Sample Test: Verbal Aptitude- 1 - CAT MCQ

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the given question.

Clothing production has been increasing steadily at a yearly rate of 4.5 percent, and the demand for fashion isn't letting up. In the past four decades, the global consumption of clothing has doubled. In some countries, the amount of clothing purchased per year is double what is discarded. This increased consumption comes at a cost to the environment, filling landfills and heightening greenhouse gas emissions.
As the trend increases, though, scholars have also noted that individuals view clothing as part of their identity. To better understand how clothing consumption affects the environment and consumers, scholar Kate Fletcher examined environmental and anthropological data from nine countries and several case studies to determine how sustainable fashion could change the consumer-clothes relationship.
Demand for clothing is often not one of necessity but is instead more of a social phenomenon, which Fletcher refers to as "instant gratification through consumption." For fashion to become more sustainable, designers will have to consider the consumer's relationship to clothes.
Fletcher's definition of sustainable fashion is twofold: it involves using more sustainable materials as well as designing clothes that are meant to last and to be enjoyed for a long time. Sustainable materials may be fabrics that give off low emissions, or use less water or energy to produce, and are durable enough to be worn again and again.
Durability extends beyond holding up to wear and tear—clothing can also be designed for the wearer to form new relationships with their clothes over time. As Fletcher writes, "Simply put, expending resources and effort to extend the lives of products pays few dividends unless the users of those pieces take advantage of the benefits provided by their longer life and this, in turn, acts to slow consumption."
Fletcher used a case study to see how durable designs work in action. A woman gifted a well-made dress to her neighbour, who proceeded to share the dress with her three daughters. They also shared the dress with their mother's sister and grandmother. Ultimately, six people got use of this dress over forty years.
Through this study, Fletcher highlights the social nature of fashion as a leading way to influence people to wear and purchase more sustainable items: "What one person chooses to wear, and to wear for a long time, is also affected by the decisions and actions of others." Having enough sustainable options isn't the issue. According to Fletcher, "Long-life garments exist, but…their extended lives are determined more by an ideology of use than by a garment's physical robustness."
While there have been some gains in the world of sustainable fashion, the demand for clothes surpasses current efforts. The fashion industry is still a leading cause of global emissions and continues to cause negative effects on land, water, and climate. Fletcher concludes by highlighting the importance of consumer action in the realm of sustainable fashion: "Durability involves people."

Q. The author of the passage will agree with all the statements below, EXCEPT:

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

Ethicists are still confronted by the traditional questions that have plagued them since the ancients. What does it mean to act, and to act well? How do we determine which actions are those which are moral, and which fall outside this sphere? And how do we negotiate the priority of all of these questions?
These, and many others, are questions of philosophical inquiry whose answers have tremendous ramifications. However in the modern philosophical context, which has been marked by declining religiosity and even a belief in rationality, they have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming. At the same time, there is a paradoxical resurgence of interest in universalism within the international legal context and the discourse of human rights, which at this point lack a firm philosophical foundation.
Unfortunately, many of these movements appeal only to prudential arguments at best, and abstract pleas for the realization of human dignity at worst. Yet many of these notions, such as that of the innate dignity of the human being, possess an intuitive power which cannot be dismissed easily. In the absence of certainty for such intuitions it may be helpful to first ask: what are the power dynamics and systems of knowledge in our modern world, and what are their relationships to concepts of morality in general?
Contributing originally to the discourse of modernity, reconceptualization of temporality, and a reexamination of time's connection to language, would allow us to better understand the nature of systems of knowledge. Language both represents and maintains the particular notions and internal rules of a paradigm.
The concept of development within systems of knowledge, henceforth called paradigms, would be better understood were we to embrace a broader, organic concept of time more fluid, dynamic, and interconnected — like a self-sealing system rather than like the Newtonian perception of time. Heideggerian term of an "ecstatic" concept of time may be ascribed to this notion, a time of intense emotions experienced during sleep or while being in a reverie, a time beyond regiment and control. Within paradigms, the notion of a goal or endpoint can powerfully affect the generation and evolution of the paradigm itself.
One prominent philosophical example is the way in which ideal theories of the state in Communist theory were considered not simply a goal to be striven towards, but the inevitable endpoint of the dialectics of history. A less esoteric modern example might be the way in which modern physics strives to fit the requirements of a Unified Field Theory, or Theory of Everything as Stephen Hawking characterizes it, where all the components which shall make up this theory are known in advance.
This notion of ecstatic time in which the future requirements of paradigms have as much of an impact on their development as rules established in the past is analogous to the way in which nano technology systems dictate necessary developments from a notional future to past information structures.
The concepts we have of knowledge and our methods of understanding it would be altered somewhat by this premise. These paradigms of thought are insufficiently self-reflective, which has profound consequences when it comes to understanding the world, and ultimately, acting upon it.

Q. 'However in the modern philosophical context, which has been marked by declining religiosity and even a belief in rationality, they (philosophical questions) have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming'. Which one of the following interpretations of this sentence would be closest in meaning to the original?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

Ethicists are still confronted by the traditional questions that have plagued them since the ancients. What does it mean to act, and to act well? How do we determine which actions are those which are moral, and which fall outside this sphere? And how do we negotiate the priority of all of these questions?
These, and many others, are questions of philosophical inquiry whose answers have tremendous ramifications. However in the modern philosophical context, which has been marked by declining religiosity and even a belief in rationality, they have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming. At the same time, there is a paradoxical resurgence of interest in universalism within the international legal context and the discourse of human rights, which at this point lack a firm philosophical foundation.
Unfortunately, many of these movements appeal only to prudential arguments at best, and abstract pleas for the realization of human dignity at worst. Yet many of these notions, such as that of the innate dignity of the human being, possess an intuitive power which cannot be dismissed easily. In the absence of certainty for such intuitions it may be helpful to first ask: what are the power dynamics and systems of knowledge in our modern world, and what are their relationships to concepts of morality in general?
Contributing originally to the discourse of modernity, reconceptualization of temporality, and a reexamination of time's connection to language, would allow us to better understand the nature of systems of knowledge. Language both represents and maintains the particular notions and internal rules of a paradigm.
The concept of development within systems of knowledge, henceforth called paradigms, would be better understood were we to embrace a broader, organic concept of time more fluid, dynamic, and interconnected — like a self-sealing system rather than like the Newtonian perception of time. Heideggerian term of an "ecstatic" concept of time may be ascribed to this notion, a time of intense emotions experienced during sleep or while being in a reverie, a time beyond regiment and control. Within paradigms, the notion of a goal or endpoint can powerfully affect the generation and evolution of the paradigm itself.
One prominent philosophical example is the way in which ideal theories of the state in Communist theory were considered not simply a goal to be striven towards, but the inevitable endpoint of the dialectics of history. A less esoteric modern example might be the way in which modern physics strives to fit the requirements of a Unified Field Theory, or Theory of Everything as Stephen Hawking characterizes it, where all the components which shall make up this theory are known in advance.
This notion of ecstatic time in which the future requirements of paradigms have as much of an impact on their development as rules established in the past is analogous to the way in which nano technology systems dictate necessary developments from a notional future to past information structures.
The concepts we have of knowledge and our methods of understanding it would be altered somewhat by this premise. These paradigms of thought are insufficiently self-reflective, which has profound consequences when it comes to understanding the world, and ultimately, acting upon it.

Q. Which one of the following statements best summarises the author's position about human rights discussions?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

Ethicists are still confronted by the traditional questions that have plagued them since the ancients. What does it mean to act, and to act well? How do we determine which actions are those which are moral, and which fall outside this sphere? And how do we negotiate the priority of all of these questions?
These, and many others, are questions of philosophical inquiry whose answers have tremendous ramifications. However in the modern philosophical context, which has been marked by declining religiosity and even a belief in rationality, they have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming. At the same time, there is a paradoxical resurgence of interest in universalism within the international legal context and the discourse of human rights, which at this point lack a firm philosophical foundation.
Unfortunately, many of these movements appeal only to prudential arguments at best, and abstract pleas for the realization of human dignity at worst. Yet many of these notions, such as that of the innate dignity of the human being, possess an intuitive power which cannot be dismissed easily. In the absence of certainty for such intuitions it may be helpful to first ask: what are the power dynamics and systems of knowledge in our modern world, and what are their relationships to concepts of morality in general?
Contributing originally to the discourse of modernity, reconceptualization of temporality, and a reexamination of time's connection to language, would allow us to better understand the nature of systems of knowledge. Language both represents and maintains the particular notions and internal rules of a paradigm.
The concept of development within systems of knowledge, henceforth called paradigms, would be better understood were we to embrace a broader, organic concept of time more fluid, dynamic, and interconnected — like a self-sealing system rather than like the Newtonian perception of time. Heideggerian term of an "ecstatic" concept of time may be ascribed to this notion, a time of intense emotions experienced during sleep or while being in a reverie, a time beyond regiment and control. Within paradigms, the notion of a goal or endpoint can powerfully affect the generation and evolution of the paradigm itself.
One prominent philosophical example is the way in which ideal theories of the state in Communist theory were considered not simply a goal to be striven towards, but the inevitable endpoint of the dialectics of history. A less esoteric modern example might be the way in which modern physics strives to fit the requirements of a Unified Field Theory, or Theory of Everything as Stephen Hawking characterizes it, where all the components which shall make up this theory are known in advance.
This notion of ecstatic time in which the future requirements of paradigms have as much of an impact on their development as rules established in the past is analogous to the way in which nano technology systems dictate necessary developments from a notional future to past information structures.
The concepts we have of knowledge and our methods of understanding it would be altered somewhat by this premise. These paradigms of thought are insufficiently self-reflective, which has profound consequences when it comes to understanding the world, and ultimately, acting upon it.

Q. According to the passage, all of the following are true about ecstatic time EXCEPT that:

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.

Ethicists are still confronted by the traditional questions that have plagued them since the ancients. What does it mean to act, and to act well? How do we determine which actions are those which are moral, and which fall outside this sphere? And how do we negotiate the priority of all of these questions?
These, and many others, are questions of philosophical inquiry whose answers have tremendous ramifications. However in the modern philosophical context, which has been marked by declining religiosity and even a belief in rationality, they have been cut adrift from the context out of which they developed, searching for a foundation which is not forthcoming. At the same time, there is a paradoxical resurgence of interest in universalism within the international legal context and the discourse of human rights, which at this point lack a firm philosophical foundation.
Unfortunately, many of these movements appeal only to prudential arguments at best, and abstract pleas for the realization of human dignity at worst. Yet many of these notions, such as that of the innate dignity of the human being, possess an intuitive power which cannot be dismissed easily. In the absence of certainty for such intuitions it may be helpful to first ask: what are the power dynamics and systems of knowledge in our modern world, and what are their relationships to concepts of morality in general?
Contributing originally to the discourse of modernity, reconceptualization of temporality, and a reexamination of time's connection to language, would allow us to better understand the nature of systems of knowledge. Language both represents and maintains the particular notions and internal rules of a paradigm.
The concept of development within systems of knowledge, henceforth called paradigms, would be better understood were we to embrace a broader, organic concept of time more fluid, dynamic, and interconnected — like a self-sealing system rather than like the Newtonian perception of time. Heideggerian term of an "ecstatic" concept of time may be ascribed to this notion, a time of intense emotions experienced during sleep or while being in a reverie, a time beyond regiment and control. Within paradigms, the notion of a goal or endpoint can powerfully affect the generation and evolution of the paradigm itself.
One prominent philosophical example is the way in which ideal theories of the state in Communist theory were considered not simply a goal to be striven towards, but the inevitable endpoint of the dialectics of history. A less esoteric modern example might be the way in which modern physics strives to fit the requirements of a Unified Field Theory, or Theory of Everything as Stephen Hawking characterizes it, where all the components which shall make up this theory are known in advance.
This notion of ecstatic time in which the future requirements of paradigms have as much of an impact on their development as rules established in the past is analogous to the way in which nano technology systems dictate necessary developments from a notional future to past information structures.
The concepts we have of knowledge and our methods of understanding it would be altered somewhat by this premise. These paradigms of thought are insufficiently self-reflective, which has profound consequences when it comes to understanding the world, and ultimately, acting upon it.

Q. Which of the following accurately depicts an endpoint of a paradigm affecting the evolution of the paradigm itself?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

So far, the history of hypnotism has given us two manifestations, or methods, that of passes and playing upon the imagination in various ways, used by Mesmer, and that of physical means, such as looking at a bright objects, used by Braid. Both of these methods are still in use, and though hundreds of scientific men, including many physicians, have studied the subject for years, no essentially new principle has been discovered, though the details of hypnotic operation have been thoroughly classified and many minor elements of interest have been developed. All these make a body of evidence which will assist us in answering the question, what is hypnotism.
Modern scientific study has pretty conclusively established the following facts:

• Idiots, babies under three years old, and hopelessly insane people cannot be hypnotised.
• No one can be hypnotised unless the operator can make him concentrate his attention for a reasonable length of time.
• Concentration of attention, whatever the method of producing hypnotism, is absolutely necessary.
• Persons not easily hypnotised are those said to be neurotic (or those affected with hysteria). By 'hysteria' is not meant nervous excitability, necessarily. In medical science 'hysteria' is an irregular action of the nervous system. It is a tendency to nervous disease which in severe cases may lead to insanity.

The expert hypnotiser often tries to rummage through the human mind, looking for small pieces of evidence that might link turbulence today to occurrences forgotten. Dr. Ernest Hart says :
''It is a common delusion that the mesmerist or hypnotiser counts for anything in the experiment. The operator, whether priest, physician, charlatan, self-deluded enthusiast, or conscious impostor, is not the source of any occult influence, does not possess any mysterious power, and plays only a very secondary and insignificant part in the chain of phenomena observed. There exist at the present time many individuals who claim for themselves, and some who make a living by so doing, a peculiar property or power as potent mesmerisers, hypnotisers, magnetisers, or electro-biologists. I hope to be able to prove, what I firmly hold, both from my own personal experience and experiment, that there is no such thing as a potent mesmeric influence, no such power resident in any one person more than another; that a glass of water, a tree, a stick, or a lime-light can mesmerise as effectually as can any individual. A clever hypnotiser means only a person who is acquainted with the physical or mental tricks by which the hypnotic condition is produced; or sometimes an unconscious impostor who is unaware of the very trifling part for which he is cast in the play."

Q. It can be inferred from the passage that hypnotism is effective in each of the following cases EXCEPT:

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

So far, the history of hypnotism has given us two manifestations, or methods, that of passes and playing upon the imagination in various ways, used by Mesmer, and that of physical means, such as looking at a bright objects, used by Braid. Both of these methods are still in use, and though hundreds of scientific men, including many physicians, have studied the subject for years, no essentially new principle has been discovered, though the details of hypnotic operation have been thoroughly classified and many minor elements of interest have been developed. All these make a body of evidence which will assist us in answering the question, what is hypnotism.
Modern scientific study has pretty conclusively established the following facts:

• Idiots, babies under three years old, and hopelessly insane people cannot be hypnotised.
• No one can be hypnotised unless the operator can make him concentrate his attention for a reasonable length of time.
• Concentration of attention, whatever the method of producing hypnotism, is absolutely necessary.
• Persons not easily hypnotised are those said to be neurotic (or those affected with hysteria). By 'hysteria' is not meant nervous excitability, necessarily. In medical science 'hysteria' is an irregular action of the nervous system. It is a tendency to nervous disease which in severe cases may lead to insanity.

The expert hypnotiser often tries to rummage through the human mind, looking for small pieces of evidence that might link turbulence today to occurrences forgotten. Dr. Ernest Hart says :
''It is a common delusion that the mesmerist or hypnotiser counts for anything in the experiment. The operator, whether priest, physician, charlatan, self-deluded enthusiast, or conscious impostor, is not the source of any occult influence, does not possess any mysterious power, and plays only a very secondary and insignificant part in the chain of phenomena observed. There exist at the present time many individuals who claim for themselves, and some who make a living by so doing, a peculiar property or power as potent mesmerisers, hypnotisers, magnetisers, or electro-biologists. I hope to be able to prove, what I firmly hold, both from my own personal experience and experiment, that there is no such thing as a potent mesmeric influence, no such power resident in any one person more than another; that a glass of water, a tree, a stick, or a lime-light can mesmerise as effectually as can any individual. A clever hypnotiser means only a person who is acquainted with the physical or mental tricks by which the hypnotic condition is produced; or sometimes an unconscious impostor who is unaware of the very trifling part for which he is cast in the play."

Q. The author's labeling of a hypnotist as an "unconscious impostor" intends to buttress his claim that

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

So far, the history of hypnotism has given us two manifestations, or methods, that of passes and playing upon the imagination in various ways, used by Mesmer, and that of physical means, such as looking at a bright objects, used by Braid. Both of these methods are still in use, and though hundreds of scientific men, including many physicians, have studied the subject for years, no essentially new principle has been discovered, though the details of hypnotic operation have been thoroughly classified and many minor elements of interest have been developed. All these make a body of evidence which will assist us in answering the question, what is hypnotism.
Modern scientific study has pretty conclusively established the following facts:

• Idiots, babies under three years old, and hopelessly insane people cannot be hypnotised.
• No one can be hypnotised unless the operator can make him concentrate his attention for a reasonable length of time.
• Concentration of attention, whatever the method of producing hypnotism, is absolutely necessary.
• Persons not easily hypnotised are those said to be neurotic (or those affected with hysteria). By 'hysteria' is not meant nervous excitability, necessarily. In medical science 'hysteria' is an irregular action of the nervous system. It is a tendency to nervous disease which in severe cases may lead to insanity.

The expert hypnotiser often tries to rummage through the human mind, looking for small pieces of evidence that might link turbulence today to occurrences forgotten. Dr. Ernest Hart says :
''It is a common delusion that the mesmerist or hypnotiser counts for anything in the experiment. The operator, whether priest, physician, charlatan, self-deluded enthusiast, or conscious impostor, is not the source of any occult influence, does not possess any mysterious power, and plays only a very secondary and insignificant part in the chain of phenomena observed. There exist at the present time many individuals who claim for themselves, and some who make a living by so doing, a peculiar property or power as potent mesmerisers, hypnotisers, magnetisers, or electro-biologists. I hope to be able to prove, what I firmly hold, both from my own personal experience and experiment, that there is no such thing as a potent mesmeric influence, no such power resident in any one person more than another; that a glass of water, a tree, a stick, or a lime-light can mesmerise as effectually as can any individual. A clever hypnotiser means only a person who is acquainted with the physical or mental tricks by which the hypnotic condition is produced; or sometimes an unconscious impostor who is unaware of the very trifling part for which he is cast in the play."

Q. Which of the following options is similar to the work of a capable hypnotist as described in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

So far, the history of hypnotism has given us two manifestations, or methods, that of passes and playing upon the imagination in various ways, used by Mesmer, and that of physical means, such as looking at a bright objects, used by Braid. Both of these methods are still in use, and though hundreds of scientific men, including many physicians, have studied the subject for years, no essentially new principle has been discovered, though the details of hypnotic operation have been thoroughly classified and many minor elements of interest have been developed. All these make a body of evidence which will assist us in answering the question, what is hypnotism.
Modern scientific study has pretty conclusively established the following facts:

• Idiots, babies under three years old, and hopelessly insane people cannot be hypnotised.
• No one can be hypnotised unless the operator can make him concentrate his attention for a reasonable length of time.
• Concentration of attention, whatever the method of producing hypnotism, is absolutely necessary.
• Persons not easily hypnotised are those said to be neurotic (or those affected with hysteria). By 'hysteria' is not meant nervous excitability, necessarily. In medical science 'hysteria' is an irregular action of the nervous system. It is a tendency to nervous disease which in severe cases may lead to insanity.

The expert hypnotiser often tries to rummage through the human mind, looking for small pieces of evidence that might link turbulence today to occurrences forgotten. Dr. Ernest Hart says :
''It is a common delusion that the mesmerist or hypnotiser counts for anything in the experiment. The operator, whether priest, physician, charlatan, self-deluded enthusiast, or conscious impostor, is not the source of any occult influence, does not possess any mysterious power, and plays only a very secondary and insignificant part in the chain of phenomena observed. There exist at the present time many individuals who claim for themselves, and some who make a living by so doing, a peculiar property or power as potent mesmerisers, hypnotisers, magnetisers, or electro-biologists. I hope to be able to prove, what I firmly hold, both from my own personal experience and experiment, that there is no such thing as a potent mesmeric influence, no such power resident in any one person more than another; that a glass of water, a tree, a stick, or a lime-light can mesmerise as effectually as can any individual. A clever hypnotiser means only a person who is acquainted with the physical or mental tricks by which the hypnotic condition is produced; or sometimes an unconscious impostor who is unaware of the very trifling part for which he is cast in the play."

Q. Which of the following best describes the essential difference between the two historical approaches on mesmerism?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage.

The following speech was delivered by Catiline, a Roman politician and revolutionary, to his soldiers on the eve of the battle which resulted in his defeat and death.
I am well aware, soldiers, that words cannot inspire courage; and that a spiritless army cannot be rendered active, or a timid army valiant, by the speech of its commander. Whatever courage is in the heart of a man, whether from nature or from habit, so much will be shown by him in the field; and on him whom neither glory nor danger can move, exhortation is bestowed in vain; for the terror in his breast stops his ears.
I have called you together, however, to give you a few instructions, and to explain to you, at the same time, my reasons for the course which I have adopted. Two armies of the enemy, one on the side of Rome, and the other on that of Gaul, oppose our progress; while the want of corn, and of other necessaries, prevents us from remaining, however strongly we may desire to remain, in our present position. Whithersoever we would go, we must open a passage with our swords. I conjure you, therefore, to maintain a brave and resolute spirit; and to remember, when you advance to battle, that on your own right hands depend riches, honour, and glory, with the enjoyment of your liberty and of your country. If we conquer, all will be safe; we shall have provisions in abundance, and the colonies and corporate towns will open their gates to us. But if we lose the victory through want of courage, those same places will turn against us; for neither place nor friend will protect him whom his arms have not protected. Besides, soldiers, the same exigency does not press upon our adversaries, as presses upon us; we fight for our country, for our liberty, for our life; they contend for what but little concerns them, the power of a small party. Attack them, therefore, with so much the greater confidence, and call to mind your achievements of old.
We might, with the utmost ignominy, have passed the rest of our days in exile. Some of you, after losing your property, might have waited at Rome for assistance from others. But because such a life, to men of spirit, was disgusting and unendurable, you resolved upon your present course. If you wish to quit it, you must exert all your resolution, for none but conquerors have exchanged war for peace. To hope for safety in flight, when you have turned away from the enemy the arms by which the body is defended, is indeed madness. In battle, those who are most afraid are always in most danger; but courage is equivalent to a rampart.
When I contemplate you, soldiers, and when I consider your past exploits, a strong hope of victory animates me. Your spirit, your age, your valour, gives me confidence to say nothing of necessity, which makes even cowards brave. To prevent the numbers of the enemy from surrounding us, our confined situation is sufficient. But should Fortune be unjust to your valour, take care not to lose your lives unavenged; take care not to be taken and butchered like cattle, rather than fighting like men, to leave to your enemies a bloody and mournful victory.

Q. Why, according to Catiline, should his soldiers fight with greater confidence?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage.

The following speech was delivered by Catiline, a Roman politician and revolutionary, to his soldiers on the eve of the battle which resulted in his defeat and death.
I am well aware, soldiers, that words cannot inspire courage; and that a spiritless army cannot be rendered active, or a timid army valiant, by the speech of its commander. Whatever courage is in the heart of a man, whether from nature or from habit, so much will be shown by him in the field; and on him whom neither glory nor danger can move, exhortation is bestowed in vain; for the terror in his breast stops his ears.
I have called you together, however, to give you a few instructions, and to explain to you, at the same time, my reasons for the course which I have adopted. Two armies of the enemy, one on the side of Rome, and the other on that of Gaul, oppose our progress; while the want of corn, and of other necessaries, prevents us from remaining, however strongly we may desire to remain, in our present position. Whithersoever we would go, we must open a passage with our swords. I conjure you, therefore, to maintain a brave and resolute spirit; and to remember, when you advance to battle, that on your own right hands depend riches, honour, and glory, with the enjoyment of your liberty and of your country. If we conquer, all will be safe; we shall have provisions in abundance, and the colonies and corporate towns will open their gates to us. But if we lose the victory through want of courage, those same places will turn against us; for neither place nor friend will protect him whom his arms have not protected. Besides, soldiers, the same exigency does not press upon our adversaries, as presses upon us; we fight for our country, for our liberty, for our life; they contend for what but little concerns them, the power of a small party. Attack them, therefore, with so much the greater confidence, and call to mind your achievements of old.
We might, with the utmost ignominy, have passed the rest of our days in exile. Some of you, after losing your property, might have waited at Rome for assistance from others. But because such a life, to men of spirit, was disgusting and unendurable, you resolved upon your present course. If you wish to quit it, you must exert all your resolution, for none but conquerors have exchanged war for peace. To hope for safety in flight, when you have turned away from the enemy the arms by which the body is defended, is indeed madness. In battle, those who are most afraid are always in most danger; but courage is equivalent to a rampart.
When I contemplate you, soldiers, and when I consider your past exploits, a strong hope of victory animates me. Your spirit, your age, your valour, gives me confidence to say nothing of necessity, which makes even cowards brave. To prevent the numbers of the enemy from surrounding us, our confined situation is sufficient. But should Fortune be unjust to your valour, take care not to lose your lives unavenged; take care not to be taken and butchered like cattle, rather than fighting like men, to leave to your enemies a bloody and mournful victory.

Q. What, according to Catiline, amounts to 'madness' in a battle?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage.

The following speech was delivered by Catiline, a Roman politician and revolutionary, to his soldiers on the eve of the battle which resulted in his defeat and death.
I am well aware, soldiers, that words cannot inspire courage; and that a spiritless army cannot be rendered active, or a timid army valiant, by the speech of its commander. Whatever courage is in the heart of a man, whether from nature or from habit, so much will be shown by him in the field; and on him whom neither glory nor danger can move, exhortation is bestowed in vain; for the terror in his breast stops his ears.
I have called you together, however, to give you a few instructions, and to explain to you, at the same time, my reasons for the course which I have adopted. Two armies of the enemy, one on the side of Rome, and the other on that of Gaul, oppose our progress; while the want of corn, and of other necessaries, prevents us from remaining, however strongly we may desire to remain, in our present position. Whithersoever we would go, we must open a passage with our swords. I conjure you, therefore, to maintain a brave and resolute spirit; and to remember, when you advance to battle, that on your own right hands depend riches, honour, and glory, with the enjoyment of your liberty and of your country. If we conquer, all will be safe; we shall have provisions in abundance, and the colonies and corporate towns will open their gates to us. But if we lose the victory through want of courage, those same places will turn against us; for neither place nor friend will protect him whom his arms have not protected. Besides, soldiers, the same exigency does not press upon our adversaries, as presses upon us; we fight for our country, for our liberty, for our life; they contend for what but little concerns them, the power of a small party. Attack them, therefore, with so much the greater confidence, and call to mind your achievements of old.
We might, with the utmost ignominy, have passed the rest of our days in exile. Some of you, after losing your property, might have waited at Rome for assistance from others. But because such a life, to men of spirit, was disgusting and unendurable, you resolved upon your present course. If you wish to quit it, you must exert all your resolution, for none but conquerors have exchanged war for peace. To hope for safety in flight, when you have turned away from the enemy the arms by which the body is defended, is indeed madness. In battle, those who are most afraid are always in most danger; but courage is equivalent to a rampart.
When I contemplate you, soldiers, and when I consider your past exploits, a strong hope of victory animates me. Your spirit, your age, your valour, gives me confidence to say nothing of necessity, which makes even cowards brave. To prevent the numbers of the enemy from surrounding us, our confined situation is sufficient. But should Fortune be unjust to your valour, take care not to lose your lives unavenged; take care not to be taken and butchered like cattle, rather than fighting like men, to leave to your enemies a bloody and mournful victory.

Q. The speech made by Catiline is primarily meant to send a clear message to his soldiers that

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage.

The following speech was delivered by Catiline, a Roman politician and revolutionary, to his soldiers on the eve of the battle which resulted in his defeat and death.
I am well aware, soldiers, that words cannot inspire courage; and that a spiritless army cannot be rendered active, or a timid army valiant, by the speech of its commander. Whatever courage is in the heart of a man, whether from nature or from habit, so much will be shown by him in the field; and on him whom neither glory nor danger can move, exhortation is bestowed in vain; for the terror in his breast stops his ears.
I have called you together, however, to give you a few instructions, and to explain to you, at the same time, my reasons for the course which I have adopted. Two armies of the enemy, one on the side of Rome, and the other on that of Gaul, oppose our progress; while the want of corn, and of other necessaries, prevents us from remaining, however strongly we may desire to remain, in our present position. Whithersoever we would go, we must open a passage with our swords. I conjure you, therefore, to maintain a brave and resolute spirit; and to remember, when you advance to battle, that on your own right hands depend riches, honour, and glory, with the enjoyment of your liberty and of your country. If we conquer, all will be safe; we shall have provisions in abundance, and the colonies and corporate towns will open their gates to us. But if we lose the victory through want of courage, those same places will turn against us; for neither place nor friend will protect him whom his arms have not protected. Besides, soldiers, the same exigency does not press upon our adversaries, as presses upon us; we fight for our country, for our liberty, for our life; they contend for what but little concerns them, the power of a small party. Attack them, therefore, with so much the greater confidence, and call to mind your achievements of old.
We might, with the utmost ignominy, have passed the rest of our days in exile. Some of you, after losing your property, might have waited at Rome for assistance from others. But because such a life, to men of spirit, was disgusting and unendurable, you resolved upon your present course. If you wish to quit it, you must exert all your resolution, for none but conquerors have exchanged war for peace. To hope for safety in flight, when you have turned away from the enemy the arms by which the body is defended, is indeed madness. In battle, those who are most afraid are always in most danger; but courage is equivalent to a rampart.
When I contemplate you, soldiers, and when I consider your past exploits, a strong hope of victory animates me. Your spirit, your age, your valour, gives me confidence to say nothing of necessity, which makes even cowards brave. To prevent the numbers of the enemy from surrounding us, our confined situation is sufficient. But should Fortune be unjust to your valour, take care not to lose your lives unavenged; take care not to be taken and butchered like cattle, rather than fighting like men, to leave to your enemies a bloody and mournful victory.

Q. The phrase '…to say nothing of necessity, which makes even cowards brave' aims to

Directions: There is a sentence that is missing in the paragraph below. Look at the paragraph and decide in which blank (option 1, 2, 3, or 4) the following sentence would best fit.

Sentence: Yes, the world may well be transformed by 2050.

Paragraph: (1) ________. As scientists are gradually learning, even if we solve the immediate warming problem linked to the greenhouse effect, there's another warming problem steadily growing beneath it. Let's call it the 'deep warming' problem. This deeper problem also raises Earth's surface temperature but, unlike global warming, it has nothing to do with greenhouse gases and our use of fossil fuels. (2) ________. It stems directly from our use of energy in all forms and our tendency to use more energy over time – a problem created by the inevitable waste heat that is generated whenever we use energy to do something. (3) ________. Carbon dioxide levels may stabilise or fall thanks to advanced AI-assisted technologies that run on energy harvested from the sun and wind. And the fossil fuel industry may be taking its last breaths. But we will still face a deeper problem. (4) ________. That's because 'deep warming' is not created by the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. It's a problem built into our relationship with energy itself.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.

There will always be produced native talent, vast power of influencing mankind, united with restless, aspiring and insatiate ambition. And this talent will be unfolded in greater proportion as common education is more generally diffused. The question then, is not whether such talent shall or shall not exist. The only practical question is, whether these rare endowments shall be cultivated and disciplined and cautioned and directed by the lessons of past wisdom, or whether they shall be allowed to grow up in reckless and headstrong arrogance. It is merely a question whether the extraordinary talent bestowed upon society by our Creator, shall be a blessing or a curse to us and to our children.

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

1. During colonialism, introducing 'European values' meant specifically introducing European bourgeois values as it has been indicated by many scholars when tracing the formation of theories of race.

2. It is known that colonialism was declared as a civilising mission in which political forces joined religious missionaries to bring the light of progress to the 'dark continent'.

3. The civilising mission targeted both the moral and material conditions of its subjects to introduce the European values to the African people.

4. According to some scholars, racial theories were embedded in the making of class identity in European societies.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.

As far as superior knowledge and talent confer on their possessor a natural charter of privilege to control his associates and exert an influence on the direction of the general affairs of the community, the free and natural action of that privilege is best secured by a perfectly free democratic system, which will abolish all artificial distinctions, and, preventing the accumulation of any social obstacles to advancement, will permit the free development of every germ of talent, wherever it may chance to exist.

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

1. In cases where the public health authorities and the population do not share a common culture, it is harder for effective communication to form between them.

2. Communication between doctors or health authorities and the population is important for the implementation of public health policies.

3. Linguistic, cultural, and ideological differences all pose difficulty for the population to understand the authorities.

4. Even when the government and the people have no cultural conflicts, violent riots may happen due to the distrust of authority, typified by the Italian cholera riots of 1910-11.

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

1. Consumers were increasingly seeking out protein as a healthful nutrient, and whey protein, derived from milk, was seen as the most desirable kind, especially by athletes.

2. Several years ago, Arla, one of the largest dairy companies in the world, set out to create a product to take advantage of an inviting opportunity.

3. Whey protein has a milky taste and, separated from milk's natural fat and sugar, it has a dry mouthfeel.

4. Isolating protein from whey and adding it to clear drinks could make them more appealing to consumers and make Arla a lot of money, but there was a problem: the flavour.

Directions: There is a sentence that is missing in the paragraph below. Look at the paragraph and decide in which blank (option 1, 2, 3, or 4) the following sentence would best fit.

Sentence: Water and nature are inextricable from life in the small but densely populated nation – perhaps understandably so.

Paragraph: Bangladesh as a whole is "nature-on-the-move", its fluid geography the result of one of the most dynamic and extensive river networks in the world. (1) ________. The deltaic nation is literally a by-product of the rivers' processes: a giant sandbox created by millennia of alluvial deposits by Brahmaputra-Jamuna, Padma (the Ganges) and Meghna rivers. (2) ________. Around 80% of the country is floodplains, and a new island, Bhasan Char, emerged from Himalayan silt in 20 years. The Bangladesh National Parliament building in Dhaka is surrounded by an artificial lake, showcasing the country's riverine beauty. It is a popular attraction that has been called one of the greatest architectural achievements of the 20th Century. (3) ________. In Bangladesh, we see water as a sacred purifying element. Water purifies you during ablution as a Muslim. If you are Hindu, your house is sprinkled with Ganga water. Buddhists cross a bridge or place a fountain in their space of meditation. (4) ________.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.

It's a good thing that almost all of us worry. Think of worry as a built-in alarm device. When it is used wisely, it alerts us to danger and prompts us to navigate our way through a maze of solutions to life's various problems. We need to think through our options when we are faced with problems, weighing the benefits and pitfalls of each alternative, and then come up with the best solution. From there we take action which, we hope, solves the problem. Worry is helpful when it is used at the right time and at the right level for resolving our difficulties. Like many things in life, however, too little worry, or too much of it, can be harmful.