RC Practice Test - 5 - CAT MCQ

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

Classical and New Age (alternative) music are often promoted for relaxation and stress relief. A Google search for "Mozart and relaxation" yielded 39,700 hits, while a search for "New Age music and relaxation" yielded 16,200 hits. But what are the specific psychological effects of these popular forms of music? We approached this question from the perspective of ABC (Attentional Behavioral Cognitive) relaxation theory, a comprehensive and empirically-based approach to understanding a wide range of relaxation activities.

Smith has proposed that different approaches to relaxation have different positive psychological effects. In developing his perspective, Smith examined over 200 texts for a wide range of relaxation activities (progressive muscle relaxation, autogenie training, yoga, breathing exercises, imagery, creative visualization, tai chi, self-hypnosis, meditation, contemplation, and prayer) and developed an initial lexicon of 400 relaxation-related terms. Through item screening and a series of eight separate factor analytic studies, involving a combined sample of 2,616 participants, Smith and his colleagues identified what are currently relaxation state (R-State) categories: Sleepiness, Disengagement , Rested/Refreshed, Energized, Physical Relaxation, At ease/Peace, Joy, Mental Quiet, Childlike Innocence, Thankfulness and Love, Mystery, Awe and Wonder, Prayerfulness, and Timeless/Boundless/Infinite. The fifteenth R-State, Aware, is a metastate that can either exist alone or in combination with other states. Note that most research has combined two highly correlated R-States, Energized and Aware, into a single variable, Strength and Awareness.

Music researchers frequently examine only self reports of "relaxation." ABC relaxation theory and research suggests this is not sufficient. "Relaxation" is only one of 15 factor dimensions of positive relaxation-related experience that may contribute to reduced stress. To elaborate, factor analytic studies show that self-reported "relaxation" consistently and highly loads on one R-State-"At ease/Peace." In other words, individuals who claim to feel "relaxed" are in fact reporting high levels of R-State At ease/Peace. Conversely, those who report a type of relaxation or music not to be relaxing, may in fact be experiencing other R-States, for example Disengagement, Mental Quiet, or Mystery. These R-States may well have important clinical applications.

The importance of examining R-States other than "relaxation" becomes clear when we examine complete literature on ABC relaxation theory. To date, over 35 studies involving over 10,000 participants have examined the differences and commonalities of over 40 various approaches to relaxation. Practitioners of progressive muscle relaxation often recall feeling R-States Disengagement and Physical Relaxation. Practitioners of yoga stretching recall Strength and Awareness. Meditators experience Mental Quiet. However, little research has examined R-States associated with listening to music. Ritchie, Holmes, and Alien and Lewis found that those who select music as their preferred form of passive relaxation consistently recall feeling Joy as well as Strength and Awareness while listening to music. However, these were retrospective studies and the type of music was not identified. And, as we have noted, other music researchers have generally limited their attention to types of music that appear to evoke self-reported "relaxation".

Q. None of the following can be unmistakably inferred from the first paragraph of the passage EXCEPT:

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The use of restorative justice programs within the criminal justice system is a relatively recent development that has started being used instead of the traditional retributive system that defines justice in a punitive way. There are many examples of restorative justice programs or changes in judicial procedure that illustrate the shift towards a restorative justice mentality within the criminal justice system generally. Providing closure for victims has become a goal of the criminal justice system and although there is not a concrete definition of closure it is generally accepted to be an emotional state related to peace, relief, or a sense of finality.

The victims should be "at the center of the criminal justice process" rather than lost somewhere on the periphery. This is just one of many ideas at the heart of the restorative justice movement. Judges have been viewed in the past as if they were some kind of mechanical calculator of justice that applied strict logic and rationality to the cases to determine how the law should be applied. That idea is slowly losing support as restorative justice and other victim centered programs emerge. There is even a subfield within law known as therapeutic jurisprudence that sees the law as a potential vehicle for victim therapy by recognizing that law is not about pure logic but experience and emotion.

Restorative justice questions the belief that punishment of the offender is obligatory to restore justice. It suggests that providing the victims with satisfaction by involving them in the justice process is far more beneficial. Offender punishment in restorative justice programs is more flexible and keys primarily on making the offender take accountability and feel certain emotions.

There is a different form of deontological ethics posited by W.D. Ross that relies on several prima facie duties to which all people should adhere; fidelity, reparation, gratitude, non-injury, beneficence, self-improvement, and justice. Restorative justice programs fall neatly into this form of ethics by focusing on offender guilt and accountability (fidelity); involving the victim to discover how the situation can be repaired (reparation); creating a sense of empathy between the two parties by establishing communication'; preventing a cycle of violence or revenge (beneficence); focusing on creating new behaviors in the accused (self-improvement); and reaching a decision that is believed to be doing justice by all parties involved.

Jackson (2009) explains that one goal of restorative justice is to hopefully create feelings of guilt and shame in the offender through the victim's expression of their feelings. Shame is more painful of an experience for an individual than guilt. Shame makes individuals want to run off and hide while guilt solicits motivation to confess, repair, and apologize. Shame creates a situation that naturally inhibits people from opening up and sharing their experiences with others.

Just taking a quick glance at the traits of shame and guilt respectively creates an intuitive response that perhaps guilt is better suited than shame for restorative justice programs. If shame makes an individual want to turn away and hide, then it is hard to see how a restorative justice program based on dialogue and communication would be effective. Guilt seems to have the opposite effect on empathy from shame, and leads to more empathy for others which in turn creates motivation for reparative actions.

Q. Which one of the following best describes the term 'therapeutic jurisprudence' as used in the second paragraph of the passage?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The use of restorative justice programs within the criminal justice system is a relatively recent development that has started being used instead of the traditional retributive system that defines justice in a punitive way. There are many examples of restorative justice programs or changes in judicial procedure that illustrate the shift towards a restorative justice mentality within the criminal justice system generally. Providing closure for victims has become a goal of the criminal justice system and although there is not a concrete definition of closure it is generally accepted to be an emotional state related to peace, relief, or a sense of finality.

The victims should be "at the center of the criminal justice process" rather than lost somewhere on the periphery. This is just one of many ideas at the heart of the restorative justice movement. Judges have been viewed in the past as if they were some kind of mechanical calculator of justice that applied strict logic and rationality to the cases to determine how the law should be applied. That idea is slowly losing support as restorative justice and other victim centered programs emerge. There is even a subfield within law known as therapeutic jurisprudence that sees the law as a potential vehicle for victim therapy by recognizing that law is not about pure logic but experience and emotion.

Restorative justice questions the belief that punishment of the offender is obligatory to restore justice. It suggests that providing the victims with satisfaction by involving them in the justice process is far more beneficial. Offender punishment in restorative justice programs is more flexible and keys primarily on making the offender take accountability and feel certain emotions.

There is a different form of deontological ethics posited by W.D. Ross that relies on several prima facie duties to which all people should adhere; fidelity, reparation, gratitude, non-injury, beneficence, self-improvement, and justice. Restorative justice programs fall neatly into this form of ethics by focusing on offender guilt and accountability (fidelity); involving the victim to discover how the situation can be repaired (reparation); creating a sense of empathy between the two parties by establishing communication'; preventing a cycle of violence or revenge (beneficence); focusing on creating new behaviors in the accused (self-improvement); and reaching a decision that is believed to be doing justice by all parties involved.

Jackson (2009) explains that one goal of restorative justice is to hopefully create feelings of guilt and shame in the offender through the victim's expression of their feelings. Shame is more painful of an experience for an individual than guilt. Shame makes individuals want to run off and hide while guilt solicits motivation to confess, repair, and apologize. Shame creates a situation that naturally inhibits people from opening up and sharing their experiences with others.

Just taking a quick glance at the traits of shame and guilt respectively creates an intuitive response that perhaps guilt is better suited than shame for restorative justice programs. If shame makes an individual want to turn away and hide, then it is hard to see how a restorative justice program based on dialogue and communication would be effective. Guilt seems to have the opposite effect on empathy from shame, and leads to more empathy for others which in turn creates motivation for reparative actions.

Q. Which of the following statements regarding restorative justice is true?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The use of restorative justice programs within the criminal justice system is a relatively recent development that has started being used instead of the traditional retributive system that defines justice in a punitive way. There are many examples of restorative justice programs or changes in judicial procedure that illustrate the shift towards a restorative justice mentality within the criminal justice system generally. Providing closure for victims has become a goal of the criminal justice system and although there is not a concrete definition of closure it is generally accepted to be an emotional state related to peace, relief, or a sense of finality.

The victims should be "at the center of the criminal justice process" rather than lost somewhere on the periphery. This is just one of many ideas at the heart of the restorative justice movement. Judges have been viewed in the past as if they were some kind of mechanical calculator of justice that applied strict logic and rationality to the cases to determine how the law should be applied. That idea is slowly losing support as restorative justice and other victim centered programs emerge. There is even a subfield within law known as therapeutic jurisprudence that sees the law as a potential vehicle for victim therapy by recognizing that law is not about pure logic but experience and emotion.

Restorative justice questions the belief that punishment of the offender is obligatory to restore justice. It suggests that providing the victims with satisfaction by involving them in the justice process is far more beneficial. Offender punishment in restorative justice programs is more flexible and keys primarily on making the offender take accountability and feel certain emotions.

There is a different form of deontological ethics posited by W.D. Ross that relies on several prima facie duties to which all people should adhere; fidelity, reparation, gratitude, non-injury, beneficence, self-improvement, and justice. Restorative justice programs fall neatly into this form of ethics by focusing on offender guilt and accountability (fidelity); involving the victim to discover how the situation can be repaired (reparation); creating a sense of empathy between the two parties by establishing communication'; preventing a cycle of violence or revenge (beneficence); focusing on creating new behaviors in the accused (self-improvement); and reaching a decision that is believed to be doing justice by all parties involved.

Jackson (2009) explains that one goal of restorative justice is to hopefully create feelings of guilt and shame in the offender through the victim's expression of their feelings. Shame is more painful of an experience for an individual than guilt. Shame makes individuals want to run off and hide while guilt solicits motivation to confess, repair, and apologize. Shame creates a situation that naturally inhibits people from opening up and sharing their experiences with others.

Just taking a quick glance at the traits of shame and guilt respectively creates an intuitive response that perhaps guilt is better suited than shame for restorative justice programs. If shame makes an individual want to turn away and hide, then it is hard to see how a restorative justice program based on dialogue and communication would be effective. Guilt seems to have the opposite effect on empathy from shame, and leads to more empathy for others which in turn creates motivation for reparative actions.

Q. Which of the following is not part of the prima facie duties that make up the deontological ethics posited by W. D. Ross?

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage.

The use of restorative justice programs within the criminal justice system is a relatively recent development that has started being used instead of the traditional retributive system that defines justice in a punitive way. There are many examples of restorative justice programs or changes in judicial procedure that illustrate the shift towards a restorative justice mentality within the criminal justice system generally. Providing closure for victims has become a goal of the criminal justice system and although there is not a concrete definition of closure it is generally accepted to be an emotional state related to peace, relief, or a sense of finality.

The victims should be "at the center of the criminal justice process" rather than lost somewhere on the periphery. This is just one of many ideas at the heart of the restorative justice movement. Judges have been viewed in the past as if they were some kind of mechanical calculator of justice that applied strict logic and rationality to the cases to determine how the law should be applied. That idea is slowly losing support as restorative justice and other victim centered programs emerge. There is even a subfield within law known as therapeutic jurisprudence that sees the law as a potential vehicle for victim therapy by recognizing that law is not about pure logic but experience and emotion.

Restorative justice questions the belief that punishment of the offender is obligatory to restore justice. It suggests that providing the victims with satisfaction by involving them in the justice process is far more beneficial. Offender punishment in restorative justice programs is more flexible and keys primarily on making the offender take accountability and feel certain emotions.

There is a different form of deontological ethics posited by W.D. Ross that relies on several prima facie duties to which all people should adhere; fidelity, reparation, gratitude, non-injury, beneficence, self-improvement, and justice. Restorative justice programs fall neatly into this form of ethics by focusing on offender guilt and accountability (fidelity); involving the victim to discover how the situation can be repaired (reparation); creating a sense of empathy between the two parties by establishing communication'; preventing a cycle of violence or revenge (beneficence); focusing on creating new behaviors in the accused (self-improvement); and reaching a decision that is believed to be doing justice by all parties involved.

Jackson (2009) explains that one goal of restorative justice is to hopefully create feelings of guilt and shame in the offender through the victim's expression of their feelings. Shame is more painful of an experience for an individual than guilt. Shame makes individuals want to run off and hide while guilt solicits motivation to confess, repair, and apologize. Shame creates a situation that naturally inhibits people from opening up and sharing their experiences with others.

Just taking a quick glance at the traits of shame and guilt respectively creates an intuitive response that perhaps guilt is better suited than shame for restorative justice programs. If shame makes an individual want to turn away and hide, then it is hard to see how a restorative justice program based on dialogue and communication would be effective. Guilt seems to have the opposite effect on empathy from shame, and leads to more empathy for others which in turn creates motivation for reparative actions.

Q. Restorative programs should invoke the feeling of guilt rather than shame in the accused, because:

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

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 legalization 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: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

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 legalization 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: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

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 legalization 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: Read the passage and answer the question based on it.

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 legalization 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 mainstream'?

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

The opposition between 'nature' and 'culture' is problematic for many reasons, but there's one that we rarely discuss. The 'nature vs culture' dualism leaves out an entire domain that properly belongs to neither: the world of waste. The mountains of waste that we produce every year or the new cosmos of micro-plastics expanding through our oceans – none of these have ever been entered into the ledger under 'culture'. Waste is precisely what dissolves the distinction between nature and culture. Nature and waste have fused at both planetary and microbiological scales. Similarly, waste is not merely a by-product of culture: it is culture. To focus our gaze on waste is not an act of morbid negativity; it is an act of cultural realism. If we look at the material ages of human history, from the Stone Age and the Bronze Age through to the Steam Age and the Information Age, we get the illusory sense that hard things are dematerialising. In fact, the opposite is true. The Steam Age launched a great explosion of material goods that has mushroomed exponentially ever since, while statistics about our current rates of waste numb the mind.

To say that we live in a Waste Age is to acknowledge both its geological and economic dimensions. It is to acknowledge that growth is entirely dependent on the relentless and ruthlessly efficient generation of waste. Is this an ungenerous and pessimistic take on human activity in the 21st century? On the contrary. Invoking the Waste Age offers the opportunity for a radical shift in late-capitalist civilisation. By recognising the scale of the crisis can we reorient society and the economy towards less polluting modes of producing, consuming and living.

The problem is that waste has always been a marginal issue, both literally and figuratively. It has been dumped in and on the peripheries, consigned to that mythical place called 'away'. It has always been an 'externality', an unavoidable byproduct of necessary industrialisation. But it is now an internality – internal to every ecosystem and every digestive system from marine microorganisms to humans. To invoke the Waste Age is to usher in the hope of a cleaner future.

Contrary to what we might assume, wastefulness is not a natural human instinct – we had to be taught how to do it. Consumers had to be persuaded that this magical new substance – plastic – was not too good to be thrown away. Some observers were quick to disapprove. Vance Packard's details at length the different forms of planned obsolescence, from products engineered to fail to those that are simply meant to be more desirable than last year's model. It is understood that such obsolescence is a necessary feature of a healthy economy – from politicians to cynical businessmen to consumers who think it is their patriotic duty to shop and support the economy. The very idea of the 'lifetime guarantee' conjured up the specter of unemployment and shuttered factories. You might think that I'm suggesting that recycling is the answer to this crisis. Recycling rates are pathetically inadequate, and in many countries the system is essentially broken. The notion of recycling works to justify the production of more virgin plastics and other materials, as if it's alright because they will be recycled.

Q. The author of this passage is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following:

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

The opposition between 'nature' and 'culture' is problematic for many reasons, but there's one that we rarely discuss. The 'nature vs culture' dualism leaves out an entire domain that properly belongs to neither: the world of waste. The mountains of waste that we produce every year or the new cosmos of micro-plastics expanding through our oceans – none of these have ever been entered into the ledger under 'culture'. Waste is precisely what dissolves the distinction between nature and culture. Nature and waste have fused at both planetary and microbiological scales. Similarly, waste is not merely a by-product of culture: it is culture. To focus our gaze on waste is not an act of morbid negativity; it is an act of cultural realism. If we look at the material ages of human history, from the Stone Age and the Bronze Age through to the Steam Age and the Information Age, we get the illusory sense that hard things are dematerialising. In fact, the opposite is true. The Steam Age launched a great explosion of material goods that has mushroomed exponentially ever since, while statistics about our current rates of waste numb the mind.

To say that we live in a Waste Age is to acknowledge both its geological and economic dimensions. It is to acknowledge that growth is entirely dependent on the relentless and ruthlessly efficient generation of waste. Is this an ungenerous and pessimistic take on human activity in the 21st century? On the contrary. Invoking the Waste Age offers the opportunity for a radical shift in late-capitalist civilisation. By recognising the scale of the crisis can we reorient society and the economy towards less polluting modes of producing, consuming and living.

The problem is that waste has always been a marginal issue, both literally and figuratively. It has been dumped in and on the peripheries, consigned to that mythical place called 'away'. It has always been an 'externality', an unavoidable byproduct of necessary industrialisation. But it is now an internality – internal to every ecosystem and every digestive system from marine microorganisms to humans. To invoke the Waste Age is to usher in the hope of a cleaner future.

Contrary to what we might assume, wastefulness is not a natural human instinct – we had to be taught how to do it. Consumers had to be persuaded that this magical new substance – plastic – was not too good to be thrown away. Some observers were quick to disapprove. Vance Packard's details at length the different forms of planned obsolescence, from products engineered to fail to those that are simply meant to be more desirable than last year's model. It is understood that such obsolescence is a necessary feature of a healthy economy – from politicians to cynical businessmen to consumers who think it is their patriotic duty to shop and support the economy. The very idea of the 'lifetime guarantee' conjured up the specter of unemployment and shuttered factories. You might think that I'm suggesting that recycling is the answer to this crisis. Recycling rates are pathetically inadequate, and in many countries the system is essentially broken. The notion of recycling works to justify the production of more virgin plastics and other materials, as if it's alright because they will be recycled.

Q. Which of the following can be best inferred about ''cultural realism'' as mentioned in the first paragraph of the passage?

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

The opposition between 'nature' and 'culture' is problematic for many reasons, but there's one that we rarely discuss. The 'nature vs culture' dualism leaves out an entire domain that properly belongs to neither: the world of waste. The mountains of waste that we produce every year or the new cosmos of micro-plastics expanding through our oceans – none of these have ever been entered into the ledger under 'culture'. Waste is precisely what dissolves the distinction between nature and culture. Nature and waste have fused at both planetary and microbiological scales. Similarly, waste is not merely a by-product of culture: it is culture. To focus our gaze on waste is not an act of morbid negativity; it is an act of cultural realism. If we look at the material ages of human history, from the Stone Age and the Bronze Age through to the Steam Age and the Information Age, we get the illusory sense that hard things are dematerialising. In fact, the opposite is true. The Steam Age launched a great explosion of material goods that has mushroomed exponentially ever since, while statistics about our current rates of waste numb the mind.

To say that we live in a Waste Age is to acknowledge both its geological and economic dimensions. It is to acknowledge that growth is entirely dependent on the relentless and ruthlessly efficient generation of waste. Is this an ungenerous and pessimistic take on human activity in the 21st century? On the contrary. Invoking the Waste Age offers the opportunity for a radical shift in late-capitalist civilisation. By recognising the scale of the crisis can we reorient society and the economy towards less polluting modes of producing, consuming and living.

The problem is that waste has always been a marginal issue, both literally and figuratively. It has been dumped in and on the peripheries, consigned to that mythical place called 'away'. It has always been an 'externality', an unavoidable byproduct of necessary industrialisation. But it is now an internality – internal to every ecosystem and every digestive system from marine microorganisms to humans. To invoke the Waste Age is to usher in the hope of a cleaner future.

Contrary to what we might assume, wastefulness is not a natural human instinct – we had to be taught how to do it. Consumers had to be persuaded that this magical new substance – plastic – was not too good to be thrown away. Some observers were quick to disapprove. Vance Packard's details at length the different forms of planned obsolescence, from products engineered to fail to those that are simply meant to be more desirable than last year's model. It is understood that such obsolescence is a necessary feature of a healthy economy – from politicians to cynical businessmen to consumers who think it is their patriotic duty to shop and support the economy. The very idea of the 'lifetime guarantee' conjured up the specter of unemployment and shuttered factories. You might think that I'm suggesting that recycling is the answer to this crisis. Recycling rates are pathetically inadequate, and in many countries the system is essentially broken. The notion of recycling works to justify the production of more virgin plastics and other materials, as if it's alright because they will be recycled.

Q. ''It has been dumped in and on the peripheries, consigned to that mythical place called 'away'.'' Which of the following can be inferred when the author states this in the passage?

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

The opposition between 'nature' and 'culture' is problematic for many reasons, but there's one that we rarely discuss. The 'nature vs culture' dualism leaves out an entire domain that properly belongs to neither: the world of waste. The mountains of waste that we produce every year or the new cosmos of micro-plastics expanding through our oceans – none of these have ever been entered into the ledger under 'culture'. Waste is precisely what dissolves the distinction between nature and culture. Nature and waste have fused at both planetary and microbiological scales. Similarly, waste is not merely a by-product of culture: it is culture. To focus our gaze on waste is not an act of morbid negativity; it is an act of cultural realism. If we look at the material ages of human history, from the Stone Age and the Bronze Age through to the Steam Age and the Information Age, we get the illusory sense that hard things are dematerialising. In fact, the opposite is true. The Steam Age launched a great explosion of material goods that has mushroomed exponentially ever since, while statistics about our current rates of waste numb the mind.

To say that we live in a Waste Age is to acknowledge both its geological and economic dimensions. It is to acknowledge that growth is entirely dependent on the relentless and ruthlessly efficient generation of waste. Is this an ungenerous and pessimistic take on human activity in the 21st century? On the contrary. Invoking the Waste Age offers the opportunity for a radical shift in late-capitalist civilisation. By recognising the scale of the crisis can we reorient society and the economy towards less polluting modes of producing, consuming and living.

The problem is that waste has always been a marginal issue, both literally and figuratively. It has been dumped in and on the peripheries, consigned to that mythical place called 'away'. It has always been an 'externality', an unavoidable byproduct of necessary industrialisation. But it is now an internality – internal to every ecosystem and every digestive system from marine microorganisms to humans. To invoke the Waste Age is to usher in the hope of a cleaner future.

Contrary to what we might assume, wastefulness is not a natural human instinct – we had to be taught how to do it. Consumers had to be persuaded that this magical new substance – plastic – was not too good to be thrown away. Some observers were quick to disapprove. Vance Packard's details at length the different forms of planned obsolescence, from products engineered to fail to those that are simply meant to be more desirable than last year's model. It is understood that such obsolescence is a necessary feature of a healthy economy – from politicians to cynical businessmen to consumers who think it is their patriotic duty to shop and support the economy. The very idea of the 'lifetime guarantee' conjured up the specter of unemployment and shuttered factories. You might think that I'm suggesting that recycling is the answer to this crisis. Recycling rates are pathetically inadequate, and in many countries the system is essentially broken. The notion of recycling works to justify the production of more virgin plastics and other materials, as if it's alright because they will be recycled.

Q. The author of the passage is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?