VARC Sectional Test- 2 - CAT MCQ

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.
Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.
It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.
Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".
Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.
Q. In the statement, "Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a ... and subjugation they brought", what do you infer is the tone of the author?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Our digital world depends on the interconnectivity between wireless devices, often battery-free with no direct power supply. Such devices include wireless passive sensors, designed to receive and respond to signals from the environment. These devices can be powered by electromagnetic waves, provided their antenna can efficiently convert waves to energy. When Alexander Graham Bell made the first-ever phone call in 1876, calling his assistant to meet him, the connectivity of today's world would have been well beyond his wildest dreams. Perhaps even in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the internet as we know it started to emerge, the digital world we have since built would have been unimaginable. Today, we don't just use technology to communicate with each other: we are also finding ways to make devices communicate between themselves to allow us to control our environments. The 'Internet of Things', as it is now called, is the combination of the immense web of sensors, devices, apps, and other technology that are connected and sharing information between them.
To control our world, however, we need to be able to interconnect many devices which, for ease of installation and pleasing design, are usually wireless, including no power supply cables. For environmental reasons, it is also beneficial that these devices are battery-free. Battery-free devices can instead be powered by the electromagnetic waves they receive from the powered devices they are connected to. With the right equipment, the electromagnetic waves sent by the Wi-Fi router could be enough to supply the energy needed to power the motion sensor. Devices whose function is to detect and respond to physical signals from the surrounding environment are called passive sensors. The ability of a passive sensor to harvest energy from the environment depends heavily on the ability of its antenna – which receives electromagnetic waves – to efficiently turn waves into electricity that can power it. As such, a crucial part of improving this remote powering technology involves making the rectifier (the part of the antenna responsible for converting waves to power) work as efficiently as possible.
The rectifier performance can be measured in terms of its voltage conversion efficiency, or its power conversion efficiency, where 'voltage' refers to an electrical potential, and 'power' here refers to the rate at which electrical energy is transferred through an electrical circuit. However, these two quantities are closely interlinked in complex ways, to such an extent that optimising one of these parameters is often done at the expense of the other, and it is not possible to optimise both parameters simultaneously. Dominik Mair and his colleagues at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, have shown in a recent publication that using either voltage or power conversion efficiency as measures of rectifier performance is not feasible. Instead, the team demonstrated that the concept of a 'mean conversion efficiency' (the average of the voltage and power conversion efficiencies) allows optimisation algorithms to find optimum rectifier circuit designs much quicker. Not only that, but the resulting designs also show superior overall performance when compared to previous ones, even with very low power from incoming waves. The growing demand for 'intelligent' devices that are interconnected with each other, allowing us to control our environment, is pushing the development of wireless, battery-free sensors which can gather information and even make decisions or control actuators.
Q. Why does the author consider that it would have been impossible to imagine a digital world even in the late 20th century?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Our digital world depends on the interconnectivity between wireless devices, often battery-free with no direct power supply. Such devices include wireless passive sensors, designed to receive and respond to signals from the environment. These devices can be powered by electromagnetic waves, provided their antenna can efficiently convert waves to energy. When Alexander Graham Bell made the first-ever phone call in 1876, calling his assistant to meet him, the connectivity of today's world would have been well beyond his wildest dreams. Perhaps even in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the internet as we know it started to emerge, the digital world we have since built would have been unimaginable. Today, we don't just use technology to communicate with each other: we are also finding ways to make devices communicate between themselves to allow us to control our environments. The 'Internet of Things', as it is now called, is the combination of the immense web of sensors, devices, apps, and other technology that are connected and sharing information between them.
To control our world, however, we need to be able to interconnect many devices which, for ease of installation and pleasing design, are usually wireless, including no power supply cables. For environmental reasons, it is also beneficial that these devices are battery-free. Battery-free devices can instead be powered by the electromagnetic waves they receive from the powered devices they are connected to. With the right equipment, the electromagnetic waves sent by the Wi-Fi router could be enough to supply the energy needed to power the motion sensor. Devices whose function is to detect and respond to physical signals from the surrounding environment are called passive sensors. The ability of a passive sensor to harvest energy from the environment depends heavily on the ability of its antenna – which receives electromagnetic waves – to efficiently turn waves into electricity that can power it. As such, a crucial part of improving this remote powering technology involves making the rectifier (the part of the antenna responsible for converting waves to power) work as efficiently as possible.
The rectifier performance can be measured in terms of its voltage conversion efficiency, or its power conversion efficiency, where 'voltage' refers to an electrical potential, and 'power' here refers to the rate at which electrical energy is transferred through an electrical circuit. However, these two quantities are closely interlinked in complex ways, to such an extent that optimising one of these parameters is often done at the expense of the other, and it is not possible to optimise both parameters simultaneously. Dominik Mair and his colleagues at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, have shown in a recent publication that using either voltage or power conversion efficiency as measures of rectifier performance is not feasible. Instead, the team demonstrated that the concept of a 'mean conversion efficiency' (the average of the voltage and power conversion efficiencies) allows optimisation algorithms to find optimum rectifier circuit designs much quicker. Not only that, but the resulting designs also show superior overall performance when compared to previous ones, even with very low power from incoming waves. The growing demand for 'intelligent' devices that are interconnected with each other, allowing us to control our environment, is pushing the development of wireless, battery-free sensors which can gather information and even make decisions or control actuators.
Q. Which of the following is the reason why Dominik Mair's designs show overall superior performance as compared to traditional designs?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Our digital world depends on the interconnectivity between wireless devices, often battery-free with no direct power supply. Such devices include wireless passive sensors, designed to receive and respond to signals from the environment. These devices can be powered by electromagnetic waves, provided their antenna can efficiently convert waves to energy. When Alexander Graham Bell made the first-ever phone call in 1876, calling his assistant to meet him, the connectivity of today's world would have been well beyond his wildest dreams. Perhaps even in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the internet as we know it started to emerge, the digital world we have since built would have been unimaginable. Today, we don't just use technology to communicate with each other: we are also finding ways to make devices communicate between themselves to allow us to control our environments. The 'Internet of Things', as it is now called, is the combination of the immense web of sensors, devices, apps, and other technology that are connected and sharing information between them.
To control our world, however, we need to be able to interconnect many devices which, for ease of installation and pleasing design, are usually wireless, including no power supply cables. For environmental reasons, it is also beneficial that these devices are battery-free. Battery-free devices can instead be powered by the electromagnetic waves they receive from the powered devices they are connected to. With the right equipment, the electromagnetic waves sent by the Wi-Fi router could be enough to supply the energy needed to power the motion sensor. Devices whose function is to detect and respond to physical signals from the surrounding environment are called passive sensors. The ability of a passive sensor to harvest energy from the environment depends heavily on the ability of its antenna – which receives electromagnetic waves – to efficiently turn waves into electricity that can power it. As such, a crucial part of improving this remote powering technology involves making the rectifier (the part of the antenna responsible for converting waves to power) work as efficiently as possible.
The rectifier performance can be measured in terms of its voltage conversion efficiency, or its power conversion efficiency, where 'voltage' refers to an electrical potential, and 'power' here refers to the rate at which electrical energy is transferred through an electrical circuit. However, these two quantities are closely interlinked in complex ways, to such an extent that optimising one of these parameters is often done at the expense of the other, and it is not possible to optimise both parameters simultaneously. Dominik Mair and his colleagues at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, have shown in a recent publication that using either voltage or power conversion efficiency as measures of rectifier performance is not feasible. Instead, the team demonstrated that the concept of a 'mean conversion efficiency' (the average of the voltage and power conversion efficiencies) allows optimisation algorithms to find optimum rectifier circuit designs much quicker. Not only that, but the resulting designs also show superior overall performance when compared to previous ones, even with very low power from incoming waves. The growing demand for 'intelligent' devices that are interconnected with each other, allowing us to control our environment, is pushing the development of wireless, battery-free sensors which can gather information and even make decisions or control actuators.
Q. Each of the following statements can be inferred in context of the passage, EXCEPT:

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Our digital world depends on the interconnectivity between wireless devices, often battery-free with no direct power supply. Such devices include wireless passive sensors, designed to receive and respond to signals from the environment. These devices can be powered by electromagnetic waves, provided their antenna can efficiently convert waves to energy. When Alexander Graham Bell made the first-ever phone call in 1876, calling his assistant to meet him, the connectivity of today's world would have been well beyond his wildest dreams. Perhaps even in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when the internet as we know it started to emerge, the digital world we have since built would have been unimaginable. Today, we don't just use technology to communicate with each other: we are also finding ways to make devices communicate between themselves to allow us to control our environments. The 'Internet of Things', as it is now called, is the combination of the immense web of sensors, devices, apps, and other technology that are connected and sharing information between them.
To control our world, however, we need to be able to interconnect many devices which, for ease of installation and pleasing design, are usually wireless, including no power supply cables. For environmental reasons, it is also beneficial that these devices are battery-free. Battery-free devices can instead be powered by the electromagnetic waves they receive from the powered devices they are connected to. With the right equipment, the electromagnetic waves sent by the Wi-Fi router could be enough to supply the energy needed to power the motion sensor. Devices whose function is to detect and respond to physical signals from the surrounding environment are called passive sensors. The ability of a passive sensor to harvest energy from the environment depends heavily on the ability of its antenna – which receives electromagnetic waves – to efficiently turn waves into electricity that can power it. As such, a crucial part of improving this remote powering technology involves making the rectifier (the part of the antenna responsible for converting waves to power) work as efficiently as possible.
The rectifier performance can be measured in terms of its voltage conversion efficiency, or its power conversion efficiency, where 'voltage' refers to an electrical potential, and 'power' here refers to the rate at which electrical energy is transferred through an electrical circuit. However, these two quantities are closely interlinked in complex ways, to such an extent that optimising one of these parameters is often done at the expense of the other, and it is not possible to optimise both parameters simultaneously. Dominik Mair and his colleagues at the University of Innsbruck in Austria, have shown in a recent publication that using either voltage or power conversion efficiency as measures of rectifier performance is not feasible. Instead, the team demonstrated that the concept of a 'mean conversion efficiency' (the average of the voltage and power conversion efficiencies) allows optimisation algorithms to find optimum rectifier circuit designs much quicker. Not only that, but the resulting designs also show superior overall performance when compared to previous ones, even with very low power from incoming waves. The growing demand for 'intelligent' devices that are interconnected with each other, allowing us to control our environment, is pushing the development of wireless, battery-free sensors which can gather information and even make decisions or control actuators.
Q. Why does the author state that rectifiers should work 'as efficiently as possible' to improve remote powering technology?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Positioning - once the heart of strategy - is rejected as too static for today's dynamic markets and changing technologies. According to the new dogma, rivals can quickly copy any market position, and competitive advantage is, at best, temporary.

But those beliefs are dangerous half-truths, and they are leading more and more companies down the path of mutually destructive competition. True, some barriers to competition are falling as regulation eases and markets become global. True, companies have properly invested energy in becoming leaner and more nimble. In many industries, however, what some call hyper-competition is a self-inflicted wound, not the inevitable outcome of a changing paradigm of competition.

The root of the problem is the failure to distinguish between operational effectiveness and strategy. The quest for productivity, quality, and speed has spawned a remarkable number of management tools and techniques: total quality management, benchmarking, time-based competition, outsourcing, partnering, reengineering, change management. Although the resulting operational improvements have often been dramatic, many companies have been frustrated by their inability to translate those gains into sustainable profitability. And bit by bit, almost imperceptibly, management tools have taken the place of strategy. As managers push to improve on all fronts, they move farther away from viable competitive positions.

Operational effectiveness and strategy are both essential to superior performance, which, after all, is the primary goal of any enterprise. But they work in very different ways.

A company can outperform rivals only if it can establish a difference that it can preserve. It must deliver greater value to customers or create comparable value at a lower cost or do both. The arithmetic of superior profitability then follows: delivering greater value allows a company to charge higher average unit prices: greater efficiency results in lower average unit costs.

Operational Effectiveness (OE) means performing similar activities better than rivals perform them. Operational effectiveness includes but is not limited to efficiency. It refers to any number of practices that allow a company to better utilise its inputs by, for example, reducing defects in products or developing better products faster. In contrast, strategic positioning means performing different activities from rivals' or performing similar activities in different ways.

Differences in operational effectiveness among companies are pervasive. Some companies are able to get more out of their inputs than others because they eliminate wasted effort, employ more advanced technology, motivate employees better, or have greater insight into managing particular activities or sets of activities. Such differences in operational effectiveness are an important source of differences in profitability among competitors because they directly affect relative cost positions and levels of differentiation.

Differences in operational effectiveness were at the heart of the Japanese challenge to Western companies in the 1980s. The Japanese were so far ahead of rivals in operational effectiveness that they could offer lower cost and superior quality at the same time.

The productivity frontier is constantly shifting outward as new technologies and management approaches are developed and as new inputs become available.
Q. On the basis of the information in the passage, operational effectiveness and strategic position are different from each other in which one of the following respects?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Positioning - once the heart of strategy - is rejected as too static for today's dynamic markets and changing technologies. According to the new dogma, rivals can quickly copy any market position, and competitive advantage is, at best, temporary.

But those beliefs are dangerous half-truths, and they are leading more and more companies down the path of mutually destructive competition. True, some barriers to competition are falling as regulation eases and markets become global. True, companies have properly invested energy in becoming leaner and more nimble. In many industries, however, what some call hyper-competition is a self-inflicted wound, not the inevitable outcome of a changing paradigm of competition.

The root of the problem is the failure to distinguish between operational effectiveness and strategy. The quest for productivity, quality, and speed has spawned a remarkable number of management tools and techniques: total quality management, benchmarking, time-based competition, outsourcing, partnering, reengineering, change management. Although the resulting operational improvements have often been dramatic, many companies have been frustrated by their inability to translate those gains into sustainable profitability. And bit by bit, almost imperceptibly, management tools have taken the place of strategy. As managers push to improve on all fronts, they move farther away from viable competitive positions.

Operational effectiveness and strategy are both essential to superior performance, which, after all, is the primary goal of any enterprise. But they work in very different ways.

A company can outperform rivals only if it can establish a difference that it can preserve. It must deliver greater value to customers or create comparable value at a lower cost or do both. The arithmetic of superior profitability then follows: delivering greater value allows a company to charge higher average unit prices: greater efficiency results in lower average unit costs.

Operational Effectiveness (OE) means performing similar activities better than rivals perform them. Operational effectiveness includes but is not limited to efficiency. It refers to any number of practices that allow a company to better utilise its inputs by, for example, reducing defects in products or developing better products faster. In contrast, strategic positioning means performing different activities from rivals' or performing similar activities in different ways.

Differences in operational effectiveness among companies are pervasive. Some companies are able to get more out of their inputs than others because they eliminate wasted effort, employ more advanced technology, motivate employees better, or have greater insight into managing particular activities or sets of activities. Such differences in operational effectiveness are an important source of differences in profitability among competitors because they directly affect relative cost positions and levels of differentiation.

Differences in operational effectiveness were at the heart of the Japanese challenge to Western companies in the 1980s. The Japanese were so far ahead of rivals in operational effectiveness that they could offer lower cost and superior quality at the same time.

The productivity frontier is constantly shifting outward as new technologies and management approaches are developed and as new inputs become available.
Q. The overall tone of the passage is

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Positioning - once the heart of strategy - is rejected as too static for today's dynamic markets and changing technologies. According to the new dogma, rivals can quickly copy any market position, and competitive advantage is, at best, temporary.

But those beliefs are dangerous half-truths, and they are leading more and more companies down the path of mutually destructive competition. True, some barriers to competition are falling as regulation eases and markets become global. True, companies have properly invested energy in becoming leaner and more nimble. In many industries, however, what some call hyper-competition is a self-inflicted wound, not the inevitable outcome of a changing paradigm of competition.

The root of the problem is the failure to distinguish between operational effectiveness and strategy. The quest for productivity, quality, and speed has spawned a remarkable number of management tools and techniques: total quality management, benchmarking, time-based competition, outsourcing, partnering, reengineering, change management. Although the resulting operational improvements have often been dramatic, many companies have been frustrated by their inability to translate those gains into sustainable profitability. And bit by bit, almost imperceptibly, management tools have taken the place of strategy. As managers push to improve on all fronts, they move farther away from viable competitive positions.

Operational effectiveness and strategy are both essential to superior performance, which, after all, is the primary goal of any enterprise. But they work in very different ways.

A company can outperform rivals only if it can establish a difference that it can preserve. It must deliver greater value to customers or create comparable value at a lower cost or do both. The arithmetic of superior profitability then follows: delivering greater value allows a company to charge higher average unit prices: greater efficiency results in lower average unit costs.

Operational Effectiveness (OE) means performing similar activities better than rivals perform them. Operational effectiveness includes but is not limited to efficiency. It refers to any number of practices that allow a company to better utilise its inputs by, for example, reducing defects in products or developing better products faster. In contrast, strategic positioning means performing different activities from rivals' or performing similar activities in different ways.

Differences in operational effectiveness among companies are pervasive. Some companies are able to get more out of their inputs than others because they eliminate wasted effort, employ more advanced technology, motivate employees better, or have greater insight into managing particular activities or sets of activities. Such differences in operational effectiveness are an important source of differences in profitability among competitors because they directly affect relative cost positions and levels of differentiation.

Differences in operational effectiveness were at the heart of the Japanese challenge to Western companies in the 1980s. The Japanese were so far ahead of rivals in operational effectiveness that they could offer lower cost and superior quality at the same time.

The productivity frontier is constantly shifting outward as new technologies and management approaches are developed and as new inputs become available.
Q. Which one of the following statements is the author most likely to agree with?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
Positioning - once the heart of strategy - is rejected as too static for today's dynamic markets and changing technologies. According to the new dogma, rivals can quickly copy any market position, and competitive advantage is, at best, temporary.

But those beliefs are dangerous half-truths, and they are leading more and more companies down the path of mutually destructive competition. True, some barriers to competition are falling as regulation eases and markets become global. True, companies have properly invested energy in becoming leaner and more nimble. In many industries, however, what some call hyper-competition is a self-inflicted wound, not the inevitable outcome of a changing paradigm of competition.

The root of the problem is the failure to distinguish between operational effectiveness and strategy. The quest for productivity, quality, and speed has spawned a remarkable number of management tools and techniques: total quality management, benchmarking, time-based competition, outsourcing, partnering, reengineering, change management. Although the resulting operational improvements have often been dramatic, many companies have been frustrated by their inability to translate those gains into sustainable profitability. And bit by bit, almost imperceptibly, management tools have taken the place of strategy. As managers push to improve on all fronts, they move farther away from viable competitive positions.

Operational effectiveness and strategy are both essential to superior performance, which, after all, is the primary goal of any enterprise. But they work in very different ways.

A company can outperform rivals only if it can establish a difference that it can preserve. It must deliver greater value to customers or create comparable value at a lower cost or do both. The arithmetic of superior profitability then follows: delivering greater value allows a company to charge higher average unit prices: greater efficiency results in lower average unit costs.

Operational Effectiveness (OE) means performing similar activities better than rivals perform them. Operational effectiveness includes but is not limited to efficiency. It refers to any number of practices that allow a company to better utilise its inputs by, for example, reducing defects in products or developing better products faster. In contrast, strategic positioning means performing different activities from rivals' or performing similar activities in different ways.

Differences in operational effectiveness among companies are pervasive. Some companies are able to get more out of their inputs than others because they eliminate wasted effort, employ more advanced technology, motivate employees better, or have greater insight into managing particular activities or sets of activities. Such differences in operational effectiveness are an important source of differences in profitability among competitors because they directly affect relative cost positions and levels of differentiation.

Differences in operational effectiveness were at the heart of the Japanese challenge to Western companies in the 1980s. The Japanese were so far ahead of rivals in operational effectiveness that they could offer lower cost and superior quality at the same time.

The productivity frontier is constantly shifting outward as new technologies and management approaches are developed and as new inputs become available.
Q. It can be inferred from the passage that the distinction between operational effectiveness and strategy has seemingly obscured now due to none of the following EXCEPT:

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a psychedelic renaissance. Research into the healing potential of psychedelics has re-started at prestigious universities such as Johns Hopkins in Baltimore and Imperial College London, and is making rock stars out of the scientists carrying it out. Their findings are being reported with joy and exultation by mainstream media - on CNN, the BBC, even the Daily Mail. Respectable publishers such as Penguin are behind psychedelics bestsellers. The counterculture has gone mainstream.

The mystical theory of psychedelics has five key tenets. The first is that psychedelics lead to a mystical experience of unitive, non-dual consciousness, in which all is one, you are united with It, God, the Tao, Brahman, etc. This experience is timeless, ineffable and joyful.

Second, that the psychedelic experience is the same as the experience of mystics, found in all religions. Different religions use different terms for ultimate reality, but all mystics are really having the same non-dual experience. This is the theory of the 'perennial philosophy', promoted by Huxley and other perennialists. It's known in religious studies as the 'universal core of religious experience' theory.

Third, that the mystical experience previously occurred mainly to ascetics, and was somewhat rare and unpredictable, therefore scientists dismissed it as ego-regression, psychosis and so forth. But now psychedelics have revealed a predictable and replicable route to mystical experiences, so scientists can study them in the lab. They can measure to what extent a person's experience maps onto the 'universal core'.

Fourth, that this scientific research will create an empirical spirituality or 'neuro-theology'. It will prove, or at least make more credible, the transcendent insights of the mystics.

And finally, that this will change the world. Humanity will join a new scientific religion of mystical experience, beyond differences of language, nation, culture, religion, class, gender or ethnicity. We will all become liberal environmental progressives. We will all overcome our fear of death. After four centuries of materialism, Western culture will be re-enchanted, but in a predictable, rational and replicable way. Subsequent Johns Hopkins studies found that the stronger the mystical experience induced by psilocybin, the more people were freed from addiction, depression, even the fear of death.

The millenarian hope bubbling below the cool, detached surface of the psychedelic renaissance is apparent if you read Sacred Knowledge: Psychedelics and Religious Experience (2015) by William Richards, a psychologist at the Johns Hopkins psychedelic lab. The book climaxes in an epilogue of propositions that include: 'In case you had any doubts, God is'; 'Consciousness, whether we like it or not, appears to be indestructible'; and 'The ultimate nature of matter and mind is the force of energy called love.' It's not clear if these propositions are scientific findings or ecstatic poetry.

Finally, I think that the mystical theory of psychedelics is closer to theology than to science. Still, we don't need mystical theology to argue for the legalisation of psychedelics. To use the language of secular psychology, psychedelics seem to reliably take people briefly beyond their customary ego and to allow the contents of their subconscious to emerge. Even if you're not mystically inclined, that process can still be very healing.
Q. Which of the following best describes what the passage primarily talks about?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a psychedelic renaissance. Research into the healing potential of psychedelics has re-started at prestigious universities such as Johns Hopkins in Baltimore and Imperial College London, and is making rock stars out of the scientists carrying it out. Their findings are being reported with joy and exultation by mainstream media - on CNN, the BBC, even the Daily Mail. Respectable publishers such as Penguin are behind psychedelics bestsellers. The counterculture has gone mainstream.

The mystical theory of psychedelics has five key tenets. The first is that psychedelics lead to a mystical experience of unitive, non-dual consciousness, in which all is one, you are united with It, God, the Tao, Brahman, etc. This experience is timeless, ineffable and joyful.

Second, that the psychedelic experience is the same as the experience of mystics, found in all religions. Different religions use different terms for ultimate reality, but all mystics are really having the same non-dual experience. This is the theory of the 'perennial philosophy', promoted by Huxley and other perennialists. It's known in religious studies as the 'universal core of religious experience' theory.

Third, that the mystical experience previously occurred mainly to ascetics, and was somewhat rare and unpredictable, therefore scientists dismissed it as ego-regression, psychosis and so forth. But now psychedelics have revealed a predictable and replicable route to mystical experiences, so scientists can study them in the lab. They can measure to what extent a person's experience maps onto the 'universal core'.

Fourth, that this scientific research will create an empirical spirituality or 'neuro-theology'. It will prove, or at least make more credible, the transcendent insights of the mystics.

And finally, that this will change the world. Humanity will join a new scientific religion of mystical experience, beyond differences of language, nation, culture, religion, class, gender or ethnicity. We will all become liberal environmental progressives. We will all overcome our fear of death. After four centuries of materialism, Western culture will be re-enchanted, but in a predictable, rational and replicable way. Subsequent Johns Hopkins studies found that the stronger the mystical experience induced by psilocybin, the more people were freed from addiction, depression, even the fear of death.

The millenarian hope bubbling below the cool, detached surface of the psychedelic renaissance is apparent if you read Sacred Knowledge: Psychedelics and Religious Experience (2015) by William Richards, a psychologist at the Johns Hopkins psychedelic lab. The book climaxes in an epilogue of propositions that include: 'In case you had any doubts, God is'; 'Consciousness, whether we like it or not, appears to be indestructible'; and 'The ultimate nature of matter and mind is the force of energy called love.' It's not clear if these propositions are scientific findings or ecstatic poetry.

Finally, I think that the mystical theory of psychedelics is closer to theology than to science. Still, we don't need mystical theology to argue for the legalisation of psychedelics. To use the language of secular psychology, psychedelics seem to reliably take people briefly beyond their customary ego and to allow the contents of their subconscious to emerge. Even if you're not mystically inclined, that process can still be very healing.
Q. Which of the following most corresponds to the author's idea of mystical theory of psychedelics?

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a psychedelic renaissance. Research into the healing potential of psychedelics has re-started at prestigious universities such as Johns Hopkins in Baltimore and Imperial College London, and is making rock stars out of the scientists carrying it out. Their findings are being reported with joy and exultation by mainstream media - on CNN, the BBC, even the Daily Mail. Respectable publishers such as Penguin are behind psychedelics bestsellers. The counterculture has gone mainstream.

The mystical theory of psychedelics has five key tenets. The first is that psychedelics lead to a mystical experience of unitive, non-dual consciousness, in which all is one, you are united with It, God, the Tao, Brahman, etc. This experience is timeless, ineffable and joyful.

Second, that the psychedelic experience is the same as the experience of mystics, found in all religions. Different religions use different terms for ultimate reality, but all mystics are really having the same non-dual experience. This is the theory of the 'perennial philosophy', promoted by Huxley and other perennialists. It's known in religious studies as the 'universal core of religious experience' theory.

Third, that the mystical experience previously occurred mainly to ascetics, and was somewhat rare and unpredictable, therefore scientists dismissed it as ego-regression, psychosis and so forth. But now psychedelics have revealed a predictable and replicable route to mystical experiences, so scientists can study them in the lab. They can measure to what extent a person's experience maps onto the 'universal core'.

Fourth, that this scientific research will create an empirical spirituality or 'neuro-theology'. It will prove, or at least make more credible, the transcendent insights of the mystics.

And finally, that this will change the world. Humanity will join a new scientific religion of mystical experience, beyond differences of language, nation, culture, religion, class, gender or ethnicity. We will all become liberal environmental progressives. We will all overcome our fear of death. After four centuries of materialism, Western culture will be re-enchanted, but in a predictable, rational and replicable way. Subsequent Johns Hopkins studies found that the stronger the mystical experience induced by psilocybin, the more people were freed from addiction, depression, even the fear of death.

The millenarian hope bubbling below the cool, detached surface of the psychedelic renaissance is apparent if you read Sacred Knowledge: Psychedelics and Religious Experience (2015) by William Richards, a psychologist at the Johns Hopkins psychedelic lab. The book climaxes in an epilogue of propositions that include: 'In case you had any doubts, God is'; 'Consciousness, whether we like it or not, appears to be indestructible'; and 'The ultimate nature of matter and mind is the force of energy called love.' It's not clear if these propositions are scientific findings or ecstatic poetry.

Finally, I think that the mystical theory of psychedelics is closer to theology than to science. Still, we don't need mystical theology to argue for the legalisation of psychedelics. To use the language of secular psychology, psychedelics seem to reliably take people briefly beyond their customary ego and to allow the contents of their subconscious to emerge. Even if you're not mystically inclined, that process can still be very healing.
Q. The author of the passage will agree with each of the following EXCEPT that:

Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a psychedelic renaissance. Research into the healing potential of psychedelics has re-started at prestigious universities such as Johns Hopkins in Baltimore and Imperial College London, and is making rock stars out of the scientists carrying it out. Their findings are being reported with joy and exultation by mainstream media - on CNN, the BBC, even the Daily Mail. Respectable publishers such as Penguin are behind psychedelics bestsellers. The counterculture has gone mainstream.

The mystical theory of psychedelics has five key tenets. The first is that psychedelics lead to a mystical experience of unitive, non-dual consciousness, in which all is one, you are united with It, God, the Tao, Brahman, etc. This experience is timeless, ineffable and joyful.

Second, that the psychedelic experience is the same as the experience of mystics, found in all religions. Different religions use different terms for ultimate reality, but all mystics are really having the same non-dual experience. This is the theory of the 'perennial philosophy', promoted by Huxley and other perennialists. It's known in religious studies as the 'universal core of religious experience' theory.

Third, that the mystical experience previously occurred mainly to ascetics, and was somewhat rare and unpredictable, therefore scientists dismissed it as ego-regression, psychosis and so forth. But now psychedelics have revealed a predictable and replicable route to mystical experiences, so scientists can study them in the lab. They can measure to what extent a person's experience maps onto the 'universal core'.

Fourth, that this scientific research will create an empirical spirituality or 'neuro-theology'. It will prove, or at least make more credible, the transcendent insights of the mystics.

And finally, that this will change the world. Humanity will join a new scientific religion of mystical experience, beyond differences of language, nation, culture, religion, class, gender or ethnicity. We will all become liberal environmental progressives. We will all overcome our fear of death. After four centuries of materialism, Western culture will be re-enchanted, but in a predictable, rational and replicable way. Subsequent Johns Hopkins studies found that the stronger the mystical experience induced by psilocybin, the more people were freed from addiction, depression, even the fear of death.

The millenarian hope bubbling below the cool, detached surface of the psychedelic renaissance is apparent if you read Sacred Knowledge: Psychedelics and Religious Experience (2015) by William Richards, a psychologist at the Johns Hopkins psychedelic lab. The book climaxes in an epilogue of propositions that include: 'In case you had any doubts, God is'; 'Consciousness, whether we like it or not, appears to be indestructible'; and 'The ultimate nature of matter and mind is the force of energy called love.' It's not clear if these propositions are scientific findings or ecstatic poetry.

Finally, I think that the mystical theory of psychedelics is closer to theology than to science. Still, we don't need mystical theology to argue for the legalisation of psychedelics. To use the language of secular psychology, psychedelics seem to reliably take people briefly beyond their customary ego and to allow the contents of their subconscious to emerge. Even if you're not mystically inclined, that process can still be very healing.
Q. What does the author mean by saying 'the counterculture has gone main stream'?

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

What is this hidden secret? Is there nothing in life other than what is visible to the eyes from the point of view of the common understanding of the generality of mankind? Life seems to be only what is seen by the eyes, heard with the ears and sensed in some way or other by the organs of this psycho-physical composition. But man is superior, they say, to the animal in a special and significant endowment with which he is blessed by providence, nature or whatever we may call it - that endowment being the capacity to study what is implied in the experiences through which he passes, rather than merely be satisfied with the experiences only.

Directions: The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) given below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequence of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer.
1. The turn to the emotions as actions, then, will benefit from Hume's skepticism about action, along with his wariness about how much control we have over our emotions.
2. The reduction of emotion to action leaves behind the fact that our emotions are often mixed, what Hume acknowledged as the 'contrariety of the motives and passions'.
3. It not only divorces action from a philosophical tradition that linked action to mental states, but it also ignores the possibility that emotions have intentionality, which means that they are judgments about things.
4. The neuroscientific view of emotions as actions impoverishes action.

Directions: The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) given below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequence of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer.
1. Work by psychologists such as Ed Diener suggests that positive and negative emotions are not independent from each other at any given point in time.
2. A child who isn't carefree lacks the mental space required for the enjoyment of all the good things in her life.
3. These emotions tend to suppress each other, and that the more stress and anxiety a child feels, the less mental space she will have for the development of positive emotions towards valuable projects and relationships.
4. The possibility for a child to be not carefree in general yet still feel positive emotions has always been questioned.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
India and America are not always likely to share strategic interests. Nevertheless, we must remain friends in the sense of a higher commitment to certain values. Alliances based on interests are but transient. We should support America if it seeks to export the ideal of genuine liberal democracy around the world and warn it of the fate which befell earlier hegemons that chose to pursue narrow selfish interests. This position, as their friend in freedom, is what we owe them. Frankness, in other words, must be the primary virtue of our often strained, but nevertheless true friendship.

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: Storm surges and extreme heat can lead to power outages that knock out the technology systems critical to homes, hospitals, and industries.
Paragraph: Cities are on the front lines of the growing physical risks associated with climate change. (1) _______. They are home to more than half of the world's people, and by 2050, that figure is projected to rise to 68 percent. Urban areas are often located in places of particular climate risk, such as on coastlines, floodplains, and islands. (2) _______. Moreover, modern urban infrastructure and its operating systems are closely connected. A failure in one part of a network can affect another, multiplying the damage. (3) _______. Cities must proactively address climate risks and invest in resilient infrastructure to protect their residents and ensure sustainable development for the future. (4) _______.

Directions: The passage given below is followed by four alternative summaries.
Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
In computer programming, code smell is any symptom in the source code of a programme that possibly indicates a deeper problem. Code smells are usually not bugs - they are not technically incorrect and don't currently prevent the programme from functioning. Instead, they indicate weaknesses in design that may be slowing down development or increasing the risk of bugs or failures in the future. But when code is a slow, wretchedly designed mess that's hard to maintain, programmers talk about stench. The metaphor becomes olfactory, the swill of gases that rise from rot and decay.

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: There were no other options.
Paragraph: While traditional banks had been convenient one-stop shops for businesses and consumers, many didn't evolve their products in a way that matched the tech-driven pace of change in other industries. (1) ________. Products such as checking accounts, loans, and even corporate advisory seemed undifferentiated. (2) ________. And people increasingly felt frustrated by the financial fragmentation that banks had imposed on many consumer processes. For instance, buying a home once required navigating a confusing world of disconnected real-estate brokers, mortgage lenders, insurance companies, lawyers, renovation contractors, and so on. (3) ________. Our grandparents tolerated those frustrations, but they also used pay phones. (4) _______. Today, we are awash in new ways to reach and connect with consumers. Banks need to identify and engage these customers—as their newer competitors are doing.

Directions: The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) given below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper sequence of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of the four numbers as your answer.
1. The tradition was already ages-old in Japan, but naming it went hand in hand with making recommendations for practices like one should walk, gaze and exercise among the trees and eat well-balanced meals of organic, locally sourced food.
2. How nature can heal was little researched until 1982, when Tomohide Akiyama coined the term 'shinrin-yoku' (forest bathing) to describe the practice of getting into the woods for body and mind renewal.
3. When Akiyama recommended forest bathing all those years ago, he knew about the pioneering studies of phytoncides – basically, pungent essential oils.
4. The oils, volatile compounds exuded by conifers and some other plants, reduce blood pressure and boost immune function, among other benefits.