Option C: People become more alike in appearance, opinion, and outlook than they often have been. Unity, order, and homogeneity thus prevail at the cost of individuality and diversity. This model, as J. C. Davis demonstrates, dominated early modern utopianism. . . . And utopian homogeneity remains a familiar theme well into the twentieth century.
Option C is a direct inference from the above excerpt. It has been mentioned that this theme of homogeneity and uniformity dominated early modern utopianism.

Option D: Throughout the passage, the author deals with conceptions of utopian societies as dealt with in literary works. We can infer that utopian societies do exist in literature where the characters practice traditions that the author made up to portray a utopian society.

Although mildly subjective, the question tests our understanding of the central idea. Across the passage, we notice the 'conflation' of tea consumption with particular virtues: it was not merely limited to benefits to the consumer but served a greater purpose. The narrative was that by drinking tea, people were/are advancing the cause of civilisation and community {thereby, imparting a sense of moral elevation}. Thus, the welfare highlighted is two-fold: both the consumer and society is benefitted. Towards the end, the author supports the narrative as follows: "It is not a stretch to say that tea marketers have advanced the particularly noble cause of human dialogue and friendship." Any choice showcasing this dual benefit might be the potential answer.
Option A presents sustainably farmed foods; it is easy to identify that any associated marketing mechanics will emphasise the benefit of such food to both people and the environment. Thus, advertisers will make a case for how sustainably farmed food is beneficial not just to the consumer but also to the world at large. This will be equivalent to the 'conflation' that we came across in the passage.
Option B mentions natural health supplements; although we can discern the benefit to the consumer, the benefits to society is hard to perceive. Similarly, Options C and D appear irrelevant; it is difficult to identify what virtues we are conflating here with the subject. 
Hence, of the given choices, Option A appears most appropriate. 

We can refer to the following excerpt to examine the choices: { Beginning in the 1700s, the temperance movement advocated for tea as a pleasure that cheered but did not inebriate, and industrialists soon borrowed this moral argument in advancing their case for free trade in tea (and hence more open markets for their textiles). Factory owners joined in, compelled by the cause of a sober workforce, while Christian missionaries discovered that tea “would soothe any colonial encounter”. }
Options A, C and D can be directly inferred from the excerpt. The author does not present any information pertaining to tea drinkers lobbying for product diversity - hence, we can identify this as an incorrect reason. 
Therefore, Option B is the correct choice. 

{During the Second World War, tea service was presented as a social and patriotic activity that uplifted soldiers and calmed refugees.}
{I have been offered tea at a British garden party, a Bedouin campfire, a Turkish carpet shop and a Japanese chashitsu, to name a few settings. In each case the offering was more an idea - friendship, community, respect - than a drink, and in each case the idea then created a reality. It is not a stretch to say that tea marketers have advanced the particularly noble cause of human dialogue and friendship.}
Options A, B and D have been implied in the above excerpts - we can safely assume that the author will agree to the claims made in these options.  Option C, however, has not been stated in the passage. There is no information to deduce that the author will agree with the assertions that tea became the leading drink in Britain in the nineteenth century. Thus, Option C is the correct choice. 

An important clue to analyse the options lies in the following excerpt: {Yet tea is, Rappaport makes clear, a world apart - an astonishing success story in which tea marketers not only succeeded in conveying a sense of moral elevation to the consumer but also arguably did advance the cause of civilisation and community.} It is emphasised that the moral praise that tea received was not mere talk - tea as a 'morality product' did produce desirable outcomes. Option A is closest to conveying this idea. Options B, C and D fail to highlight the attribute that separates tea from 'other morality products' {as per the passage}.
Hence, Option A is the correct choice. 

The argument in Option A has been discussed in the following excerpt:
...the sceptic’s contention that we cannot be sure that we know anything - at least not if we think of knowledge as something like having a correct mental representation of reality, and not if we think of reality as something like things-as-they-are-in-themselves, independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions.

The argument in Option B has been discussed in the following excerpt:
For, they explain, unless we can ground our claims to knowledge as such, which is to say, distinguish it from mere opinion, superstition, fantasy, wishful thinking, ideology, illusion or delusion, then the actions we take on the basis of presumed knowledge - boarding an airplane, swallowing a pill, finding someone guilty of a crime - will be irrational and unjustifiable.

The argument in Option D has been discussed in the following excerpt:
While it is not clear that the scandal matters to anyone but philosophers, philosophers point out that it should matter to everyone, at least given a certain conception of knowledge.
The author does says that ignoring the scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is the most common way of dealing with it, not the best way. Hence. Option C has not been discussed.

We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on how we acquired them (I saw it with my own eyes; I heard it on Fox News; a guy at the office told me) and how broadly and strenuously they seem to be shared or endorsed by various relevant people: experts and authorities, friends and family members, colleagues and associates.
From the above excerpt, it is clear that held beliefs and presumptive knowledges depend upon how we acquired them, and how strongly they are shared or endorsed by relevant people in our circle. Hence, Option A is the answer.

...and not if we think of reality as something like things-as-they-are-in-themselves, independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions. For, the sceptic will note, since reality, under that conception of it, is outside our ken (we cannot catch a glimpse of things-in-themselves around the corner of our own eyes; we cannot form an idea of reality that floats above the processes of our conceiving it), we have no way to compare our mental representations with things-as-they-are-in-themselves and therefore no way to determine whether they are correct or incorrect.

The author is making a logical argument in the sentence given in the question. According to the author, if we say that the reality of objects is independent of our perceptions, then it is out of our ken. Hence, we cannot for this idea of reality, and logically, we would be unable to comprehend it. Option D comes the closest to capturing this point.

Option A is incorrect. The sceptic argues that if reality were independent of individual perceptions, then the reality would float above the processes with which we conceive it. It is being presented as an argument ot negate the viewpoint, while the Option takes it as an established fact.
Perception is more than eyesight. Option B captures only eyesight, and hence, is a distortion.
The process of conceiving reality and our knowledge is not the argument the author presents in the mentioned lines. Hence, Option C is incorrect.

We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on how we acquired them...
As mentioned in the above line, Option A directly contradicts what the author says.
It has been said that knowledge, or the problem of knowledge, is the scandal of philosophy. The scandal is philosophy’s apparent inability to show how, when and why we can be sure that we know something or, indeed, that we know anything.
The author then goes on to explain that sceptic view is the skeleton in western philosophy's closet when trying to negate this scandal. Thus, it means that the scandal has to do with the sceptic way of thinking.
In the next paragraph, the sceptic view has been explained, which talks about our inability to grasp reality if we think of it as independent of our perceptions. Hence, the scandal can be construed to be the same. The author is likely to agree with this view. Option B is the answer.
In the last paragraph, the author points out that we defend a viewpoint strongly if we feel that it is held widely in our social circle. However, the author does not allude to the fact that it is appropriate or not. Also, such an argument would bolster the inherent bias we have, and hence would point towards a fault in our decision making. Hence, Option C is incorrect.
Option D is not supported in the passage. The passage presents the sceptic view that if reality were construed as independent of our perceptions, then it would be impossible to grasp reality. It has not been mentioned that in this case, we should aim to study that reality in a similar manner.

I have elaborated . . . a framework for analyzing the contradictory pulls on [Indian] nationalist ideology in its struggle against the dominance of colonialism and the resolution it offered to those contradictions. Briefly, this resolution was built around a separation of the domain of culture into two spheres—the material and the spiritual. It was in the material sphere that the claims of Western civilization were the most powerful. Science, technology, rational forms of economic organization, modern methods of statecraft—these had given the European countries the strength to subjugate the non-European people . . . To overcome this domination, the colonized people had to learn those superior techniques of organizing material life and incorporate them within their own cultures. . . . But this could not mean the imitation of the West in every aspect of life, for then the very distinction between the West and the East would vanish—the self-identity of national culture would itself be threatened. . . .
The first paragraph acknowledges that the nationalist ideology was fighting against colonial dominance, and there were certain inherent contradictions in the way this struggle was being carried out. The author says that a method of resolution of these contradictions was to separate material and spiritual domains. This hints at the contradiction present. We can infer from here that this is being done because the nationalists acknowledge that the colonial countries were superior in certain aspects, which allowed them to subjugate non-Europeans, as is also mentioned later in the paragraph. The author also mentions that the colonized people had to learn those superior techniques, instead of all-out rejection of colonialist ideas and the progress they brought with them. Thus, the contradiction was that to overcome colonial dominance, nationalism had to accept that the material ways of the West were superior and incorporate them. Hence, Option D is the answer.

The arguments in the passage are based on the premise that the material and spiritual aspects of culture were different. Hence, even if Indian nationalism accepted the superior material ways of the west, they still would not be giving in to colonial dominance and their identity would be preserved by the spiritual aspect, as it remained unaffected. Hence, to weaken the author's argument, we can give a statement that proves that the spiritual aspect was affected too. Option C does that and is the answer.
Rejecting education for women could have more than one reason. It does not imply that the spiritual part of Indian culture was affected by colonialism. Moreover, the separation of roles according to gender is something that nationalist ideology supported, hence, rejecting education based on gender would not contradict it. Option A can be eliminated.
Option B does not weaken the author's argument since the author already agrees that the forces of colonialist modernity helped shape Indian nationalism, but only in the material aspect.
Option D is unrelated to the argument at hand and can be eliminated too.

The discourse of nationalism shows that the material/spiritual distinction was condensed into an analogous, but ideologically far more powerful, dichotomy: that between the outer and the inner....

The above excerpt shows that the material/spiritual distinction was condensed to form a far more superior dichotomy of the outer and the inner. Thus, the former was the premise for the latter, as well as inferior to the latter. Hence, Options B and C are true.

To overcome this domination, the colonized people had to learn those superior techniques of organizing material life and incorporate them within their own cultures. . . . But this could not mean the imitation of the West in every aspect of life, for then the very distinction between the West and the East would vanish—the self-identity of national culture would itself be threatened. . .

From the above excerpt, we can infer that the dichotomy helped save the identity of Indian Nationalism. Option D is also true.

Option A is not true as per the passage, and hence, is the answer.

Once we match this new meaning of the home/world dichotomy with the identification of social roles by gender, we get the ideological framework within which nationalism answered the women’s question. It would be a grave error to see in this, as liberals are apt to in their despair at the many marks of social conservatism in nationalist practice, a total rejection of the West. Quite the contrary: the nationalist paradigm in fact supplied an ideological principle of selection.
From the above excerpt, we can see that the liberals were concerned over the social conservatism that nationalist practice promoted as an ideological principal of selection, where social roles would be selected according to the gender of the person. Hence, Option B is the answer, as it comes the closest in capturing the liberal perception of the same.
The material/spiritual dichotomy has not been discussed in terms of liberal perspective, hence, Option A is out of the score here.
Option C is incorrect. Indian nationalism did not accept the changes brought about the colonialism, rather, promoted the segregation of gender roles according to their spiritual ideology of home/ world dichotomy.
Option D is contrary to what is mentioned in the passage. The author says that the 'ideological principle of selection' was the actual truth, and the liberal perspective was just contrary to what was actually happening.

Through war, famine and natural disasters, whole communities can be destroyed, taking their language with them to the grave...
Such trading up and out of a speech form occurs for complex political, cultural and economic reasons - sometimes voluntary for economic and educational reasons, although often amplified by state coercion or neglect.
More commonly, speakers live on but abandon their language in favor of another vernacular, a widespread process that linguists refer to as “language shift” from which few languages
From the above excerpts, Options A, B, and D can be supported. The passage supports that Internet technology has allowed certain endangered languages to thrive. Option C is not supported anywhere in the passage, hence, is the answer.

Multilingualism can help us live in a more connected and more interdependent world.
Throughout the passage, the author is advocating for greater language diversity and suggesting how to counter the threat to the same. Multilingualism is something that the author has supported as cited above. Hence, Option A is the answer.
More commonly, speakers live on but abandon their language in favor of another vernacular, a widespread process that linguists refer to as “language shift” from which few languages are immune.
Since the author advocated the preservation of languages, he would likely be against this shift, as it endangers languages. Option B can be eliminated.
Again, the author is pushing for more diversity and preservation of cultures instead of homogenization of the same. Option C can be eliminated.
The author does not push for state intervention in the preservation of languages. Hence, Option D would not be the answer.

It’s easy to forget that most of the world’s languages are still transmitted orally with no widely established written form. While speech communities are increasingly involved in projects to protect their languages - in print, on air and online - orality is fragile and contributes to linguistic vulnerability. But indigenous languages are about much more than unusual words and intriguing grammar: They function as vehicles for the transmission of cultural traditions, environmental understandings and knowledge about medicinal plants, all at risk when elders die and livelihoods are disrupted.
From the underlined portions of the above excerpt, we can infer options A, B, and C.
The first paragraph does mention that indigenous languages have unusual words and intriguing grammar. But it has not been mentioned as a factor that makes their documentation challenging. Hence, Option D is the answer.

More commonly, speakers live on but abandon their language in favor of another vernacular, a widespread process that linguists refer to as “language shift” from which few languages are immune. Such trading up and out of a speech form occurs for complex political, cultural and economic reasons - sometimes voluntary for economic and educational reasons, although often amplified by state coercion or neglect. Welsh, long stigmatized and disparaged by the British state, has rebounded with vigor.

In the above excerpt, the trading of language for another (language shift) has been mentioned. The author mentions the reasons why this happens, and then the Welsh language is mentioned as an example which has rebounded against the same with vigour. Thus, it is presented as a ray of hope, that a language can be revived even when cultural shift occurs. Option B is the answer.

The example has not been mentioned to spite the efforts that were put to integrate Welsh speakers into English speaking fold. The purpose of the author is to deal with endangered languages, and the subject in Option A would be out of scope.

The role of state effort in revitalising Welsh has not been mentioned, hence, Option C can be eliminated.
The role of globalisation in revitalising Welsh has not been mentioned either. Hence, Option D can be eliminated too.

The author begins that passage by saying that truth does not necessarily carry power. He then goes on to explain that to attain social cohesion, sticking to the truth is not always an optimal strategy. In the last paragraph, the author sums up this trade-off:
Even if we need to pay some price for deactivating our rational faculties, the advantages of increased social cohesion are often so big that fictional stories routinely triumph over the truth in human history. Scholars have known this for thousands of years, which is why scholars often had to decide whether they served the truth or social harmony.
Thus, Option B is the answer.
The author is not fixated upon the types of stories, not upon what kind of stories do the leaders propagate. Hence, Options A and C can be eliminated.
Power has been mentioned to indicate that sometimes, absolute truth is not the way forward to achieve maximum utility. The main contention of the author is not the trade-off between truth and power but between truth and social cohesion. Option D can be eliminated too.

Even if we need to pay some price for deactivating our rational faculties, the advantages of increased social cohesion are often so big that fictional stories routinely triumph over the truth in human history. Scholars have known this for thousands of years, which is why scholars often had to decide whether they served the truth or social harmony. Should they aim to unite people by making sure everyone believes in the same fiction, or should they let people know the truth even at the price of disunity?

In the penultimate paragraph, the author mentions how successful leaders balance truth and social unity to achieve an optimal outcome. The above excerpt shows that scholars have known this for a long time too, and have implemented it. Thus, Option C is the answer. 

That leaders and scholars have improved with time when it comes to achieving social cohesion is not implied in the passage. Option A can be eliminated.
We cannot say that scholars use myths to obtain power as leaders do. Hence, Option B can be eliminated.
We cannot say that scholars use myths to stay in office as leaders do. Option D can be eliminated too.

The author does not support that there is a limit to the influence that myths have on people, nor does he support imposing one. Hence, Option A can be eliminated.
Third, and most important, the truth is often painful and disturbing. Hence if you stick to unalloyed reality, few people will follow you. An American presidential candidate who tells the American public the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about American history has a 100 percent guarantee of losing the elections. . . . An uncompromising adherence to the truth is an admirable spiritual practice, but it is not a winning political strategy. . . .
Option B is contrary to what is being said in the passage. The author says that untarnished truth is not a good recipe for a political win, hence, the candidate should steer clear of that.
Option C is also contrary to what is being said in the passage. According to the author, not conveying the complete truth will allow a person to stay in power.
Option D is in line with the above excerpt and hence, is the answer.

Option A: The author here emphasizes that the choice between truth and social cohesion is a difficult one for scholars, as it means choosing between truth or uniting everyone using a common narrative. Here, the reach and influence of fiction created by that scholar has been overemphasized, and hence, is the answer.
Option B: There is no overemphasis in this option. Since humans have achieved these feats, and these feats do manipulate the objective reality around us, Option B can be eliminated.
Option C: Here too, the importance of fiction has not been overemphasized, but the importance of truth has been downplayed.
Option D: Option D presents a statement, which is unrelated to the emphasis being placed on the importance of myths.

The fundamental unity of humanity is the theme of Mr. Chomsky's universal grammar, and of this exciting book.
Throughout the passage, the author seems to support the points made by Mr Pinker. The above line also shows that the opinion of the author towards the book is positive, and the author does not think that the book is racist in any way, but promotes unity and cohesion. Option D captures this point correctly and is the answer.
So according to Mr. Pinker, the roots of language must be in the genes, but there cannot be a “grammar gene” any more than there can be a gene for the heart or any other complex body structure. This proposition will undoubtedly raise the hackles of some behavioral psychologists and anthropologists, for it apparently contradicts the liberal idea that human behavior may be changed for the better by improvements in culture and environment.
The book does not support that a complex anatomical structure like a 'voice box' plays a key role in determining language acquisition skills. Nor does it support the role of culture and environment in shaping human behaviour Options A and B are eliminated.
Option C portrays the book as racist, which is directly in contradiction with the author's opinion. C is eliminated too.

Unlike Mr. Chomsky, Mr. Pinker firmly places the wiring of the brain for language within the framework of Darwinian natural selection and evolution.
The passage suggests that Mr. Pinker and Mr. Chomsky agree on almost all topics. However, the above line indicates that they both disagreed on the application of the Darwinian framework to explain language instinct. Where Mr. Pinker was in favour of the same, Mr. Chomsky was against. Hence, Option C is the answer.

A half-century ago, this would have been pooh-poohed as a “black box” theory, since one could not actually pinpoint this grammatical faculty in a specific part of the brain, or describe its functioning. But now things are different. Neurosurgeons [have now found that this] “black box” is situated in and around Broca’s area, on the left side of the forebrain. . . .
On the other hand, the “language instinct,” when it first appeared among our most distant hominid ancestors, must have given them a selective reproductive advantage over their competitors (including the ancestral chimps). . . .
He effectively disposes of all claims that intelligent nonhuman primates like chimps have any abilities to learn and use language.
The above excerpts provide support for Options B, C, and D respectively. Option A is in direct contradiction with Option D, and hence, is the answer.

Since this message was couched in terms of Chomskyan theoretical linguistics, in discourse so opaque that it was nearly incomprehensible even to some scholars, many people did not hear it. Now, in a brilliant, witty and altogether satisfying book, Mr. Chomsky's colleague Steven Pinker . . . has brought Mr. Chomsky's findings to everyman.
From the above excerpt, it is clear that Mr. Pinker's style of writing is much more comprehensible to the common man. Hence, their writing styles are quite different. Also, the above excerpt mentions that the book brings Mr. Chomsky's findings to everyman, hence, it is clear that it draws heavily from the findings. Options A and D are eliminated.
Unlike Mr. Chomsky, Mr. Pinker firmly places the wiring of the brain for language within the framework of Darwinian natural selection and evolution.
The above excerpt shows that they both disagreed on a certain point. Hence, Option B is eliminated too.
Option C finds no mention in the passage, hence, is the answer.

Back in the early 2000s, an awesome thing happened in the New X-Men comics. Our mutant heroes had been battling giant robots called Sentinels for years, but suddenly these mechanical overlords spawned a new threat: Nano-Sentinels! Not content to rule Earth with their metal fists, these tiny robots invaded our bodies at the microscopic level. Infected humans were slowly converted into machines, cell by cell.

The first paragraph talks about the X-men comics, in which the mutant heroes, that X-Men, has been battling giant robots called sentinels. But these Sentinels then developed Nano-Sentinels, which could invade bodies at the microscopic level, and the heroes would now have to fight them too. Option D perfectly captures this, and hence, is the answer.
Option A is incorrect. X-men were battling the Sentinels before the invention of Nano-Sentinels. Hence, the origin of X-men is different.
Option B is incorrect. The mechanical overlords made Nano-Sentinels to convert people into machines. It has not been said that the people were converted into the mechanical lords themselves.

A: Sentinel robots are just fiction that is mentioned in the passage to introduce the new wave of development that has taken place. Option A is eliminated.
B: The author has introduced X-men as an example only. His arguments are not related to the creation of X-men in any way. Option B can be eliminated.
C: .....but some of them could one day swim through our bloodstream to heal us.
Throughout the passage, the author is trying to highlight the positives of the new robots. Hence, a direct extension of the argument would be the robots healing us at a microscopic level, as is hinted in the above excerpt. Option C is the answer.
D: Option D, though not entirely incorrect, is not a direct extension of the arguments presented in the passage. Unlike Option C, D has not been hinted at in the passage. Hence, it can be eliminated too.

We will check which option when proven false will support the passage:
A: Robots becoming a part of everyday life is neither supported nor opposed in the passage. Thus, Option A is not the answer.
B: Instead of gears and wires, it’s assembled from two kinds of molecules - some that love water and some that avoid it - which interact to allow the bot to skate on top of a pond.
Option B has been clearly mentioned in the passage. Hence, if it is proven false, it will contradict the passage. Option B is not the answer.
C: One team of researchers, for example, has developed a different kind of hydrogel that becomes sticky when exposed to a low-voltage zap of electricity and then stops being sticky when the electricity is switched off.
Option C has been mentioned in the passage. Hence, if it is proven false, it will contradict the passage. Option C is not the answer.
D: No, they won’t be invading our bodies and turning us into Sentinels...
Option D is just the opposite of what has been given in the passage. Hence, if Option D is false, it would support the passage.

The author first introduces an arc of a comic book where nano-robots are used. He then goes on to show how that fiction is increasingly becoming reality. He then goes on to describe the various features present in today's nano-robots. Option C comes the closest in capturing this point, and hence, is the answer.
Option A is just one of the features of the modern nano-robots and is not the focus of the passage.
Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic materials are not the main point of contention here. Option B can be eliminated.
The author uses the example of X-men to introduce the development of technology today. His main contention is not the content of the comic books and how it would be affected by recent developments in technology. Option D can be eliminated too.

The passage starts by highlighting that the term 'unconscious', widely held today, came in conception not long ago. With the coining of this term, many unrelated activities/ideas found a common umbrella under which they could be categorized and also allowed them to prosper. The author then writes the following line, which gives us a clear conception of the main theme:
Thus, the massive introduction of the term unconscious by Hartmann in 1869 appeared to focalize many stray thoughts, affording a temporary feeling that a crucial step had been taken forward, a comprehensive knowledge gained a knowledge that required only further elaboration, explication, and unfolding in order to bring in a bounty of higher understanding.
Thus, the passage is about the assembly of many stray thoughts under the banner of the unconscious. Option C perfectly captures this, and hence, is the answer.
The author does not primarily deal with the unconscious as a part of the mind. Nor does he focus upon the expansion of the vocabulary of the mind and the soul. Thus, Options A and B can be rejected.
'Psychical research' is not the main focus of the passage. The author says that the term allowed certain 'psychic' activities to flourish. He does not focus on the term as an object of psychical research. Hence, Option D can be eliminated too.

Unconscious is the primary focus of the passage. Since D does not have that as a main point, it can be eliminated.
Dreams find a single, small mention as an example in the passage. Hence, Option A can be eliminated too.
Insanity finds a small mention in the passage and is not a main point. Hence, Option B is incorrect.
The author initially deals with how the enrichment of vocabulary on the matter of unconscious has a deep effect and how this later became a subject of psychoanalysis. Hence, Option C is the correct answer.

Let us try to break the sentence down and interpret its meaning:
“The enrichments of literary and intellectual language led to an altered understanding of the meanings that underlie time-honored expressions and traditional catchwords.”
In simple words |Enrichments of language| led to |change in understanding| of | time-honoured expressions|. 
In the context of the passage, the line means that when the terms related to 'the unconscious' were coined, they enriched the vocabulary of the language and this, in turn, changes the meanings of many old expressions related to this term.
Option D comes the closest in capturing the meaning, and hence, is the answer.
B: The meanings of the catchwords were altered. They were not enriched. Can be eliminated.
C: The catchwords did not cause a change. Their own meaning was changed. Can be eliminated.

The “unconscious” burst the shell of conventional language, coined as it had been to embody the fleeting ideas and the shifting conceptions of several generations until, finally, it became fixed and defined in specialized terms within the realm of medical psychology and Freudian psychoanalysis.
In the passage, the author has clearly outlined the importance of linguistic developments in helping the knowledge of the field grow. Since the option is not extreme in certainty ('may' not have happened), Option A can be inferred.
Significantly, most if not all of these practices (for example, hypnotism in surgery or psychological magnetism) originated in the waning years of the eighteenth century and during the early decades of the nineteenth century, as did some of the disciplines (such as psychology and psychical research). The majority of topics too were either new or assumed hitherto unknown colors. Thus, before 1790, few if any spoke, in medical terms, of the affinity between creative genius and the hallucinations of the insane . . .
From the above excerpt, we can infer that the affinity between genius and insanity was not looked into before the 18th century.
At the same time, once coined, powerful new ideas attracted to themselves a whole host of seemingly unrelated issues, practices, and experiences, creating a peculiar network of preoccupations that as a group had not existed before.
The above excerpt and the examples the author provides after this excerpt can help us infer that as the knowledge of the mind grew, unrelated activities found a common title. Option D can be inferred.
The passage does not imply anywhere that the new conceptions were able to provide new knowledge only because some fields were established. Option C is out of the scope of the passage and cannot be inferred.

A: We cannot infer that the 'arrow of time' has not been tested for atomic clocks. Option A can be eliminated.
B: It has been given in the Option that since quantum computers place more emphasis on their clock's accuracy, they would produce more heat.
The researchers found that as they increased the clock’s accuracy, the heat produced in the system grew, increasing the entropy of its surroundings by jostling nearby particles...
The passage supports this inference. B is the answer.
C: The relationship that the researchers found is a limit on the accuracy of a clock, so it doesn’t mean that a clock that creates the most possible entropy would be maximally accurate - hence a large, inefficient grandfather clock isn’t more precise than an atomic clock.
The passage gives a specific example of an inefficient grandfather clock. We cannot infer whether all grandfather clocks are efficient or not.
D: The clock consists of a 50-nanometre-thick membrane of silicon nitride, vibrated by an electric current.
The clock uses electric current to produce vibrations and not the other way around. Option D can be eliminated.

The relationship that the researchers found is a limit on the accuracy of a clock, so it doesn’t mean that a clock that creates the most possible entropy would be maximally accurate - hence a large, inefficient grandfather clock isn’t more precise than an atomic clock. “It’s a bit like fuel use in a car. Just because I’m using more fuel doesn’t mean that I’m going faster or further,” says Hube
In the above excerpt, the author gives an example that though a large, inefficient grandfather clock would produce more entropy, it is not necessarily more precise than an atomic clock. Hence, if a clock produces more entropy, it does not mean that it would be more precise than a clock that produces less entropy. Then the mentioned statement is given as an example. If a car is going faster or further, it will definitely use more fuel. But if a car is using more fuel, then the converse is not true. It could just be possible that the mileage of the car is low. Option A comes the closest to capturing this idea, and hence, is the answer. 

There is an evident confusion between Option B and Option C; however, the official answer key marked Option B as the correct choice. Let us try to rationalise this decision. Options A and D can be understood from the passage:
Option A follows from {...We can’t be sure yet that these results are actually universal, though, because there are many types of clocks for which the relationship between accuracy and entropy haven’t been tested...}
Option D follows from {...Understanding this relationship could be helpful for designing clocks in the future, particularly those used in quantum computers and other devices where both accuracy and temperature are crucial, says Ares...}
Option C: Pay heed to the following excerpt from the passage - {...The relationship that the researchers found is a limit on the accuracy of a clock, so it doesn’t mean that a clock that creates the most possible entropy would be maximally accurate - hence a large, inefficient grandfather clock isn’t more precise than an atomic clock. “It’s a bit like fuel use in a car. Just because I’m using more fuel doesn’t mean that I’m going faster or further,” says Huber...}
A simple correlation is being highlighted: higher accuracy means higher entropy; however, this does not necessarily imply that higher entropy translates to higher accuracy. The example of a grandfather clock is highlighted to emphasise this point: we will come across higher entropy in this case, but it does not mean that the grandfather clock is any more accurate than an atomic clock. In a way, the author tries to point out that the accuracy could very well be similar. This accuracy is not in absolute terms but in the way accuracy is defined by the author earlier in the passage. Thus, in a way, Option C matches the idea conveyed by the author
Option B: Pay heed to the following excerpt from the passage - {...The researchers found that as they increased the clock’s accuracy, the heat produced in the system grew, increasing the entropy of its surroundings by jostling nearby particles . . . “If a clock is more accurate, you are paying for it somehow,” says Ares. In this case, you pay for it by pouring more ordered energy into the clock, which is then converted into entropy. “By measuring time, we are increasing the entropy of the universe,” says Ares...}
The discussion about the price paid appears to be distinct from the earlier segment wherein the author states that when we push for higher accuracy, we will come across more heat. While talking about the cost at which higher accuracy is achieved, the author states that we "pour in" more 'ordered energy' and this subsequently leads to higher entropy. Hence, the focus seems to be on the connection between accuracy and entropy than between heat and its role in creating higher accuracy. We cannot conclusively infer that the "ordered energy" stated in the latter half refers to the "heat" mentioned earlier on. Thus, claiming that heat is the price we pay for generating higher accuracy might be difficult to substantiate. Hence, Option B is distorted. 

The maximum accuracy of a clock is directly related to how much disorder, or entropy, it creates every time it ticks.
The author highlights in the beginning of the passage that the accuracy associated with measuring time is directly related to how much entropy it creates while ticking. The author then goes on to talk about the relationship between accuracy and entropy, and how quantum mechanics and thermodynamics come in play here. Thus, the main keywords are the measurement of time, accuracy and entropy. Option C is the answer.
Electric current is just a small part of an example presented in the passage. Option A can be eliminated. The same is the case for Silicon Nitride and Membrane. These are just keywords associated with a particular experiment/example presented in the passage and are not important for the passage as a whole.