CAT 2020 Slot 2: Past Year Question Paper - CAT MCQ

This is the easiest question of the passage. The clue to the right answer is given in the last part of the first paragraph. Reading that part is enough to spot the right choice. It says there are three variables present in an aggressive act. They are: the aggressor, the circumstances, and the victim.

We must remember that this is an except question. We must pick the choice that is not presented as the author’s argument. Choice 1 goes out because the author discusses it towards the end of the passage. Men have higher levels of testosterone, resulting in higher aggression. The second sentence of the last paragraph provides clue for choice 2. Thus 2 is also eliminated. The first paragraph elaborately describes the varying nature of aggression. Thus 3 also is eliminated. The moderation of death instinct is nowhere discussed in the passage, although the presence of death instinct is discussed. Thus 4 is the right choice.

Though this is an except question, this question can be easily answered if we look for the phrase “neural regulation” in the passage. The neural inhibition has been discussed with regards to aggressive impulses, not the hormone testosterone. Thus 2 is definitely not implied by the author. Once we have found the right answer there is no need to verify the others. The rest of the options, however, do find indirect reference in the passage.

The point made by the author in the quoted remark is that you may be aggressive without any real feelings of anger or animosity. Why? Because inflicting pain is not the objective, but serves some other end. Thus 3 directly becomes the right choice. 

This is a passage easy to read and understand. The very first question is author’s tone in the given sentence. Indignant means angry, but there is no anger as the author is relating to something that used to happen 400 years ago. The author is not trying to be analytical, rather he is trying to be ironical. Irony is used to highlight a situation by using contrast in an amusing way. His intention is not to discuss the contrast between peasant life and pirate life way back in the 16th century. 3 is the best choice.

The author by giving the example of Vasco da Gama and the east India company to suggest that they both were not very different from piracy. Options 2 brings out that suggestion appropriately. 1 goes out because the author does consider them as pirates. 3 might look like a good choice but the phrase “laid the ground for modern piracy” brings something that is not implied or stated in the passage. 4 could have been another close choice, but the author’s intention is not to compare the disorganized piracy of today with the organized piracy of the past. His intention is to compare the disorganized small piracy of the past with the renegades of today. It is small Vs small, and not small Vs big. 2 is the right answer.

At the end of the fourth paragraph the author says that “root causes of piracy today are the same as they were a couple of hundred years ago”. What were the causes a couple of hundred years ago? According to the author it is poverty. Thus he believes that eliminating poverty will solve the problem. Thus 3 is the right choice. All the other choices are mentioned only to show that they haven’t brought the desired results.

We have to pick the choice that is not the cause behind the rise in piracy. 1 goes out because it is the cause. The first sentence of the fourth paragraph offers the clue. The third paragraph says that “the main motive for piracy has always been a combination of need and greed...”. Thus 3 also is correct, as a cause of piracy. The fourth paragraph has clue to option 4 as well. Thus 2 is the right choice. The author believes that surveillance can never be an effect solution because it is not addressing the root cause.

This is so simple a question that one will not feel like marking the right choice just because it is too straightforward. The author in the third paragraph says that the study of visual culture is very important to understand the agents, practices and institutions that put images to work. Then he further goes to say that “no amount of social analysis (visual culture) can account fully for the existence of Michelangelo or Leonardo. They were unique creators. Choice 4 is very close to this statement. It is so easy that one is highly likely to miss out on this. Choice 2 is close but a little absurd. It says that because they are genius they cannot be subjected to social analysis. The author says that we may have social analysis of these artists but no matter how much we analyse; the analysis may not be enough.

This question asks us to interpret a phrase given in the passage. For meaningful visual experience, we need the conditions, which operate on the foundation of covenants. 3 precisely captures that meaning. In fact, the question asks us to pick the option that is similar in content to the one given in the question. 1 could have been close but it distorts the idea by saying “when there is foundational condition established in images”. It suggests that the foundation is established in images. Only 3 correctly rephrases the whole idea given in the question

This was an easy question. Two keywords are very important, one is visual images or imagery, and the other is visual culture or practices. Both these are important as per the first paragraph of the passage and only in choice 3 can we find these two keywords. Thus 3 is the best choice. 4 misses on imagery or visual images. 2 misses on the visual culture. 1 misses both visual culture and images.

We have to mark the choice that is not a valid inference. 2 can be inferred from last paragraph. 4 can be inferred from the first paragraph, and also the paragraph that discusses Michelangelo and Leonardo. In the third last paragraph the author says “how artifacts contribute to the construction of a world...”. Thus 3 also can be inferred. 1 cannot be inferred because structures of perception have been discussed as a physiological process, not as an institutional structure. Thus 1 is farfetched and the right choice as it cannot be inferred.

To mark the correct answer, we must understand the meaning of epiphenomenon, which means a secondary effect or a by-product. 3 is the right choice because supplemental means “provided in addition to”. Thus by-product=supplemental.

The question asks us to pick a choice that the author would be most supportive of. 1 goes out because the author in the last paragraph says that localised renewable energy systems is unlikely to generate high returns for investors. 2 can be definitely inferred because the author clearly says at the end of second last para that disposal of toxic waste has perpetuated social injustice. Thus 2 is the right choice. For many 3 might be a tempting choice, but it is beside the point. The author is not concerned with more environment friendly carbon based fuels. He is talking about renewable energy sources, and the social and financial costs behind it. The whole discussion in the passage is based on the premise that we have already taken the path low carbon based renewable energy path. So the suggestion in 3 is pointless. 4 goes out because the author is not favouring any study. He wants resolution to the problem, so he wants action.

This is a slightly difficult question. But 1 definitely supports the author. It must go out. We can find the evidence in the second paragraph. The second sentence of the last paragraph provides evidence for the 2nd choice. The third choice has already been inferred while solving the earlier question. It can be found in the last sentence of the second last para. 4 is the right answer because there is no reference for it in the passage. We have to mark the answer based on the evidence that we see in the passage.

This is the easiest question of the passage. We have to first falsify the choice and then see whether it is supporting the arguments in the passage. Choice 4, when falsified, says that renewable energy systems have an environmental impact. If that is the case, the author’s arguments find support in the passage. Thus 4 is the right choice. 1 goes out because the author says in the passage that renewable energy systems are not as profitable as nonrenewable energy systems. The Last sentence of the first paragraph provides evidence for this. The profitability aspect has been discussed in the last paragraph of the passage. Thus it takes care of both 2 and 3, because if the profitability is low, it means that the expense is high, and therefore economically unsustainable. Thus all 1,2 and 3 support the author without being negated, whereas 4 supports the author only when it is negated

This question is an easy question because to find the answer we have to read only the first paragraph. The author says “...but renewables need to be further scrutinized...”. This suggests that the author has some reservations or doubts pertaining to renewable energy. Thus 3 is the right choice. A very easy question indeed. 1 goes out because it talks of nonrenewable energy systems. 2 goes out because the author is equally concerned about environmental and social impact of renewable energy systems. 4 finds no mention in the passage and the first paragraph.

This is a pretty interesting question. The author says “renewable energy can be produced at the household or neighbourhood level...but such small scale localised production is unlikely to generate high returns for investors.” This is a double edged sword. 2 goes out because efficiency has not at all been discussed in the last paragraph. Corporate control is indeed discussed but not in reference to democratic distribution of energy. Thus 3 goes out. 1 goes out because renewable energy has been discussed as a single idea, without any forms and types. Thus 1 also is a distortion

The official answer for this question seems to be a little weird. Though 4 is the official answer, we believe that sentence 5 should have been the right choice. 2 will open the paragraph. 1 and 4 focus on the victim’s past. 1 says “victim’s trauma after the assault rarely gets the attention...” and 4 says “even the most charitable question seems to focus on the victim’s past...”. 3 finally concludes by saying “the result is that we don’t have much of a vocabulary for what happens in a victim’s life after the painful past...”. 5 should have been the right answer, but the official answer is 4.

This question is a difficult one, where two possible sequences might be correct. There is no doubt that 42 is one pair and 13 is the other. The point is which will come first 13 or 42. The official answer says 1342, though we believe that 4213 is just equally logical a sequence.

This is a question of moderate difficulty. 1 points at some truth. We must try to find the sentence that connects with 1. How can we monopolize and protect data? By having intellectual property rights. Thus 31 form a pair. 4 adds another idea to the story; it says “alongside the world of monopolised information (already discussed in 31), we have information as a social good, incapable of being owned. 5 concludes by saying that “information good are freely replicable....it can be copied and pasted infinitely”. In the light of intellectual property rights, and free information goods, 2 seems to be the odd one out.

The passage has three important keywords: sovereign equality, sense of insecurity, and what was done to overcome that insecurity. The passage tells us that people delivered their rights to a sovereign power in return for the sovereign’s provision of security. This was the only way to overcome the fear of insecurity. After all there is a give and take happening, and therefore there is a transaction. Thus 1 is the best choice. 2 misses on the people’s sense of insecurity. 3 goes out because limiting the power of papacy is not the essence of the discussion. Choice 4 misses the idea of give and take, people give their rights to the sovereign in return for his protection. It misses the crucial word “transactional relationship”.

This is one of the easiest questions. 2 introduces the idea of VLT and mentions what it has. 1 comes as an addition and mentions the additional things that VLT has. 4 talks about what happens when these are combined. 3 is the result of that combination. Thus 2143 is the right sequence. A very easy question indeed!

In the passage the author compares the two factors based on which humans make decisions. The first is intuition and the other is information. The author seems to be comparing the two without any preference. 1 goes out because it inaccurately says that “we choose intuition or information based on the time available”. Nothing of this sort has been given in the passage. Time in not the causative factor here. 2 says “it is better”. Since the author has not given any preference, it would be wrong to say which one is better. Thus 2 also goes out. 3 is the right summary, and captures the essence by stating that the difference is differential speed and ability to provide a rationale. 4 just focuses on intuition, and ignores the other factor entirely.

There are three important keywords in this paragraph: the challenge posed by rural-urban continuum, the objective methodology with one or two metrics may not be enough to capture the wide diversity, it may require an element of human judgement. 2 captures all the keywords succinctly. 1 misses the element of human judgement, 3 also misses on the same. 4 goes out because it is not about the judgment of objective methodology, but human judgement coming as an additional factor to aid the methodology.

This might a little tricky question, but without doubt 2 will open the paragraph. The resultant ionising radiation in 4 is a consequence of large scale nuclear fission mentioned in 2. Thus 24 form a pair. 4 and 1 are contrasting ideas, something that justifies the presence of the conjunction “but” in 1. The resultant ionising radiation has become the most serious agent of pollution... but the attention of the layman has been captured by the atom bomb....3 comes as the appropriate conclusion. 3 can’t come after 4 because both 4 and 3 talk nuclear fission, which does not justify the presence of the word “however” in 3. We use however to contrast two ideas, but both 4 and 3 talk of peaceful uses of atomic energy. Nuclear fission is used for purposes other than atomic bomb. Thus 2413 is the right sequence.

As we need to use only two colours, in any row or column these two coloured beads will be
placed alternately like

So we cannot place Red coloured beads at position 1 or two as between any two Red beads there must at least two beads (at least one green and at least one Blue). Hence, we can use only Green and Blue coloured beads.

We can have two possible configurations:

Configuration 1: Green bead is placed at top left corner

Configuration 2: Blue bead is placed at top left corner

Between Any two Red beads there must be at least two Beads. So any Row or column there can be maximum two red beads. If we place two red beads in each row then two columns will have three red bead which cannot be accepted.

The above configuration is not correct.

So in the third row we will place only one Red bead at the middle of the third row. Also we will adjust other rows so that between any two Red beads there are at least two beads in any column.

So maximum 9 Red beads are possible in any configuration. At remaining places Green and Blue coloured beads can be placed in such way that all the conditions given are satisfied. There are multiple configurations are possible. One of the configurations is given as below.

To minimise number of Blue beads we need to maximise number of Red and Green beads. From the previous question solution, Maximum no. Red beads can be 9. The row in which has two red beads, we will place two green and one Blue bead additionally.

The row with only one red bead we will place two green and two blue beads additionally. So overall there will be minimum 6 Blue beads.

We can place maximum 6 more beads as shown below.