Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Professor Amartya Sen, the eminent economist and the Noble Laureate in Economics (1998), in his espoused theory of welfare economy, emphasized that in many underdeveloped countries like India, the state should play an important and increasingly varied role of economic development today. There are four general arguments, all of them related, for state participation in economic development. First, the entrance requirements in terms of financial capital and capital equipment are very large in certain industries, and the size of these obstacles will serve as barriers to entry on the part of private investors. One can imagine that these obstacles are imposing in industries such as steel production, automobiles, electronics, and parts of the textile industry. In addition, there are what Myint calls technical indivisibilities in social overhead capital. Public utilities, transport, communication and other infra-structural facilities must be in place before industrial development can occur, and they do not lend themselves to small-scale improvements. A related argument centers on the demand side of economy. This economy is seen as fragmented, disconnected, and incapable of inputs from other parts of the economy. Consequently, economic activity in one part of the economy does not generate the dynamism in other sectors that is expected in more cohesive economics. Industrialization necessarily involves many different sectors; economic enterprises will thrive best in an environment in which they draw on inputs from related economic sectors and, in turn, release their own goods for industrial utilization within their own economics. A third argument concerns the low-level equilibrium trap in which less developed countries find themselves. At subsistence levels, societies consume exactly what they produce. There is no remaining surplus for investment. As per-capita income rises, however the additional income will not be used for savings and investment. Instead, it will have the effect of increasing the population that will eat up the surplus and force the society to its former subsistence position. Fortunately, after a certain point, the rate of population growth will decrease; economic growth will intersect with and eventually outstrip population growth. The private sector, however, will not be able to provide the one-shot large dose of capital to push economic growth beyond those levels where population increases eat up the incremental advances. The final argument concerns the relationship between delayed development and the state. Countries wishing to industrialize today have more competitors, and these competitors occupy a more differentiated industrial terrain than previously. This means that the available niches in the international system are more limited. For today's industrializers, therefore, the process of industrialization cannot be a haphazard affair, nor can the pace, content, direction be left solely to market forces. Part of the reason for a strong state presence, then, relates specifically to the competitive international environment in which modern countries and firms must operate. Q. Which of the following best states the central point of the passage?

Less developed countries are trapped in an inescapable cycle of low production and demand.

State participation plays a very limited role in some specific sectors, like steel, automobiles, etc., compared to private capital investment in the industrialization of underdeveloped countries.

Without state intervention, many less developed countries will not be able to carry out the interrelated tasks necessary to achieve industrialization.

Underdeveloped countries face a crisis of overpopulation and lack of effective demand that cannot be overcome without outside assistance.

Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Professor Amartya Sen, the eminent economist and the Noble Laureate in Economics (1998), in his espoused theory of welfare economy, emphasized that in many underdeveloped countries like India, the state should play an important and increasingly varied role of economic development today. There are four general arguments, all of them related, for state participation in economic development. First, the entrance requirements in terms of financial capital and capital equipment are very large in certain industries, and the size of these obstacles will serve as barriers to entry on the part of private investors. One can imagine that these obstacles are imposing in industries such as steel production, automobiles, electronics, and parts of the textile industry. In addition, there are what Myint calls technical indivisibilities in social overhead capital. Public utilities, transport, communication and other infra-structural facilities must be in place before industrial development can occur, and they do not lend themselves to small-scale improvements. A related argument centers on the demand side of economy. This economy is seen as fragmented, disconnected, and incapable of inputs from other parts of the economy. Consequently, economic activity in one part of the economy does not generate the dynamism in other sectors that is expected in more cohesive economics. Industrialization necessarily involves many different sectors; economic enterprises will thrive best in an environment in which they draw on inputs from related economic sectors and, in turn, release their own goods for industrial utilization within their own economics. A third argument concerns the low-level equilibrium trap in which less developed countries find themselves. At subsistence levels, societies consume exactly what they produce. There is no remaining surplus for investment. As per-capita income rises, however the additional income will not be used for savings and investment. Instead, it will have the effect of increasing the population that will eat up the surplus and force the society to its former subsistence position. Fortunately, after a certain point, the rate of population growth will decrease; economic growth will intersect with and eventually outstrip population growth. The private sector, however, will not be able to provide the one-shot large dose of capital to push economic growth beyond those levels where population increases eat up the incremental advances. The final argument concerns the relationship between delayed development and the state. Countries wishing to industrialize today have more competitors, and these competitors occupy a more differentiated industrial terrain than previously. This means that the available niches in the international system are more limited. For today's industrializers, therefore, the process of industrialization cannot be a haphazard affair, nor can the pace, content, direction be left solely to market forces. Part of the reason for a strong state presence, then, relates specifically to the competitive international environment in which modern countries and firms must operate. Q. The author suggests all of the following as appropriate roles for the state in economic development EXCEPT:

Safeguarding against the domination of local markets by a single source of capital

Financing industries with large capital requirements

Providing capital inputs sufficient for growth to surpass increases in per capita consumption

Helping to coordinate demand among different economic sectors

Directions: The passage below is accompanied by a set of questions. Choose the best answer to each question. Professor Amartya Sen, the eminent economist and the Noble Laureate in Economics (1998), in his espoused theory of welfare economy, emphasized that in many underdeveloped countries like India, the state should play an important and increasingly varied role of economic development today. There are four general arguments, all of them related, for state participation in economic development. First, the entrance requirements in terms of financial capital and capital equipment are very large in certain industries, and the size of these obstacles will serve as barriers to entry on the part of private investors. One can imagine that these obstacles are imposing in industries such as steel production, automobiles, electronics, and parts of the textile industry. In addition, there are what Myint calls technical indivisibilities in social overhead capital. Public utilities, transport, communication and other infra-structural facilities must be in place before industrial development can occur, and they do not lend themselves to small-scale improvements. A related argument centers on the demand side of economy. This economy is seen as fragmented, disconnected, and incapable of inputs from other parts of the economy. Consequently, economic activity in one part of the economy does not generate the dynamism in other sectors that is expected in more cohesive economics. Industrialization necessarily involves many different sectors; economic enterprises will thrive best in an environment in which they draw on inputs from related economic sectors and, in turn, release their own goods for industrial utilization within their own economics. A third argument concerns the low-level equilibrium trap in which less developed countries find themselves. At subsistence levels, societies consume exactly what they produce. There is no remaining surplus for investment. As per-capita income rises, however the additional income will not be used for savings and investment. Instead, it will have the effect of increasing the population that will eat up the surplus and force the society to its former subsistence position. Fortunately, after a certain point, the rate of population growth will decrease; economic growth will intersect with and eventually outstrip population growth. The private sector, however, will not be able to provide the one-shot large dose of capital to push economic growth beyond those levels where population increases eat up the incremental advances. The final argument concerns the relationship between delayed development and the state. Countries wishing to industrialize today have more competitors, and these competitors occupy a more differentiated industrial terrain than previously. This means that the available niches in the international system are more limited. For today's industrializers, therefore, the process of industrialization cannot be a haphazard affair, nor can the pace, content, direction be left solely to market forces. Part of the reason for a strong state presence, then, relates specifically to the competitive international environment in which modern countries and firms must operate. Q. According to the passage, the low-level equilibrium trap in underdeveloped countries results from

The tendency of societies to produce more than they can use

Intervention of the state in economic development

The inability of market forces to overcome the effects of population growth

The fragmented and disconnected nature of the demand side of the economy

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question based on it. Among the cryptic stories everyone knows since childhood, the myth of Atlantis is probably one of the most thrilling and mysterious ones. The idea of a huge continent lying underwater, once inhabited by a supposedly ingenious civilisation is intriguing on its own, and the numerous hints and clues that Atlantis was a real place make archaeologists, historians, and adventurers across the globe seek for its remains with enviable enthusiasm. Still, the myth of Atlantis is controversial and debated, and there are numerous theories regarding where it was located, which people inhabited it, and why this civilisation disappeared. Before the 19 th century, Atlantis was more of a myth romantic seekers of truth tried to prove; however, in 1882, Ignatius Donnelly published a book titled ''Atlantis, the Antediluvian'' World; in this manuscript, he proved that Atlantis was not a mere legend crafted by Plato, but could be a historical reality. Donnelly believed there must have been an incredibly advanced ancient civilisation that invented metallurgy, agriculture, astronomy, and so on, and from which other, less sophisticated civilisations must have had inherited knowledge and technologies. He also believed that Atlantis was located right where Plato described: near the Pillars of Hercules by the Straits of Gibraltar; the Atlantic Ocean's ''shifting waters,'' as he called it, sank the continent on which Atlantis was located. Continental plate tectonics shows that Donnelly's theory is incorrect, but it happened to be extremely tenacious, so even nowadays many people believed Atlantis to have existed right where Plato said it did. This theory also inspired other people to start looking for Atlantis, spawning dozens of newer speculations. One of them belongs to Charles Berlitz, an author who mostly wrote about various paranormal phenomena. Berlitz claimed that Atlantis sank in the infamous Bermuda Triangle. Obviously, none of these theories stands up to criticism, but they still remain popular. A more realistic explanation of the emergence of the image of Atlantis is offered by a professor of classics at Bard College in Annandale, James Romm. He believes that Atlantis was a metaphor introduced by Plato to illustrate his philosophical concepts. Romm says that Plato ''was dealing with a number of issues, themes that run throughout his work. The myth about Atlantis could be an illustration of Plato's ideas about a utopian state. Besides, there is more proof that Atlantis must have been a metaphor rather than a historic reality. So far, it is still not clear whether Atlantis existed or not. Romantics believe it did, continuing to invent new theories, clinging to a few unreliable theories introduced in the past; modern science, however - oceanography, in particular - proves them wrong. The most credible explanation of Atlantis is that it must have been Plato's metaphor illustrating his philosophical concepts; advocating a utopian society. Plato described a prosperous civilisation which fell the victim of its own greediness, immorality, and corruption; in this regard, the legend of Atlantis makes perfect sense. Q. According to the passage, which of the following statements is closest to Berlitz's claim about Atlantis?

The absence of technology led to its destruction.

Mystics failed to reason its sudden and unexpected disappearance.

Atlantis submerged in the Bermuda Triangle.

Sailors were untrained which led to its consequent ruin.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question based on it. Among the cryptic stories everyone knows since childhood, the myth of Atlantis is probably one of the most thrilling and mysterious ones. The idea of a huge continent lying underwater, once inhabited by a supposedly ingenious civilisation is intriguing on its own, and the numerous hints and clues that Atlantis was a real place make archaeologists, historians, and adventurers across the globe seek for its remains with enviable enthusiasm. Still, the myth of Atlantis is controversial and debated, and there are numerous theories regarding where it was located, which people inhabited it, and why this civilisation disappeared. Before the 19 th century, Atlantis was more of a myth romantic seekers of truth tried to prove; however, in 1882, Ignatius Donnelly published a book titled ''Atlantis, the Antediluvian'' World; in this manuscript, he proved that Atlantis was not a mere legend crafted by Plato, but could be a historical reality. Donnelly believed there must have been an incredibly advanced ancient civilisation that invented metallurgy, agriculture, astronomy, and so on, and from which other, less sophisticated civilisations must have had inherited knowledge and technologies. He also believed that Atlantis was located right where Plato described: near the Pillars of Hercules by the Straits of Gibraltar; the Atlantic Ocean's ''shifting waters,'' as he called it, sank the continent on which Atlantis was located. Continental plate tectonics shows that Donnelly's theory is incorrect, but it happened to be extremely tenacious, so even nowadays many people believed Atlantis to have existed right where Plato said it did. This theory also inspired other people to start looking for Atlantis, spawning dozens of newer speculations. One of them belongs to Charles Berlitz, an author who mostly wrote about various paranormal phenomena. Berlitz claimed that Atlantis sank in the infamous Bermuda Triangle. Obviously, none of these theories stands up to criticism, but they still remain popular. A more realistic explanation of the emergence of the image of Atlantis is offered by a professor of classics at Bard College in Annandale, James Romm. He believes that Atlantis was a metaphor introduced by Plato to illustrate his philosophical concepts. Romm says that Plato ''was dealing with a number of issues, themes that run throughout his work. The myth about Atlantis could be an illustration of Plato's ideas about a utopian state. Besides, there is more proof that Atlantis must have been a metaphor rather than a historic reality. So far, it is still not clear whether Atlantis existed or not. Romantics believe it did, continuing to invent new theories, clinging to a few unreliable theories introduced in the past; modern science, however - oceanography, in particular - proves them wrong. The most credible explanation of Atlantis is that it must have been Plato's metaphor illustrating his philosophical concepts; advocating a utopian society. Plato described a prosperous civilisation which fell the victim of its own greediness, immorality, and corruption; in this regard, the legend of Atlantis makes perfect sense. Q. Which of the following options best summarises the main idea of the passage?

It was not clear for long whether Atlantis existed physically or not.

Romantics invented new theories to justify the existence of Atlantis.

Modern science has disproved many theories justifying the existence of Atlantis.

Atlantis was Plato's metaphor advocating a utopian society.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question. Great emotional and intellectual resources are demanded in quarrels; stamina helps, as does a capacity for obsession. But no one is born a good quarreler; the craft must be learned. There are two generally recognized apprenticeships. First, and universally preferred, is a long childhood spent in the company of fractious siblings. After several years of rainy afternoons, brothers and sisters develop a sure feel for the tactics of attrition and the niceties of strategy so necessary in first-rate quarrelling. The only child, or the child of peaceful or repressed households, is likely to grow up failing to understand that quarrels, unlike arguments, are not about anything, least of all the pursuit of truth. The apparent subject of a quarrel is a mere pretext, the real business is the quarrel itself. Essentially, adversaries in a quarrel are out to establish or rescue their dignity. Hence the elementary principle: anything may be said. The unschooled, probably no less quarrelsome by inclination than anyone else, may spend an hour with knocking heart, sifting the consequences of calling this old acquaintance a lying fraud, 'Too late?' with a cheerful wave the old acquaintance has left the room. Those who miss their first apprenticeship may care to enrol in the second, the bad marriage. This can be perilous for the neophyte; the mutual intimacy of spouses makes them at once more vulnerable and more dangerous in attack. Once sex is involved, the stakes are higher all round. And there is an unspoken rule that those who love, or have loved, one another are granted a license for unlimited beastliness such as is denied to mere sworn enemies. For all that, some of our most tenacious black belt quarrellers have come to it late in life and mastered every throw, from the Crushing Silence to the Gloating Apology, in less than ten years of marriage. A quarrel may last years. Among brooding types with time on their hands like writers, half a lifetime is not uncommon. In its most refined form, a quarrel may consist of the participants not talking to each other. They will need to scheme laboriously to appear in public together to register their silence. Brief, violent quarrels are also known as rows. In all cases the essential ingredient remains the same; the original cause must be forgotten as soon as possible. From here on, dignity, pride, self-esteem, honour are the crucial issues, which is why quarrelling, like jealousy, is an all-consuming business, virtually a profession. For the quarreller's very self-hood is on the line. To lose an argument is a brief disappointment, much like losing a game of tennis; but to be crushed in a quarrel…rather bite off your tongue and spread it at your opponent's feet. Q. According to the author, unschooled quarrelers are said to be at a disadvantage because

Their insults fail to offend their opponent

They reveal their nervousness to their opponent

They suffer from remorse for what they've said

They are apprehensive about speaking their minds

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question. Great emotional and intellectual resources are demanded in quarrels; stamina helps, as does a capacity for obsession. But no one is born a good quarreler; the craft must be learned. There are two generally recognized apprenticeships. First, and universally preferred, is a long childhood spent in the company of fractious siblings. After several years of rainy afternoons, brothers and sisters develop a sure feel for the tactics of attrition and the niceties of strategy so necessary in first-rate quarrelling. The only child, or the child of peaceful or repressed households, is likely to grow up failing to understand that quarrels, unlike arguments, are not about anything, least of all the pursuit of truth. The apparent subject of a quarrel is a mere pretext, the real business is the quarrel itself. Essentially, adversaries in a quarrel are out to establish or rescue their dignity. Hence the elementary principle: anything may be said. The unschooled, probably no less quarrelsome by inclination than anyone else, may spend an hour with knocking heart, sifting the consequences of calling this old acquaintance a lying fraud, 'Too late?' with a cheerful wave the old acquaintance has left the room. Those who miss their first apprenticeship may care to enrol in the second, the bad marriage. This can be perilous for the neophyte; the mutual intimacy of spouses makes them at once more vulnerable and more dangerous in attack. Once sex is involved, the stakes are higher all round. And there is an unspoken rule that those who love, or have loved, one another are granted a license for unlimited beastliness such as is denied to mere sworn enemies. For all that, some of our most tenacious black belt quarrellers have come to it late in life and mastered every throw, from the Crushing Silence to the Gloating Apology, in less than ten years of marriage. A quarrel may last years. Among brooding types with time on their hands like writers, half a lifetime is not uncommon. In its most refined form, a quarrel may consist of the participants not talking to each other. They will need to scheme laboriously to appear in public together to register their silence. Brief, violent quarrels are also known as rows. In all cases the essential ingredient remains the same; the original cause must be forgotten as soon as possible. From here on, dignity, pride, self-esteem, honour are the crucial issues, which is why quarrelling, like jealousy, is an all-consuming business, virtually a profession. For the quarreller's very self-hood is on the line. To lose an argument is a brief disappointment, much like losing a game of tennis; but to be crushed in a quarrel…rather bite off your tongue and spread it at your opponent's feet. Q. According to the writer, quarrels between married couples may be

Physically violent as the couples hurt each other physically

Extremely bitter as the couples become more intimate

Essentially trivial since they resolve their differences easily

Sincerely regretted as they end up in divorce

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question. Great emotional and intellectual resources are demanded in quarrels; stamina helps, as does a capacity for obsession. But no one is born a good quarreler; the craft must be learned. There are two generally recognized apprenticeships. First, and universally preferred, is a long childhood spent in the company of fractious siblings. After several years of rainy afternoons, brothers and sisters develop a sure feel for the tactics of attrition and the niceties of strategy so necessary in first-rate quarrelling. The only child, or the child of peaceful or repressed households, is likely to grow up failing to understand that quarrels, unlike arguments, are not about anything, least of all the pursuit of truth. The apparent subject of a quarrel is a mere pretext, the real business is the quarrel itself. Essentially, adversaries in a quarrel are out to establish or rescue their dignity. Hence the elementary principle: anything may be said. The unschooled, probably no less quarrelsome by inclination than anyone else, may spend an hour with knocking heart, sifting the consequences of calling this old acquaintance a lying fraud, 'Too late?' with a cheerful wave the old acquaintance has left the room. Those who miss their first apprenticeship may care to enrol in the second, the bad marriage. This can be perilous for the neophyte; the mutual intimacy of spouses makes them at once more vulnerable and more dangerous in attack. Once sex is involved, the stakes are higher all round. And there is an unspoken rule that those who love, or have loved, one another are granted a license for unlimited beastliness such as is denied to mere sworn enemies. For all that, some of our most tenacious black belt quarrellers have come to it late in life and mastered every throw, from the Crushing Silence to the Gloating Apology, in less than ten years of marriage. A quarrel may last years. Among brooding types with time on their hands like writers, half a lifetime is not uncommon. In its most refined form, a quarrel may consist of the participants not talking to each other. They will need to scheme laboriously to appear in public together to register their silence. Brief, violent quarrels are also known as rows. In all cases the essential ingredient remains the same; the original cause must be forgotten as soon as possible. From here on, dignity, pride, self-esteem, honour are the crucial issues, which is why quarrelling, like jealousy, is an all-consuming business, virtually a profession. For the quarreller's very self-hood is on the line. To lose an argument is a brief disappointment, much like losing a game of tennis; but to be crushed in a quarrel…rather bite off your tongue and spread it at your opponent's feet. Q. Which of the following best states the difference between a quarrel and an argument as described by the author in the passage?

The former involves individual egos

The former concerns strong points of view

The latter has well-established rules

The latter concerns trivial issues

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage. Emile Durkheim, the first person to be formally recognised as a sociologist and the most scientific of the pioneers, conducted a study that stands as a research model for sociologists today. His investigation of suicide was, in fact, the first sociological study to use statistics. In Suicide (1964, originally published in 1897) Durkheim documented his contention that some aspects of human behaviour - even something as allegedly individualistic as suicide - can be explained without reference to individuals. Like all of Durkheim's work, suicide must be viewed within the context of his concern for social integration. Durkheim wanted to see if suicide rates within a social entity (for example, a group, organisation, or society) are related to the degree to which individuals are socially involved (integrated and regulated). Durkheim described three types of suicide: egoistic, anomic and altruistic. Egoistic suicide is promoted when individuals do not have sufficient social ties. Since single (never married) adults, for example, are not heavily involved with family life, they are more likely to commit suicide. On the other hand, altruistic suicide is more likely to occur when social integration is too strong. The ritual suicide of Hindu widows on their husbands' funeral pyres is one example. Military personnel, trained to lay down their lives for their country, provide another illustration. Durkheim's third type of suicide - anomic suicide increases when the social regulation of individuals is disrupted. For example, suicide rates increase during economic depression. People who suddenly find themselves without a job or without hope of finding one are more prone to kill themselves. Suicide may also increase during periods of prosperity. People may loosen their social ties by taking new jobs, moving to new communities, or finding new mates. Using data from the government population reports of several countries (much of it from the French Government Statistical Officer), Durkheim found strong support for his line of reasoning. Suicide rates were higher among single than married people, among military personnel than civilians, among divorced than married people, and among people involved in nation-wide economic crises. It is important to realise that Durkheim's primary interest was not in the empirical (observable) indicators he used such as suicide rates among military personnel, married people, and so forth. Rather, Durkheim used the following indicators to support several of his contentions: (1) Social behaviour can be explained by social rather than psychological factors; (2) Suicide is affected by the degree of integration and regulation within social entities; and (3) Since society can be studied scientifically, sociology is worthy of recognition in the academic world. Durkheim was successful on all three counts. Q. Ritual suicide of Hindu widows on their husbands' funeral pyres was

A manifestation of strong social integration

An example of brutality against women

Directions: Answer the question based on the following passage. Emile Durkheim, the first person to be formally recognised as a sociologist and the most scientific of the pioneers, conducted a study that stands as a research model for sociologists today. His investigation of suicide was, in fact, the first sociological study to use statistics. In Suicide (1964, originally published in 1897) Durkheim documented his contention that some aspects of human behaviour - even something as allegedly individualistic as suicide - can be explained without reference to individuals. Like all of Durkheim's work, suicide must be viewed within the context of his concern for social integration. Durkheim wanted to see if suicide rates within a social entity (for example, a group, organisation, or society) are related to the degree to which individuals are socially involved (integrated and regulated). Durkheim described three types of suicide: egoistic, anomic and altruistic. Egoistic suicide is promoted when individuals do not have sufficient social ties. Since single (never married) adults, for example, are not heavily involved with family life, they are more likely to commit suicide. On the other hand, altruistic suicide is more likely to occur when social integration is too strong. The ritual suicide of Hindu widows on their husbands' funeral pyres is one example. Military personnel, trained to lay down their lives for their country, provide another illustration. Durkheim's third type of suicide - anomic suicide increases when the social regulation of individuals is disrupted. For example, suicide rates increase during economic depression. People who suddenly find themselves without a job or without hope of finding one are more prone to kill themselves. Suicide may also increase during periods of prosperity. People may loosen their social ties by taking new jobs, moving to new communities, or finding new mates. Using data from the government population reports of several countries (much of it from the French Government Statistical Officer), Durkheim found strong support for his line of reasoning. Suicide rates were higher among single than married people, among military personnel than civilians, among divorced than married people, and among people involved in nation-wide economic crises. It is important to realise that Durkheim's primary interest was not in the empirical (observable) indicators he used such as suicide rates among military personnel, married people, and so forth. Rather, Durkheim used the following indicators to support several of his contentions: (1) Social behaviour can be explained by social rather than psychological factors; (2) Suicide is affected by the degree of integration and regulation within social entities; and (3) Since society can be studied scientifically, sociology is worthy of recognition in the academic world. Durkheim was successful on all three counts. Q. The approach of Emile Durkheim can be termed scientific on all of the following counts, except

The use of statistics in the sociological investigation of the causes of suicide

The study of specific instances of suicides among military personnel and married people to corroborate his findings

The support that Emile received for his reasoning that co-related his findings to the rate of suicides

The study of social behaviour within social entities rather than an individual or his psychology

CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) Free MCQ Practice Test with Solutions

EduRev

All Courses

Open App

Test is scheduled to be held on
Nov 16, 2024 at 09:00 AM
Start Learning

Important Questions for CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16)

Find all the important questions for CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) at EduRev.Get fully prepared for CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) with EduRev's comprehensive question bank and test resources. Our platform offers a diverse range of question papers covering various topics within the CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) syllabus. Whether you need to review specific subjects or assess your overall readiness, EduRev has you covered. The questions are designed to challenge you and help you gain confidence in tackling the actual exam. Maximize your chances of success by utilizing EduRev's extensive collection of CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) resources.

CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) MCQs with Answers

Prepare for the CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) within the CAT exam with comprehensive MCQs and answers at EduRev. Our platform offers a wide range of practice papers, question papers, and mock tests to familiarize you with the exam pattern and syllabus. Access the best books, study materials, and notes curated by toppers to enhance your preparation. Stay updated with the exam date and receive expert preparation tips and paper analysis. Visit EduRev's official website today and access a wealth of videos and coaching resources to excel in your exam.

Online Tests for CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16)

Practice with a wide array of question papers that follow the exam pattern and syllabus. Our platform offers a user-friendly interface, allowing you to track your progress and identify areas for improvement. Access detailed solutions and explanations for each test to enhance your understanding of concepts. With EduRev's Online Tests, you can build confidence, boost your performance, and ace CAT Mock Test - 14 (November 16) with ease. Join thousands of successful students who have benefited from our trusted online resources.

Education Revolution