CAT Mock Test

PQR is a right angled triangle with PQ=8, QR=6, QT as altitude. If a circle is drawn with QT as diameter, what is the area of the shaded region?

Amar, Akbar and Anthony ran on a racetrack, with Amar finishing 160 m ahead of Akbar and 400 m ahead of Anthony. Akbar finished the race 300 m ahead of Anthony. The three of them ran the entire distance with their respective constant speeds. What was the length of the racetrack?

How many pairs of positive integers, x, y exist; such that x² + 3y and y² + 3x are both perfect squares.

How many ordered pairs (ab,cd) be formed that satisfy the property ab² + cd² = ba² + dc² where ab² represents square of a 2 digit number ab ?

A certain clock marks every hour by striking a number of times equal to the hour and the time required for a stroke is exactly equal to the time interval between strokes. At 9 : 00 a.m. the time lapse between the beginning of the first stroke and the end of the last stroke is 34 seconds. At 18 : 00 hrs. how many seconds elapse between the beginning of the first stroke and the end of the last stroke:

L and M make an appointment to meet on 20th Nov. 2005 at the CAT examination center, but without fixing anything other than that the appointment is between 10 a.m. to 11 a.m. They decide to wait no longer than 10 minutes for each other. Assuming that each is independently likely to arrive at any time during the hour, find the probability that they will meet

What is the maximum number of points of intersection of 10 squares of same side length? (Assume no two edges overlap)

In the figure shown below, all the vertical lines are parallel to each other & are equally spaced. All the horizontal lines are parallel to each other and are equally spaced. What fraction of the area of ABCD, is shaded?

ABC is an equilateral triangle and AX, BY and CZ are three parallel lines. Find the area of triangle ABC

Ken is the best sugar cube retailer in the nation. Trevor, who loves sugar, is coming over to make an order. Ken knows Trevor cannot afford more than 127 sugar cubes, but might ask for any number of cubes less than or equal to that. Ken has to prepare ‘n‘cups of cubes, where ‘n’ is as small as possible, with which he can satisfy any order Trevor might make. How many cubes are in the cup with the most sugar?

Each corner of a square subtends an angle of 30⁰ at the top of a tower ‘h’ meters high standing in the centre of the square. If ‘a’ is the length of the each side of square then 

The total amount of money spent on the purchase of pencils, rubbers and pens is Rs. 45. The cost of one pencil, one rubber and two pens is Rs. 2, Rs. 3 and Rs. 4 respectively. The total number of pencils bought is greater and less than the number of pens and the number of rubbers bought respectively. How many different combinations of the number of pencils, rubbers and pens bought are possible?

The quadratic function f(x) = ax² + bx + c is known to pass through the points (-1, 6); (7, 6), and (1, - 6). Find the smallest value of the function.

Two guys Abhinav and Bineesh are walking downward and upward respectively on a descending escalator. Abhinav takes three steps in the same time when Bineesh takes two steps. When Abhinav covers 90 steps he gets out of the escalator while Bineesh takes 80 steps to get out of the escalator. If they start from opposite ends using the same escalator, find the difference in steps covered by them when they meet.

A merchant buys 80 articles, each at Rs. 40. He sells n of them at a profit of n% and the remaining at a profit of (100 – n)%. What is the minimum profit the merchant could have made on this trade?

Directions for questions 35-39:

In a University examination, six students, Sachin, Ashish, Tanwi, Ankit, Ramesh and Suresh had written the following three papers, Economics, Finance and Accounts. The examination comprised of two parts, internals and externals. The table below shows the performance of each of these six students in this examination. Part A: Indicates the total marks scored by the student in that paper as a percentage of the total marks of all the six students put together in that subject. Part B: Indicates the marks scored by that student in internals as a percentage of total marks scored by that student in that subject. From the table below it can be inferred that Sachin had obtained 30% of marks in Economics out of the total marks obtained by all the six students in Economics put together. Whereas out of the marks scored by him in Economics, the marks scored by him in Internals accounted for 20% of marks.

Q.35)If the ratio of marks obtained by Ankit in the internals of all three subjects (Economics, Finance and Accounts) in that order is 9:3: 4, then what was the ratio of marks scored by Sachin in the externals of those three subjects in the same order?

Directions for questions 35-39:

In a University examination, six students, Sachin, Ashish, Tanwi, Ankit, Ramesh and Suresh had written the following three papers, Economics, Finance and Accounts. The examination comprised of two parts, internals and externals. The table below shows the performance of each of these six students in this examination. Part A: Indicates the total marks scored by the student in that paper as a percentage of the total marks of all the six students put together in that subject. Part B: Indicates the marks scored by that student in internals as a percentage of total marks scored by that student in that subject. From the table below it can be inferred that Sachin had obtained 30% of marks in Economics out of the total marks obtained by all the six students in Economics put together. Whereas out of the marks scored by him in Economics, the marks scored by him in Internals accounted for 20% of marks.

Q.36)If, in the case of Ramesh, the marks scored by him in Externals in Finance is less than that scored by him in Economics and Accounts, then what is the ratio of total marks scored by all students in Finance put together to the total marks scored by all six students in all the subjects put together?

Directions for questions 35-39:

In a University examination, six students, Sachin, Ashish, Tanwi, Ankit, Ramesh and Suresh had written the following three papers, Economics, Finance and Accounts. The examination comprised of two parts, internals and externals. The table below shows the performance of each of these six students in this examination. Part A: Indicates the total marks scored by the student in that paper as a percentage of the total marks of all the six students put together in that subject. Part B: Indicates the marks scored by that student in internals as a percentage of total marks scored by that student in that subject. From the table below it can be inferred that Sachin had obtained 30% of marks in Economics out of the total marks obtained by all the six students in Economics put together. Whereas out of the marks scored by him in Economics, the marks scored by him in Internals accounted for 20% of marks.

Q.37)If the total marks scored by Ramesh in Economics and Accounts are the same, then for how many students from these six is the total marks scored in Economics more than twice the total marks scored by them in Accounts?

Directions for questions 35-39:

In a University examination, six students, Sachin, Ashish, Tanwi, Ankit, Ramesh and Suresh had written the following three papers, Economics, Finance and Accounts. The examination comprised of two parts, internals and externals. The table below shows the performance of each of these six students in this examination. Part A: Indicates the total marks scored by the student in that paper as a percentage of the total marks of all the six students put together in that subject. Part B: Indicates the marks scored by that student in internals as a percentage of total marks scored by that student in that subject. From the table below it can be inferred that Sachin had obtained 30% of marks in Economics out of the total marks obtained by all the six students in Economics put together. Whereas out of the marks scored by him in Economics, the marks scored by him in Internals accounted for 20% of marks.

Q.38)If Suresh had scored 20 marks in Accounts and 45 marks in Finance, then the marks scored by all six students in internals of these 2 subjects would be (All marks, at all stages of evaluation, have to be integers. So, round off any decimal to the next higher number)

Directions for questions 35-39:

In a University examination, six students, Sachin, Ashish, Tanwi, Ankit, Ramesh and Suresh had written the following three papers, Economics, Finance and Accounts. The examination comprised of two parts, internals and externals. The table below shows the performance of each of these six students in this examination. Part A: Indicates the total marks scored by the student in that paper as a percentage of the total marks of all the six students put together in that subject. Part B: Indicates the marks scored by that student in internals as a percentage of total marks scored by that student in that subject. From the table below it can be inferred that Sachin had obtained 30% of marks in Economics out of the total marks obtained by all the six students in Economics put together. Whereas out of the marks scored by him in Economics, the marks scored by him in Internals accounted for 20% of marks.

Q.39)If the marks scored by Sachin in the internals of Economics are same as that scored by Ashish in the internals of Accounts, then what is the ratio of the total marks scored by all six students in Economics put together to that scored in Accounts put together?

If the foreign exchange reserves in the beginning of 1998-99 were Rs.11341 bn and Rs.2961 bn were withdrawn by Chinese residing abroad, then what will be the reserve at the end of year after adjusting trade deficit of the year?

The total import to China in 1998-1999 from Europe and Africa was nearly balanced by the total export from China to

Direction for questions 43to 45: Answer the questions based on the following table.

Q43)The maximum percentage decrease in market share of any product in any city for company A is

Direction for questions 43to 45: Answer the questions based on the following table.

Q44)The city in which the minimum number of products increased their market shares in 1993 to 94 is

Direction for questions 43to 45: Answer the questions based on the following table.

Q45)The number of products which doubled their market shares in one or more cities is

Direction for questions 46 to 49 : Answer the questions based on the following table.

Students of 12^th standard of a school in Bangalore decided to take up online private coaching for Mathematics for a 3 month period starting from July. There are three institutes which provide online tutoring for class 12 students. The following information is available about the number of students who took up teaching services from these three institutes during the three months.

Students are allowed to switch from one institute to another only on the first of a month. They have to continue with that institute till the end of the month. A student is allowed to switch only once in a month. In any given month, a student is allowed to be with only one institute. 3 students switched from Edustar to Matonline at the beginning of August.The largest switch to any institute took place at the beginning of September when 11 students switched to Edustar

Q46)If no one switched from Gurumath to Edustar at the beginning of August and atleast one person switched to Gurumath at the beginning of August, what is the minimum number of people who should have switched out of Matonline at the beginning of August?

Direction for questions 46 to 49 : Answer the questions based on the following table.

Students of 12^th standard of a school in Bangalore decided to take up online private coaching for Mathematics for a 3 month period starting from July. There are three institutes which provide online tutoring for class 12 students. The following information is available about the number of students who took up teaching services from these three institutes during the three months.

Students are allowed to switch from one institute to another only on the first of a month. They have to continue with that institute till the end of the month. A student is allowed to switch only once in a month. In any given month, a student is allowed to be with only one institute. 3 students switched from Edustar to Matonline at the beginning of August.The largest switch to any institute took place at the beginning of September when 11 students switched to Edustar

Q47)If no one shifted to Gurumath and if noone switched from Gurumath to Edustar at the beginning of August, Which of the following is correct?

I. The percentage of students shifting out of a tutoring service as a percentage of the students at the beginning of the previous month was highest at the beginning of August for Matonline.

II. The number of students who shifted out of Edustar is the same as those who shifted out of Gurumath at the

Direction for questions 46 to 49 : Answer the questions based on the following table.

Students of 12^th standard of a school in Bangalore decided to take up online private coaching for Mathematics for a 3 month period starting from July. There are three institutes which provide online tutoring for class 12 students. The following information is available about the number of students who took up teaching services from these three institutes during the three months.

Students are allowed to switch from one institute to another only on the first of a month. They have to continue with that institute till the end of the month. A student is allowed to switch only once in a month. In any given month, a student is allowed to be with only one institute. 3 students switched from Edustar to Matonline at the beginning of August.The largest switch to any institute took place at the beginning of September when 11 students switched to Edustar

Q48)If at the beginning of September no one shifted between Matonline and Gurumath, what is the minimum number of students who shifted from Gurumath to Edustar at the beginning of September?

Direction for questions 46 to 49 : Answer the questions based on the following table.

Students of 12^th standard of a school in Bangalore decided to take up online private coaching for Mathematics for a 3 month period starting from July. There are three institutes which provide online tutoring for class 12 students. The following information is available about the number of students who took up teaching services from these three institutes during the three months.

Students are allowed to switch from one institute to another only on the first of a month. They have to continue with that institute till the end of the month. A student is allowed to switch only once in a month. In any given month, a student is allowed to be with only one institute. 3 students switched from Edustar to Matonline at the beginning of August.The largest switch to any institute took place at the beginning of September when 11 students switched to Edustar

Q49)Which of the following is correct if no one shifted between Matonline and Gurumath at the beginning of September?

I) One student shifted out of Gurumath at the beginning of September

II) 2 students shifted to Matonline

Directions for questions 50 to 53: These questions are based on the following information.

Five friends - A, B, C, D and E met at a party. They live in different cities among - Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad and work in different companies among - Infotec, Quetec, Rototec, Simotec and Tetratec, not necessarily in the same order. We know the following information about them.

(a) A lives in Delhi but does not work in Quetec.

(b) C works in Tetratec.

(c) The person, who lives in Bangalore, works in Simotec

(d) Neither D nor B lives in Chennai.

(e) B works in Infotec and E lives in Hyderabad.

Q50)Who lives in Mumbai?

Directions for questions 50 to 53: These questions are based on the following information.

Five friends - A, B, C, D and E met at a party. They live in different cities among - Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad and work in different companies among - Infotec, Quetec, Rototec, Simotec and Tetratec, not necessarily in the same order. We know the following information about them.

(a) A lives in Delhi but does not work in Quetec.

(b) C works in Tetratec.

(c) The person, who lives in Bangalore, works in Simotec

(d) Neither D nor B lives in Chennai.

(e) B works in Infotec and E lives in Hyderabad.

Q51)Which company does D work in?

Directions for questions 50 to 53: These questions are based on the following information.

Five friends - A, B, C, D and E met at a party. They live in different cities among - Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad and work in different companies among - Infotec, Quetec, Rototec, Simotec and Tetratec, not necessarily in the same order. We know the following information about them.

(a) A lives in Delhi but does not work in Quetec.

(b) C works in Tetratec.

(c) The person, who lives in Bangalore, works in Simotec

(d) Neither D nor B lives in Chennai.

(e) B works in Infotec and E lives in Hyderabad.

Q52)In which city does the person who works in Tetratec live?

Directions for questions 50 to 53: These questions are based on the following information.

Five friends - A, B, C, D and E met at a party. They live in different cities among - Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Chennai and Hyderabad and work in different companies among - Infotec, Quetec, Rototec, Simotec and Tetratec, not necessarily in the same order. We know the following information about them.

(a) A lives in Delhi but does not work in Quetec.

(b) C works in Tetratec.

(c) The person, who lives in Bangalore, works in Simotec

(d) Neither D nor B lives in Chennai.

(e) B works in Infotec and E lives in Hyderabad.

Q53)In which city does the person who works in Infotec live?

Directions for questions 54-57: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.

The following table gives the standings at a certain stage of a six-team football tournament. Each team plays with the other team only once. A game of football involves only two teams. The team that scores more number of goals is the winner of that particular game. A game is said to be a draw if the goals scored by both the teams is the same. The following nomenclature holds true for the table, ‘P’ – Games played, ‘W’ – Games won, ‘L’- Games lost, ‘D’ – Games drawn, ‘GF’ – Goals For, ‘GA’- Goals Against, ‘GD’ – Goal Difference, ‘Points’ – Total number of points. Three points are awarded for a win, one for a draw and no points are awarded in case of a loss. There is some data missing in the table.

Additional information given:
(i) The total number of goals scored in each of the drawn games is 2.

(ii) Aston villa and Manchester United drew their games with Chelsea and Birmingham City respectively.

(iii) Chelsea beats Sunderland.

Q54)Find the number of goals scored in the game between Chelsea and Sunderland.

Directions for questions 54-57: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.

The following table gives the standings at a certain stage of a six-team football tournament. Each team plays with the other team only once. A game of football involves only two teams. The team that scores more number of goals is the winner of that particular game. A game is said to be a draw if the goals scored by both the teams is the same. The following nomenclature holds true for the table, ‘P’ – Games played, ‘W’ – Games won, ‘L’- Games lost, ‘D’ – Games drawn, ‘GF’ – Goals For, ‘GA’- Goals Against, ‘GD’ – Goal Difference, ‘Points’ – Total number of points. Three points are awarded for a win, one for a draw and no points are awarded in case of a loss. There is some data missing in the table.

Additional information given:
(i) The total number of goals scored in each of the drawn games is 2.

(ii) Aston villa and Manchester United drew their games with Chelsea and Birmingham City respectively.

(iii) Chelsea beats Sunderland.

Q55)Fulham lost its game with a Scoreline of

Directions for questions 54-57: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.

The following table gives the standings at a certain stage of a six-team football tournament. Each team plays with the other team only once. A game of football involves only two teams. The team that scores more number of goals is the winner of that particular game. A game is said to be a draw if the goals scored by both the teams is the same. The following nomenclature holds true for the table, ‘P’ – Games played, ‘W’ – Games won, ‘L’- Games lost, ‘D’ – Games drawn, ‘GF’ – Goals For, ‘GA’- Goals Against, ‘GD’ – Goal Difference, ‘Points’ – Total number of points. Three points are awarded for a win, one for a draw and no points are awarded in case of a loss. There is some data missing in the table.

Additional information given:
(i) The total number of goals scored in each of the drawn games is 2.

(ii) Aston villa and Manchester United drew their games with Chelsea and Birmingham City respectively.

(iii) Chelsea beats Sunderland.

Q56)How many goals has Chelsea scored in its 4 games?

Directions for questions 54-57: Answer the questions on the basis of the information given below.

The following table gives the standings at a certain stage of a six-team football tournament. Each team plays with the other team only once. A game of football involves only two teams. The team that scores more number of goals is the winner of that particular game. A game is said to be a draw if the goals scored by both the teams is the same. The following nomenclature holds true for the table, ‘P’ – Games played, ‘W’ – Games won, ‘L’- Games lost, ‘D’ – Games drawn, ‘GF’ – Goals For, ‘GA’- Goals Against, ‘GD’ – Goal Difference, ‘Points’ – Total number of points. Three points are awarded for a win, one for a draw and no points are awarded in case of a loss. There is some data missing in the table.

Additional information given:
(i) The total number of goals scored in each of the drawn games is 2.

(ii) Aston villa and Manchester United drew their games with Chelsea and Birmingham City respectively.

(iii) Chelsea beats Sunderland.

Q57)How many games have been played till now?

Directions for Questions 58-62: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

Schedule for the mid-term examination for students in class IX in St Patrick’s School is prepared. There are seven subjects: English, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Computer Science and Economics. The mid-term examination is to be culminated in fortnight starting on Monday of first week and ending on Saturday of the next week, there being no exam on Sunday. It is also known that:

1. There is a gap of 3 days between the schedules of Mathematics and English.
2. There is a gap of 1 week between the schedules of Physics and Mathematics.
3. III. There is exam on each day of the week except Sunday.
4. There is no gap between the schedules of Biology and that of the subject that just precedes it.
5. The schedule Computer science follow that of Chemistry.

Q58)Two of the exams fall on

Directions for Questions 58-62: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

Schedule for the mid-term examination for students in class IX in St Patrick’s School is prepared. There are seven subjects: English, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Computer Science and Economics. The mid-term examination is to be culminated in fortnight starting on Monday of first week and ending on Saturday of the next week, there being no exam on Sunday. It is also known that:

1. There is a gap of 3 days between the schedules of Mathematics and English.
2. There is a gap of 1 week between the schedules of Physics and Mathematics.
3. III. There is exam on each day of the week except Sunday.
4. There is no gap between the schedules of Biology and that of the subject that just precedes it.
5. The schedule Computer science follow that of Chemistry.

Q59)How many days are there between the schedules of English and Economics?

Directions for Questions 58-62: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

Schedule for the mid-term examination for students in class IX in St Patrick’s School is prepared. There are seven subjects: English, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Computer Science and Economics. The mid-term examination is to be culminated in fortnight starting on Monday of first week and ending on Saturday of the next week, there being no exam on Sunday. It is also known that:

1. There is a gap of 3 days between the schedules of Mathematics and English.
2. There is a gap of 1 week between the schedules of Physics and Mathematics.
3. III. There is exam on each day of the week except Sunday.
4. There is no gap between the schedules of Biology and that of the subject that just precedes it.
5. The schedule Computer science follow that of Chemistry.

Q60)How many days are there between the schedules of Economics and Biology?

Directions for Questions 58-62: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

Schedule for the mid-term examination for students in class IX in St Patrick's School is prepared. There are seven subjects: English, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Computer Science and Economics. The mid-term examination is to be culminated in fortnight starting on Monday of first week and ending on Saturday of the next week, there being no exam on Sunday. It is also known that:

1. There is a gap of 3 days between the schedules of Mathematics and English.
2. There is a gap of 1 week between the schedules of Physics and Mathematics.
3. III. There is exam on each day of the week except Sunday.
4. There is no gap between the schedules of Biology and that of the subject that just precedes it.
5. The schedule Computer science follow that of Chemistry.

Q61)The schedule of which of the following subjects can be uniquely determined?

Directions for Questions 58-62: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

Schedule for the mid-term examination for students in class IX in St Patrick's School is prepared. There are seven subjects: English, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Computer Science and Economics. The mid-term examination is to be culminated in fortnight starting on Monday of first week and ending on Saturday of the next week, there being no exam on Sunday. It is also known that:

1. There is a gap of 3 days between the schedules of Mathematics and English.
2. There is a gap of 1 week between the schedules of Physics and Mathematics.
3. III. There is exam on each day of the week except Sunday.
4. There is no gap between the schedules of Biology and that of the subject that just precedes it.
5. The schedule Computer science follow that of Chemistry.

Q62)In how many different ways, the schedule of all exams are possible?

Directions for questions 63-66: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

In the mini – World Cup played at Bulawayo, five cricket teams viz. Australia, South Africa, India, New Zealand and Pakistan participated in the tournament. Each team has to play exactly one match with each of the other teams. If a team wins a match, it is awarded 2 points and gets no points for losing a match. In case a match is a tie, then each of the two teams playing the match would be awarded a point. None of the matches scheduled were abandoned.
After the tournament was over, it was known that the total sum of the points scored by some pairs of two teams is a follows:

i) Australia + India = 12

ii) India + South Africa = 11

iii) New Zealand + India = 10

iv) India + Pakistan = 8

Also, it is known that there were two ties in the tournament.

Q63)If it is known that South Africa won a match against Australia, then New Zealand tied their match with which of the following teams?

Directions for questions 63-66: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

In the mini – World Cup played at Bulawayo, five cricket teams viz. Australia, South Africa, India, New Zealand and Pakistan participated in the tournament. Each team has to play exactly one match with each of the other teams. If a team wins a match, it is awarded 2 points and gets no points for losing a match. In case a match is a tie, then each of the two teams playing the match would be awarded a point. None of the matches scheduled were abandoned.
After the tournament was over, it was known that the total sum of the points scored by some pairs of two teams is a follows:

i) Australia + India = 12

ii) India + South Africa = 11

iii) New Zealand + India = 10

iv) India + Pakistan = 8

Also, it is known that there were two ties in the tournament.

Q64)How many total arrangements of wins and ties are possible?

Directions for questions 63-66: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

In the mini – World Cup played at Bulawayo, five cricket teams viz. Australia, South Africa, India, New Zealand and Pakistan participated in the tournament. Each team has to play exactly one match with each of the other teams. If a team wins a match, it is awarded 2 points and gets no points for losing a match. In case a match is a tie, then each of the two teams playing the match would be awarded a point. None of the matches scheduled were abandoned.
After the tournament was over, it was known that the total sum of the points scored by some pairs of two teams is a follows:

i) Australia + India = 12

ii) India + South Africa = 11

iii) New Zealand + India = 10

iv) India + Pakistan = 8

Also, it is known that there were two ties in the tournament.

Q65)Which of the following teams stand 3rd position?

Directions for questions 63-66: Answer the questions based on the information given below.

In the mini – World Cup played at Bulawayo, five cricket teams viz. Australia, South Africa, India, New Zealand and Pakistan participated in the tournament. Each team has to play exactly one match with each of the other teams. If a team wins a match, it is awarded 2 points and gets no points for losing a match. In case a match is a tie, then each of the two teams playing the match would be awarded a point. None of the matches scheduled were abandoned.
After the tournament was over, it was known that the total sum of the points scored by some pairs of two teams is a follows:

i) Australia + India = 12

ii) India + South Africa = 11

iii) New Zealand + India = 10

iv) India + Pakistan = 8

Also, it is known that there were two ties in the tournament.

Q66)Which of the following statements must be true?

Passage 1

Directions for Q.67 to Q.71 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Moral philosophy, or the science of human nature, may be treated after two different manners; each of which has its peculiar merit, and may contribute to the entertainment, instruction, and reformation of mankind. The one considers man chiefly as born for action; and as influenced in his measures by taste and sentiment; pursuing one object, and avoiding another, according to the value which these objects seem to possess, and according to the light in which they present themselves. As virtue, of all objects, is allowed to be the most valuable, this species of philosophers paint her in the most amiable colours; borrowing all helps from poetry and eloquence, and treating their subject in an easy and obvious manner, and such as is best fitted to please the imagination, and engage the affections. They select the most striking observations and instances from common life; place opposite characters in a proper contrast; and alluring us into the paths of virtue by the views of glory and happiness, direct our steps in these paths by the soundest precepts and most illustrious examples. They make us feel the difference between vice and virtue; they excite and regulate our sentiments; and so they can but bend our hearts to the love of probity and true honour, they think, that they have fully attained the end of all their labors.

The other species of philosophers consider man in the light of a reasonable rather than an active being, and endeavour to form his understanding more than cultivate his manners. They regard human nature as a subject of speculation; and with a narrow scrutiny examine it, in order to find those principles, which regulate our understanding, excite our sentiments, and make us approve or blame any particular object, action, or behaviour. They think it a reproach to all literature, that philosophy should not yet have fixed, beyond controversy, the foundation of morals, reasoning, and criticism; and should forever talk of truth and falsehood, vice and virtue, beauty and deformity, without being able to determine the source of these distinctions. While they attempt this arduous task, they are deterred by no difficulties; but proceeding from particular instances to general principles, they still push on their enquiries to principles more general, and rest not satisfied till they arrive at those original principles, by which, in every science, all human curiosity must be bounded. Though their speculations seem abstract and even unintelligible to common readers, they aim at the approbation of the learned and the wise; and think themselves sufficiently compensated for the labour of their whole lives, if they can discover some hidden truths, which may contribute to the instruction of posterity.

It is certain that the easy and obvious philosophy will always, with the generality of mankind, have the preference above the accurate and abstruse; and by many will be recommended, not only as more agreeable, but more useful than the other. It enters more into common life; moulds the heart and affections; and, by touching those principles which actuate men, reforms their conduct, and brings them nearer to that model of perfection which it describes. On the contrary, the abstruse philosophy, being founded on a turn of mind, which cannot enter into business and action, vanishes when the philosopher leaves the shade, and comes into open day; nor can its principles easily retain any influence over our conduct and behaviour. The feelings of our heart, the agitation of our passions, the vehemence of our affections, dissipate all its conclusions, and reduce the profound philosopher to a mere plebeian.

This also must be confessed, that the most durable, as well as justest fame, has been acquired by the easy philosophy, and that abstract reasoners seem hitherto to have enjoyed only a momentary reputation, from the caprice or ignorance of their own age, but have not been able to support their renown with more equitable posterity. It is easy for a profound philosopher to commit a mistake in his subtle reasonings; and one mistake is the necessary parent of another, while he pushes on his consequences, and is not deterred from embracing any conclusion, by its unusual appearance, or its contradiction to popular opinion. But a philosopher, who purposes only to represent the common sense of mankind in more beautiful and more engaging colours, if by accident he falls into error, goes no farther; but renewing his appeal to common sense, and the natural sentiments of the mind, returns into the right path, and secures himself from any dangerous illusions. The fame of Cicero flourishes at present; but that of Aristotle is utterly decayed. La Bruyere passes the seas, and still maintains his reputation: But the glory of Malebranche is confined to his own nation, and to his own age. And Addison, perhaps, will be read with pleasure, when Locke shall be entirely forgotten.

Q67). What is the central idea of this passage?

Passage 1

Directions for Q.67 to Q.71 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Moral philosophy, or the science of human nature, may be treated after two different manners; each of which has its peculiar merit, and may contribute to the entertainment, instruction, and reformation of mankind. The one considers man chiefly as born for action; and as influenced in his measures by taste and sentiment; pursuing one object, and avoiding another, according to the value which these objects seem to possess, and according to the light in which they present themselves. As virtue, of all objects, is allowed to be the most valuable, this species of philosophers paint her in the most amiable colours; borrowing all helps from poetry and eloquence, and treating their subject in an easy and obvious manner, and such as is best fitted to please the imagination, and engage the affections. They select the most striking observations and instances from common life; place opposite characters in a proper contrast; and alluring us into the paths of virtue by the views of glory and happiness, direct our steps in these paths by the soundest precepts and most illustrious examples. They make us feel the difference between vice and virtue; they excite and regulate our sentiments; and so they can but bend our hearts to the love of probity and true honour, they think, that they have fully attained the end of all their labors.

The other species of philosophers consider man in the light of a reasonable rather than an active being, and endeavour to form his understanding more than cultivate his manners. They regard human nature as a subject of speculation; and with a narrow scrutiny examine it, in order to find those principles, which regulate our understanding, excite our sentiments, and make us approve or blame any particular object, action, or behaviour. They think it a reproach to all literature, that philosophy should not yet have fixed, beyond controversy, the foundation of morals, reasoning, and criticism; and should forever talk of truth and falsehood, vice and virtue, beauty and deformity, without being able to determine the source of these distinctions. While they attempt this arduous task, they are deterred by no difficulties; but proceeding from particular instances to general principles, they still push on their enquiries to principles more general, and rest not satisfied till they arrive at those original principles, by which, in every science, all human curiosity must be bounded. Though their speculations seem abstract and even unintelligible to common readers, they aim at the approbation of the learned and the wise; and think themselves sufficiently compensated for the labour of their whole lives, if they can discover some hidden truths, which may contribute to the instruction of posterity.

It is certain that the easy and obvious philosophy will always, with the generality of mankind, have the preference above the accurate and abstruse; and by many will be recommended, not only as more agreeable, but more useful than the other. It enters more into common life; moulds the heart and affections; and, by touching those principles which actuate men, reforms their conduct, and brings them nearer to that model of perfection which it describes. On the contrary, the abstruse philosophy, being founded on a turn of mind, which cannot enter into business and action, vanishes when the philosopher leaves the shade, and comes into open day; nor can its principles easily retain any influence over our conduct and behaviour. The feelings of our heart, the agitation of our passions, the vehemence of our affections, dissipate all its conclusions, and reduce the profound philosopher to a mere plebeian.

This also must be confessed, that the most durable, as well as justest fame, has been acquired by the easy philosophy, and that abstract reasoners seem hitherto to have enjoyed only a momentary reputation, from the caprice or ignorance of their own age, but have not been able to support their renown with more equitable posterity. It is easy for a profound philosopher to commit a mistake in his subtle reasonings; and one mistake is the necessary parent of another, while he pushes on his consequences, and is not deterred from embracing any conclusion, by its unusual appearance, or its contradiction to popular opinion. But a philosopher, who purposes only to represent the common sense of mankind in more beautiful and more engaging colours, if by accident he falls into error, goes no farther; but renewing his appeal to common sense, and the natural sentiments of the mind, returns into the right path, and secures himself from any dangerous illusions. The fame of Cicero flourishes at present; but that of Aristotle is utterly decayed. La Bruyere passes the seas, and still maintains his reputation: But the glory of Malebranche is confined to his own nation, and to his own age. And Addison, perhaps, will be read with pleasure, when Locke shall be entirely forgotten.

Q68)What can be inferred about abstruse philosophers from the passage?

Passage 1

Directions for Q.67 to Q.71 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Moral philosophy, or the science of human nature, may be treated after two different manners; each of which has its peculiar merit, and may contribute to the entertainment, instruction, and reformation of mankind. The one considers man chiefly as born for action; and as influenced in his measures by taste and sentiment; pursuing one object, and avoiding another, according to the value which these objects seem to possess, and according to the light in which they present themselves. As virtue, of all objects, is allowed to be the most valuable, this species of philosophers paint her in the most amiable colours; borrowing all helps from poetry and eloquence, and treating their subject in an easy and obvious manner, and such as is best fitted to please the imagination, and engage the affections. They select the most striking observations and instances from common life; place opposite characters in a proper contrast; and alluring us into the paths of virtue by the views of glory and happiness, direct our steps in these paths by the soundest precepts and most illustrious examples. They make us feel the difference between vice and virtue; they excite and regulate our sentiments; and so they can but bend our hearts to the love of probity and true honour, they think, that they have fully attained the end of all their labors.

The other species of philosophers consider man in the light of a reasonable rather than an active being, and endeavour to form his understanding more than cultivate his manners. They regard human nature as a subject of speculation; and with a narrow scrutiny examine it, in order to find those principles, which regulate our understanding, excite our sentiments, and make us approve or blame any particular object, action, or behaviour. They think it a reproach to all literature, that philosophy should not yet have fixed, beyond controversy, the foundation of morals, reasoning, and criticism; and should forever talk of truth and falsehood, vice and virtue, beauty and deformity, without being able to determine the source of these distinctions. While they attempt this arduous task, they are deterred by no difficulties; but proceeding from particular instances to general principles, they still push on their enquiries to principles more general, and rest not satisfied till they arrive at those original principles, by which, in every science, all human curiosity must be bounded. Though their speculations seem abstract and even unintelligible to common readers, they aim at the approbation of the learned and the wise; and think themselves sufficiently compensated for the labour of their whole lives, if they can discover some hidden truths, which may contribute to the instruction of posterity.

It is certain that the easy and obvious philosophy will always, with the generality of mankind, have the preference above the accurate and abstruse; and by many will be recommended, not only as more agreeable, but more useful than the other. It enters more into common life; moulds the heart and affections; and, by touching those principles which actuate men, reforms their conduct, and brings them nearer to that model of perfection which it describes. On the contrary, the abstruse philosophy, being founded on a turn of mind, which cannot enter into business and action, vanishes when the philosopher leaves the shade, and comes into open day; nor can its principles easily retain any influence over our conduct and behaviour. The feelings of our heart, the agitation of our passions, the vehemence of our affections, dissipate all its conclusions, and reduce the profound philosopher to a mere plebeian.

This also must be confessed, that the most durable, as well as justest fame, has been acquired by the easy philosophy, and that abstract reasoners seem hitherto to have enjoyed only a momentary reputation, from the caprice or ignorance of their own age, but have not been able to support their renown with more equitable posterity. It is easy for a profound philosopher to commit a mistake in his subtle reasonings; and one mistake is the necessary parent of another, while he pushes on his consequences, and is not deterred from embracing any conclusion, by its unusual appearance, or its contradiction to popular opinion. But a philosopher, who purposes only to represent the common sense of mankind in more beautiful and more engaging colours, if by accident he falls into error, goes no farther; but renewing his appeal to common sense, and the natural sentiments of the mind, returns into the right path, and secures himself from any dangerous illusions. The fame of Cicero flourishes at present; but that of Aristotle is utterly decayed. La Bruyere passes the seas, and still maintains his reputation: But the glory of Malebranche is confined to his own nation, and to his own age. And Addison, perhaps, will be read with pleasure, when Locke shall be entirely forgotten.

Q69)Which of the following best describes the relation of the third paragraph to the passage a whole?

Passage 1

Directions for Q.67 to Q.71 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Moral philosophy, or the science of human nature, may be treated after two different manners; each of which has its peculiar merit, and may contribute to the entertainment, instruction, and reformation of mankind. The one considers man chiefly as born for action; and as influenced in his measures by taste and sentiment; pursuing one object, and avoiding another, according to the value which these objects seem to possess, and according to the light in which they present themselves. As virtue, of all objects, is allowed to be the most valuable, this species of philosophers paint her in the most amiable colours; borrowing all helps from poetry and eloquence, and treating their subject in an easy and obvious manner, and such as is best fitted to please the imagination, and engage the affections. They select the most striking observations and instances from common life; place opposite characters in a proper contrast; and alluring us into the paths of virtue by the views of glory and happiness, direct our steps in these paths by the soundest precepts and most illustrious examples. They make us feel the difference between vice and virtue; they excite and regulate our sentiments; and so they can but bend our hearts to the love of probity and true honour, they think, that they have fully attained the end of all their labors.

The other species of philosophers consider man in the light of a reasonable rather than an active being, and endeavour to form his understanding more than cultivate his manners. They regard human nature as a subject of speculation; and with a narrow scrutiny examine it, in order to find those principles, which regulate our understanding, excite our sentiments, and make us approve or blame any particular object, action, or behaviour. They think it a reproach to all literature, that philosophy should not yet have fixed, beyond controversy, the foundation of morals, reasoning, and criticism; and should forever talk of truth and falsehood, vice and virtue, beauty and deformity, without being able to determine the source of these distinctions. While they attempt this arduous task, they are deterred by no difficulties; but proceeding from particular instances to general principles, they still push on their enquiries to principles more general, and rest not satisfied till they arrive at those original principles, by which, in every science, all human curiosity must be bounded. Though their speculations seem abstract and even unintelligible to common readers, they aim at the approbation of the learned and the wise; and think themselves sufficiently compensated for the labour of their whole lives, if they can discover some hidden truths, which may contribute to the instruction of posterity.

It is certain that the easy and obvious philosophy will always, with the generality of mankind, have the preference above the accurate and abstruse; and by many will be recommended, not only as more agreeable, but more useful than the other. It enters more into common life; moulds the heart and affections; and, by touching those principles which actuate men, reforms their conduct, and brings them nearer to that model of perfection which it describes. On the contrary, the abstruse philosophy, being founded on a turn of mind, which cannot enter into business and action, vanishes when the philosopher leaves the shade, and comes into open day; nor can its principles easily retain any influence over our conduct and behaviour. The feelings of our heart, the agitation of our passions, the vehemence of our affections, dissipate all its conclusions, and reduce the profound philosopher to a mere plebeian.

This also must be confessed, that the most durable, as well as justest fame, has been acquired by the easy philosophy, and that abstract reasoners seem hitherto to have enjoyed only a momentary reputation, from the caprice or ignorance of their own age, but have not been able to support their renown with more equitable posterity. It is easy for a profound philosopher to commit a mistake in his subtle reasonings; and one mistake is the necessary parent of another, while he pushes on his consequences, and is not deterred from embracing any conclusion, by its unusual appearance, or its contradiction to popular opinion. But a philosopher, who purposes only to represent the common sense of mankind in more beautiful and more engaging colours, if by accident he falls into error, goes no farther; but renewing his appeal to common sense, and the natural sentiments of the mind, returns into the right path, and secures himself from any dangerous illusions. The fame of Cicero flourishes at present; but that of Aristotle is utterly decayed. La Bruyere passes the seas, and still maintains his reputation: But the glory of Malebranche is confined to his own nation, and to his own age. And Addison, perhaps, will be read with pleasure, when Locke shall be entirely forgotten.

Q70)In the final paragraph, why does the author refer to the posterity as more equitable?

Passage 1

Directions for Q.67 to Q.71 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Moral philosophy, or the science of human nature, may be treated after two different manners; each of which has its peculiar merit, and may contribute to the entertainment, instruction, and reformation of mankind. The one considers man chiefly as born for action; and as influenced in his measures by taste and sentiment; pursuing one object, and avoiding another, according to the value which these objects seem to possess, and according to the light in which they present themselves. As virtue, of all objects, is allowed to be the most valuable, this species of philosophers paint her in the most amiable colours; borrowing all helps from poetry and eloquence, and treating their subject in an easy and obvious manner, and such as is best fitted to please the imagination, and engage the affections. They select the most striking observations and instances from common life; place opposite characters in a proper contrast; and alluring us into the paths of virtue by the views of glory and happiness, direct our steps in these paths by the soundest precepts and most illustrious examples. They make us feel the difference between vice and virtue; they excite and regulate our sentiments; and so they can but bend our hearts to the love of probity and true honour, they think, that they have fully attained the end of all their labors.

The other species of philosophers consider man in the light of a reasonable rather than an active being, and endeavour to form his understanding more than cultivate his manners. They regard human nature as a subject of speculation; and with a narrow scrutiny examine it, in order to find those principles, which regulate our understanding, excite our sentiments, and make us approve or blame any particular object, action, or behaviour. They think it a reproach to all literature, that philosophy should not yet have fixed, beyond controversy, the foundation of morals, reasoning, and criticism; and should forever talk of truth and falsehood, vice and virtue, beauty and deformity, without being able to determine the source of these distinctions. While they attempt this arduous task, they are deterred by no difficulties; but proceeding from particular instances to general principles, they still push on their enquiries to principles more general, and rest not satisfied till they arrive at those original principles, by which, in every science, all human curiosity must be bounded. Though their speculations seem abstract and even unintelligible to common readers, they aim at the approbation of the learned and the wise; and think themselves sufficiently compensated for the labour of their whole lives, if they can discover some hidden truths, which may contribute to the instruction of posterity.

It is certain that the easy and obvious philosophy will always, with the generality of mankind, have the preference above the accurate and abstruse; and by many will be recommended, not only as more agreeable, but more useful than the other. It enters more into common life; moulds the heart and affections; and, by touching those principles which actuate men, reforms their conduct, and brings them nearer to that model of perfection which it describes. On the contrary, the abstruse philosophy, being founded on a turn of mind, which cannot enter into business and action, vanishes when the philosopher leaves the shade, and comes into open day; nor can its principles easily retain any influence over our conduct and behaviour. The feelings of our heart, the agitation of our passions, the vehemence of our affections, dissipate all its conclusions, and reduce the profound philosopher to a mere plebeian.

This also must be confessed, that the most durable, as well as justest fame, has been acquired by the easy philosophy, and that abstract reasoners seem hitherto to have enjoyed only a momentary reputation, from the caprice or ignorance of their own age, but have not been able to support their renown with more equitable posterity. It is easy for a profound philosopher to commit a mistake in his subtle reasonings; and one mistake is the necessary parent of another, while he pushes on his consequences, and is not deterred from embracing any conclusion, by its unusual appearance, or its contradiction to popular opinion. But a philosopher, who purposes only to represent the common sense of mankind in more beautiful and more engaging colours, if by accident he falls into error, goes no farther; but renewing his appeal to common sense, and the natural sentiments of the mind, returns into the right path, and secures himself from any dangerous illusions. The fame of Cicero flourishes at present; but that of Aristotle is utterly decayed. La Bruyere passes the seas, and still maintains his reputation: But the glory of Malebranche is confined to his own nation, and to his own age. And Addison, perhaps, will be read with pleasure, when Locke shall be entirely forgotten.

Q71)Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author towards abstruse philosophers in the passage?

Passage 2

Directions for Q.72 to Q.74 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

For years, behavioral scientists have been telling us that they have a great deal to contribute to decision theory and management. Their work most applicable to business, however, was often overshadowed by that of economists. But as the assumptions of rational behavior and "perfect information" that formed the basis of much of the work in economics concerning markets came into question, behavioural science not based on those assumptions gained ascendance. At first, the contributions from behavioral science were based on laboratory tests, too many of them involving handy college students. They helped describe biases (at least among those being tested). For example, we learned that people tend to devalue long-term returns in relation to short-term gains. They tend not to buy and sell according to self-set rules. A person willing to pay up to $200 for a ticket to a sporting event is not, once he owns it, willing to sell it at any price above $200—counter to what economists would predict. Behavioral science regards it as perfectly reasonable behavior, explained by what they call the "endowment effect." It is one of many behaviors that help explain why markets are not always "rational," why they may not be a reflection of perfect information, why people buy high and sell low.

Brain scanning technology adds a new dimension to this work. It has provided fodder for books on a variety of subjects, all of which rely to some degree on brain reaction to stimuli. By introducing various stimuli while scanning a person's brain, we can begin to learn which parts govern how we feel, how we respond to stimuli, and how we react to challenges. A recent study of "midlife northeast American adults" raises questions about whether we are entering the next stage in what might be termed an era of neuromanagement. In it, a group of researchers claim to have found that brain structure and the density of cells in the right posterior parietal cortex are associated with willingness to take risks. They found that participants with higher gray matter volume in this region exhibited less risk aversion. The results "identify what might be considered the first stable biomarker for financial risk-attitude," according to the authors.

The study is a distant cousin to those that have located the side of the brain associated with creativity and the portion of the brain that is stimulated, for example, by gambling or music. Assuming: (1) there will be more research efforts combining the results of brain scans with behavioral exercises, and (2) findings are proven to be more valid than, say, those associated with phrenology, it raises some interesting questions about the future. Is it possible that some organizations selecting and hiring talent may, in the future, require a brain scan, just as some require psychological testing today? Is hiring on the basis of brain structure much different than hiring, for example, on the basis of height or other characteristics required to perform certain jobs? Or does it raise too many ethical questions? For example, who will own the data? How will it be used? How would we apply the results?

Q.72) According to the passage, brain scanning technology can reveal all of the following regions of person's brain EXCEPT the regions that:

Passage 2

Directions for Q.72 to Q.74 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

For years, behavioral scientists have been telling us that they have a great deal to contribute to decision theory and management. Their work most applicable to business, however, was often overshadowed by that of economists. But as the assumptions of rational behavior and "perfect information" that formed the basis of much of the work in economics concerning markets came into question, behavioural science not based on those assumptions gained ascendance. At first, the contributions from behavioral science were based on laboratory tests, too many of them involving handy college students. They helped describe biases (at least among those being tested). For example, we learned that people tend to devalue long-term returns in relation to short-term gains. They tend not to buy and sell according to self-set rules. A person willing to pay up to $200 for a ticket to a sporting event is not, once he owns it, willing to sell it at any price above $200—counter to what economists would predict. Behavioral science regards it as perfectly reasonable behavior, explained by what they call the "endowment effect." It is one of many behaviors that help explain why markets are not always "rational," why they may not be a reflection of perfect information, why people buy high and sell low.

Brain scanning technology adds a new dimension to this work. It has provided fodder for books on a variety of subjects, all of which rely to some degree on brain reaction to stimuli. By introducing various stimuli while scanning a person's brain, we can begin to learn which parts govern how we feel, how we respond to stimuli, and how we react to challenges. A recent study of "midlife northeast American adults" raises questions about whether we are entering the next stage in what might be termed an era of neuromanagement. In it, a group of researchers claim to have found that brain structure and the density of cells in the right posterior parietal cortex are associated with willingness to take risks. They found that participants with higher gray matter volume in this region exhibited less risk aversion. The results "identify what might be considered the first stable biomarker for financial risk-attitude," according to the authors.

The study is a distant cousin to those that have located the side of the brain associated with creativity and the portion of the brain that is stimulated, for example, by gambling or music. Assuming: (1) there will be more research efforts combining the results of brain scans with behavioral exercises, and (2) findings are proven to be more valid than, say, those associated with phrenology, it raises some interesting questions about the future. Is it possible that some organizations selecting and hiring talent may, in the future, require a brain scan, just as some require psychological testing today? Is hiring on the basis of brain structure much different than hiring, for example, on the basis of height or other characteristics required to perform certain jobs? Or does it raise too many ethical questions? For example, who will own the data? How will it be used? How would we apply the results?

Q.73)According to the passage, which of the following behaviours of people are better explained by behavioural science than by economics?

Passage 2

Directions for Q.72 to Q.74 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

For years, behavioral scientists have been telling us that they have a great deal to contribute to decision theory and management. Their work most applicable to business, however, was often overshadowed by that of economists. But as the assumptions of rational behavior and "perfect information" that formed the basis of much of the work in economics concerning markets came into question, behavioural science not based on those assumptions gained ascendance. At first, the contributions from behavioral science were based on laboratory tests, too many of them involving handy college students. They helped describe biases (at least among those being tested). For example, we learned that people tend to devalue long-term returns in relation to short-term gains. They tend not to buy and sell according to self-set rules. A person willing to pay up to $200 for a ticket to a sporting event is not, once he owns it, willing to sell it at any price above $200—counter to what economists would predict. Behavioral science regards it as perfectly reasonable behavior, explained by what they call the "endowment effect." It is one of many behaviors that help explain why markets are not always "rational," why they may not be a reflection of perfect information, why people buy high and sell low.

Brain scanning technology adds a new dimension to this work. It has provided fodder for books on a variety of subjects, all of which rely to some degree on brain reaction to stimuli. By introducing various stimuli while scanning a person's brain, we can begin to learn which parts govern how we feel, how we respond to stimuli, and how we react to challenges. A recent study of "midlife northeast American adults" raises questions about whether we are entering the next stage in what might be termed an era of neuromanagement. In it, a group of researchers claim to have found that brain structure and the density of cells in the right posterior parietal cortex are associated with willingness to take risks. They found that participants with higher gray matter volume in this region exhibited less risk aversion. The results "identify what might be considered the first stable biomarker for financial risk-attitude," according to the authors.

The study is a distant cousin to those that have located the side of the brain associated with creativity and the portion of the brain that is stimulated, for example, by gambling or music. Assuming: (1) there will be more research efforts combining the results of brain scans with behavioral exercises, and (2) findings are proven to be more valid than, say, those associated with phrenology, it raises some interesting questions about the future. Is it possible that some organizations selecting and hiring talent may, in the future, require a brain scan, just as some require psychological testing today? Is hiring on the basis of brain structure much different than hiring, for example, on the basis of height or other characteristics required to perform certain jobs? Or does it raise too many ethical questions? For example, who will own the data? How will it be used? How would we apply the results?

Q.74)What could be a suitable title to this passage?

Passage 3

Directions for Q.75 to Q.79 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Kant uses the word 'noumena' to refer to things in themselves, which he describes as 'intelligible existences' which 'are not objects of our senses'. Kant is on difficult territory with his notion of noumena. To begin with, given that we can know nothing about them, in what way does it make any sense to talk about them existing? By Kant's own standard, is it not the case that noumena are devoid of any meaning? Kant argues that although we cannot have any conception of what noumena are, we can nevertheless have a representation of them. But he goes on to state that this representation is a 'limitative conception'. That is, that noumenal representations simply mark the limit of human understanding and that is their necessary function. Unfortunately, this response does not say a great deal about noumena: it does not givethem a positive meaning.

The characteristics that Kant placed on noumena leads ultimately to the question of how we can justify a belief in them. Kant argued that they must exist because phenomena are appearances, thus they must be appearances of something, and that something must be noumena. But surely we are not justified in calling them appearances a priori. We may have a conception of them as appearances empirically, in that we say that such-and-such a phenomena is the appearance of such-and-such an object, but as we have seen the notion of phenomena and of object is accommodated within Kant's model of cognition, and thus appearance is a relation between them. There is no essential property of phenomena which make them appearances. Ultimately, Kant's noumena are unknowable and, as Russell pointed out, 'the "thing-in-itself" was an awkward element in Kant's philosophy, and was abandoned by his immediate successors'.

The important point here is that in the same way we can be sceptical about the existence of external reality within the empiricist framework, and thus be led down the path of Berkeley's idealism and solipsism, so we can be sceptical about the existence of noumena within the Kantian framework and we can be led to a similarly solipsistic position. Given that we have seen that Kant defends himself against the charge of idealism, it is worth returning back to that argument more critically.

Kant's refutation of idealism is based on the insight that what we take to be the outside world is immediately given. The real world that we live in is immediately revealed by our intuitions, and we make sense of that world through our conceptions. Kant wrote that idealism 'assumed, that the only immediate experience is internal, and that from this we can only infer the existence of external things... But our proof shows that external experience is properly immediate'. Hence, because the external world is immediately given, there is no justification in being sceptical about it.

The difficulty with Kant's refutation is not so much with the refutation itself, but with what he is defending. The external world, in the Kantian framework, is ultimately the construct of our faculties of mind (this being the thesis of transcendental ideality). It is built upon the intuitions of sensibility, and the conceptions of the understanding. Given this foundation, it is interesting to speculate what the situation would be if I lacked these faculties. No doubt I would cease to exist as a human consciousness, but would it also follow that the external world would also not exist. It is difficult to see how Kant could avoid this conclusion. Thus, Kant's refutation works so long as I am alive and am able to think about the existence of an external world, yet becomes difficult if I speculate on the consequences of my own non-existence.

Thus it follows that the external world is not objective in the sense that it exists independently of the thinking subject. As has been argued earlier, Kant does describe the external world as objective. However, what is meant by 'objective', for Kant, is that we hold a certain relation with the external world, whereby we conceive ourselves as subjects within an independent framework of objects (i.e. as explained earlier, regardless of how I happen to be looking at a chair, the nature of the chair remains fixed and independent of my perspective). This relational objectivity does not necessary imply an ontological objectivity. Kant can defend his view of the external world against idealism, so long as he frames the charge of idealism at the relational qualities of objectivity.

Kant was aware that the external world was limited by our understanding, and noumena are introduced partly as proof of this (i.e. noumena are the limits of human understanding). It is the noumena that play the role of independent existences beyond the thinking subject. They have ontological objectivity (in contrast, for Kant we do not stand in any relation to them, as the very notion of a relation cannot be applied to them). As such it is noumena that Kant needs to defend against charges of idealism, in addition to empirical reality. As they are 'unknowable', it is difficult to know how this defence can be made.

If noumena are taken away from Kant's theory, or are doubted, then everything I understand, including all objects, places and other people, become mere characters within my active mind. The world can only be appreciated as independently existing within the noumenal theory.

Q.75Why is the author very critical regarding Kant's theory of Noumena?

Passage 3

Directions for Q.75 to Q.79 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Kant uses the word 'noumena' to refer to things in themselves, which he describes as 'intelligible existences' which 'are not objects of our senses'. Kant is on difficult territory with his notion of noumena. To begin with, given that we can know nothing about them, in what way does it make any sense to talk about them existing? By Kant's own standard, is it not the case that noumena are devoid of any meaning? Kant argues that although we cannot have any conception of what noumena are, we can nevertheless have a representation of them. But he goes on to state that this representation is a 'limitative conception'. That is, that noumenal representations simply mark the limit of human understanding and that is their necessary function. Unfortunately, this response does not say a great deal about noumena: it does not givethem a positive meaning.

The characteristics that Kant placed on noumena leads ultimately to the question of how we can justify a belief in them. Kant argued that they must exist because phenomena are appearances, thus they must be appearances of something, and that something must be noumena. But surely we are not justified in calling them appearances a priori. We may have a conception of them as appearances empirically, in that we say that such-and-such a phenomena is the appearance of such-and-such an object, but as we have seen the notion of phenomena and of object is accommodated within Kant's model of cognition, and thus appearance is a relation between them. There is no essential property of phenomena which make them appearances. Ultimately, Kant's noumena are unknowable and, as Russell pointed out, 'the "thing-in-itself" was an awkward element in Kant's philosophy, and was abandoned by his immediate successors'.

The important point here is that in the same way we can be sceptical about the existence of external reality within the empiricist framework, and thus be led down the path of Berkeley's idealism and solipsism, so we can be sceptical about the existence of noumena within the Kantian framework and we can be led to a similarly solipsistic position. Given that we have seen that Kant defends himself against the charge of idealism, it is worth returning back to that argument more critically.

Kant's refutation of idealism is based on the insight that what we take to be the outside world is immediately given. The real world that we live in is immediately revealed by our intuitions, and we make sense of that world through our conceptions. Kant wrote that idealism 'assumed, that the only immediate experience is internal, and that from this we can only infer the existence of external things... But our proof shows that external experience is properly immediate'. Hence, because the external world is immediately given, there is no justification in being sceptical about it.

The difficulty with Kant's refutation is not so much with the refutation itself, but with what he is defending. The external world, in the Kantian framework, is ultimately the construct of our faculties of mind (this being the thesis of transcendental ideality). It is built upon the intuitions of sensibility, and the conceptions of the understanding. Given this foundation, it is interesting to speculate what the situation would be if I lacked these faculties. No doubt I would cease to exist as a human consciousness, but would it also follow that the external world would also not exist. It is difficult to see how Kant could avoid this conclusion. Thus, Kant's refutation works so long as I am alive and am able to think about the existence of an external world, yet becomes difficult if I speculate on the consequences of my own non-existence.

Thus it follows that the external world is not objective in the sense that it exists independently of the thinking subject. As has been argued earlier, Kant does describe the external world as objective. However, what is meant by 'objective', for Kant, is that we hold a certain relation with the external world, whereby we conceive ourselves as subjects within an independent framework of objects (i.e. as explained earlier, regardless of how I happen to be looking at a chair, the nature of the chair remains fixed and independent of my perspective). This relational objectivity does not necessary imply an ontological objectivity. Kant can defend his view of the external world against idealism, so long as he frames the charge of idealism at the relational qualities of objectivity.

Kant was aware that the external world was limited by our understanding, and noumena are introduced partly as proof of this (i.e. noumena are the limits of human understanding). It is the noumena that play the role of independent existences beyond the thinking subject. They have ontological objectivity (in contrast, for Kant we do not stand in any relation to them, as the very notion of a relation cannot be applied to them). As such it is noumena that Kant needs to defend against charges of idealism, in addition to empirical reality. As they are 'unknowable', it is difficult to know how this defence can be made.

If noumena are taken away from Kant's theory, or are doubted, then everything I understand, including all objects, places and other people, become mere characters within my active mind. The world can only be appreciated as independently existing within the noumenal theory.

Q.76Which of the following are Kant's views on Noumena?

A) Noumena are the limits of human understanding

B) Noumena does not have a positive meaning

C) Noumena must exist

D) Noumena has Ontological objectivity

Passage 3

Directions for Q.75 to Q.79 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Kant uses the word 'noumena' to refer to things in themselves, which he describes as 'intelligible existences' which 'are not objects of our senses'. Kant is on difficult territory with his notion of noumena. To begin with, given that we can know nothing about them, in what way does it make any sense to talk about them existing? By Kant's own standard, is it not the case that noumena are devoid of any meaning? Kant argues that although we cannot have any conception of what noumena are, we can nevertheless have a representation of them. But he goes on to state that this representation is a 'limitative conception'. That is, that noumenal representations simply mark the limit of human understanding and that is their necessary function. Unfortunately, this response does not say a great deal about noumena: it does not givethem a positive meaning.

The characteristics that Kant placed on noumena leads ultimately to the question of how we can justify a belief in them. Kant argued that they must exist because phenomena are appearances, thus they must be appearances of something, and that something must be noumena. But surely we are not justified in calling them appearances a priori. We may have a conception of them as appearances empirically, in that we say that such-and-such a phenomena is the appearance of such-and-such an object, but as we have seen the notion of phenomena and of object is accommodated within Kant's model of cognition, and thus appearance is a relation between them. There is no essential property of phenomena which make them appearances. Ultimately, Kant's noumena are unknowable and, as Russell pointed out, 'the "thing-in-itself" was an awkward element in Kant's philosophy, and was abandoned by his immediate successors'.

The important point here is that in the same way we can be sceptical about the existence of external reality within the empiricist framework, and thus be led down the path of Berkeley's idealism and solipsism, so we can be sceptical about the existence of noumena within the Kantian framework and we can be led to a similarly solipsistic position. Given that we have seen that Kant defends himself against the charge of idealism, it is worth returning back to that argument more critically.

Kant's refutation of idealism is based on the insight that what we take to be the outside world is immediately given. The real world that we live in is immediately revealed by our intuitions, and we make sense of that world through our conceptions. Kant wrote that idealism 'assumed, that the only immediate experience is internal, and that from this we can only infer the existence of external things... But our proof shows that external experience is properly immediate'. Hence, because the external world is immediately given, there is no justification in being sceptical about it.

The difficulty with Kant's refutation is not so much with the refutation itself, but with what he is defending. The external world, in the Kantian framework, is ultimately the construct of our faculties of mind (this being the thesis of transcendental ideality). It is built upon the intuitions of sensibility, and the conceptions of the understanding. Given this foundation, it is interesting to speculate what the situation would be if I lacked these faculties. No doubt I would cease to exist as a human consciousness, but would it also follow that the external world would also not exist. It is difficult to see how Kant could avoid this conclusion. Thus, Kant's refutation works so long as I am alive and am able to think about the existence of an external world, yet becomes difficult if I speculate on the consequences of my own non-existence.

Thus it follows that the external world is not objective in the sense that it exists independently of the thinking subject. As has been argued earlier, Kant does describe the external world as objective. However, what is meant by 'objective', for Kant, is that we hold a certain relation with the external world, whereby we conceive ourselves as subjects within an independent framework of objects (i.e. as explained earlier, regardless of how I happen to be looking at a chair, the nature of the chair remains fixed and independent of my perspective). This relational objectivity does not necessary imply an ontological objectivity. Kant can defend his view of the external world against idealism, so long as he frames the charge of idealism at the relational qualities of objectivity.

Kant was aware that the external world was limited by our understanding, and noumena are introduced partly as proof of this (i.e. noumena are the limits of human understanding). It is the noumena that play the role of independent existences beyond the thinking subject. They have ontological objectivity (in contrast, for Kant we do not stand in any relation to them, as the very notion of a relation cannot be applied to them). As such it is noumena that Kant needs to defend against charges of idealism, in addition to empirical reality. As they are 'unknowable', it is difficult to know how this defence can be made.

If noumena are taken away from Kant's theory, or are doubted, then everything I understand, including all objects, places and other people, become mere characters within my active mind. The world can only be appreciated as independently existing within the noumenal theory.

Q.77According to the passage, which of the following conclusion would be refuted by the Kants defence against Idealism?

Passage 3

Directions for Q.75 to Q.79 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Kant uses the word 'noumena' to refer to things in themselves, which he describes as 'intelligible existences' which 'are not objects of our senses'. Kant is on difficult territory with his notion of noumena. To begin with, given that we can know nothing about them, in what way does it make any sense to talk about them existing? By Kant's own standard, is it not the case that noumena are devoid of any meaning? Kant argues that although we cannot have any conception of what noumena are, we can nevertheless have a representation of them. But he goes on to state that this representation is a 'limitative conception'. That is, that noumenal representations simply mark the limit of human understanding and that is their necessary function. Unfortunately, this response does not say a great deal about noumena: it does not givethem a positive meaning.

The characteristics that Kant placed on noumena leads ultimately to the question of how we can justify a belief in them. Kant argued that they must exist because phenomena are appearances, thus they must be appearances of something, and that something must be noumena. But surely we are not justified in calling them appearances a priori. We may have a conception of them as appearances empirically, in that we say that such-and-such a phenomena is the appearance of such-and-such an object, but as we have seen the notion of phenomena and of object is accommodated within Kant's model of cognition, and thus appearance is a relation between them. There is no essential property of phenomena which make them appearances. Ultimately, Kant's noumena are unknowable and, as Russell pointed out, 'the "thing-in-itself" was an awkward element in Kant's philosophy, and was abandoned by his immediate successors'.

The important point here is that in the same way we can be sceptical about the existence of external reality within the empiricist framework, and thus be led down the path of Berkeley's idealism and solipsism, so we can be sceptical about the existence of noumena within the Kantian framework and we can be led to a similarly solipsistic position. Given that we have seen that Kant defends himself against the charge of idealism, it is worth returning back to that argument more critically.

Kant's refutation of idealism is based on the insight that what we take to be the outside world is immediately given. The real world that we live in is immediately revealed by our intuitions, and we make sense of that world through our conceptions. Kant wrote that idealism 'assumed, that the only immediate experience is internal, and that from this we can only infer the existence of external things... But our proof shows that external experience is properly immediate'. Hence, because the external world is immediately given, there is no justification in being sceptical about it.

The difficulty with Kant's refutation is not so much with the refutation itself, but with what he is defending. The external world, in the Kantian framework, is ultimately the construct of our faculties of mind (this being the thesis of transcendental ideality). It is built upon the intuitions of sensibility, and the conceptions of the understanding. Given this foundation, it is interesting to speculate what the situation would be if I lacked these faculties. No doubt I would cease to exist as a human consciousness, but would it also follow that the external world would also not exist. It is difficult to see how Kant could avoid this conclusion. Thus, Kant's refutation works so long as I am alive and am able to think about the existence of an external world, yet becomes difficult if I speculate on the consequences of my own non-existence.

Thus it follows that the external world is not objective in the sense that it exists independently of the thinking subject. As has been argued earlier, Kant does describe the external world as objective. However, what is meant by 'objective', for Kant, is that we hold a certain relation with the external world, whereby we conceive ourselves as subjects within an independent framework of objects (i.e. as explained earlier, regardless of how I happen to be looking at a chair, the nature of the chair remains fixed and independent of my perspective). This relational objectivity does not necessary imply an ontological objectivity. Kant can defend his view of the external world against idealism, so long as he frames the charge of idealism at the relational qualities of objectivity.

Kant was aware that the external world was limited by our understanding, and noumena are introduced partly as proof of this (i.e. noumena are the limits of human understanding). It is the noumena that play the role of independent existences beyond the thinking subject. They have ontological objectivity (in contrast, for Kant we do not stand in any relation to them, as the very notion of a relation cannot be applied to them). As such it is noumena that Kant needs to defend against charges of idealism, in addition to empirical reality. As they are 'unknowable', it is difficult to know how this defence can be made.

If noumena are taken away from Kant's theory, or are doubted, then everything I understand, including all objects, places and other people, become mere characters within my active mind. The world can only be appreciated as independently existing within the noumenal theory.

Q.78What is the authors stance regarding Kant’s views on the objectivity of external world?

Passage 3

Directions for Q.75 to Q.79 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

Kant uses the word 'noumena' to refer to things in themselves, which he describes as 'intelligible existences' which 'are not objects of our senses'. Kant is on difficult territory with his notion of noumena. To begin with, given that we can know nothing about them, in what way does it make any sense to talk about them existing? By Kant's own standard, is it not the case that noumena are devoid of any meaning? Kant argues that although we cannot have any conception of what noumena are, we can nevertheless have a representation of them. But he goes on to state that this representation is a 'limitative conception'. That is, that noumenal representations simply mark the limit of human understanding and that is their necessary function. Unfortunately, this response does not say a great deal about noumena: it does not givethem a positive meaning.

The characteristics that Kant placed on noumena leads ultimately to the question of how we can justify a belief in them. Kant argued that they must exist because phenomena are appearances, thus they must be appearances of something, and that something must be noumena. But surely we are not justified in calling them appearances a priori. We may have a conception of them as appearances empirically, in that we say that such-and-such a phenomena is the appearance of such-and-such an object, but as we have seen the notion of phenomena and of object is accommodated within Kant's model of cognition, and thus appearance is a relation between them. There is no essential property of phenomena which make them appearances. Ultimately, Kant's noumena are unknowable and, as Russell pointed out, 'the "thing-in-itself" was an awkward element in Kant's philosophy, and was abandoned by his immediate successors'.

The important point here is that in the same way we can be sceptical about the existence of external reality within the empiricist framework, and thus be led down the path of Berkeley's idealism and solipsism, so we can be sceptical about the existence of noumena within the Kantian framework and we can be led to a similarly solipsistic position. Given that we have seen that Kant defends himself against the charge of idealism, it is worth returning back to that argument more critically.

Kant's refutation of idealism is based on the insight that what we take to be the outside world is immediately given. The real world that we live in is immediately revealed by our intuitions, and we make sense of that world through our conceptions. Kant wrote that idealism 'assumed, that the only immediate experience is internal, and that from this we can only infer the existence of external things... But our proof shows that external experience is properly immediate'. Hence, because the external world is immediately given, there is no justification in being sceptical about it.

The difficulty with Kant's refutation is not so much with the refutation itself, but with what he is defending. The external world, in the Kantian framework, is ultimately the construct of our faculties of mind (this being the thesis of transcendental ideality). It is built upon the intuitions of sensibility, and the conceptions of the understanding. Given this foundation, it is interesting to speculate what the situation would be if I lacked these faculties. No doubt I would cease to exist as a human consciousness, but would it also follow that the external world would also not exist. It is difficult to see how Kant could avoid this conclusion. Thus, Kant's refutation works so long as I am alive and am able to think about the existence of an external world, yet becomes difficult if I speculate on the consequences of my own non-existence.

Thus it follows that the external world is not objective in the sense that it exists independently of the thinking subject. As has been argued earlier, Kant does describe the external world as objective. However, what is meant by 'objective', for Kant, is that we hold a certain relation with the external world, whereby we conceive ourselves as subjects within an independent framework of objects (i.e. as explained earlier, regardless of how I happen to be looking at a chair, the nature of the chair remains fixed and independent of my perspective). This relational objectivity does not necessary imply an ontological objectivity. Kant can defend his view of the external world against idealism, so long as he frames the charge of idealism at the relational qualities of objectivity.

Kant was aware that the external world was limited by our understanding, and noumena are introduced partly as proof of this (i.e. noumena are the limits of human understanding). It is the noumena that play the role of independent existences beyond the thinking subject. They have ontological objectivity (in contrast, for Kant we do not stand in any relation to them, as the very notion of a relation cannot be applied to them). As such it is noumena that Kant needs to defend against charges of idealism, in addition to empirical reality. As they are 'unknowable', it is difficult to know how this defence can be made.

If noumena are taken away from Kant's theory, or are doubted, then everything I understand, including all objects, places and other people, become mere characters within my active mind. The world can only be appreciated as independently existing within the noumenal theory.

Q.79Why do you think Kant introduced the term called Noumena?

Passage 4

Directions for Q.80 to Q.84 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

With the 2005 publication of Steven Levitt's Freakonomics, the world has come to see that economists can be spectacularly clever. In the search for “clean identification” — a situation in which it is easy to discern the causal forces in play —Levitt has turned to such offbeat contexts as Japanese sumo-wrestling and the seedy world of Chicago real estate. He has studied racial discrimination on a game show and reflected on white-collar bagel filching. This has inspired a flurry of imitators, including papers on point shaving in college basketball, under-used gym memberships and the parking tickets of UN diplomats. Within the tedious body of economics scholarship, these papers stand out as fantastically entertaining. Judging from the dizzying sales of Freakonomics and the thousands of lecture halls across the U.S. now bursting with econ majors, they've also been wildly successful at ginning up interest in the discipline. But what if all the cleverness has crowded out some of the truly deep questions we rely on economists to answer?

For more than a generation after the Second World War, the economists who dealt with real world data were mostly earnest, stubborn men. They tackled the era's thorniest questions. Zvi Griliches of Harvard devoted decades to the problem of productivity growth, the chief determinant of rising living standards. His colleague Simon Kuznets spent half his career devising the measure of economic growth we still use today. In the ‘80s, however, the data-crunchers had a crisis of confidence. In one famous episode, the eminent economist Gregg Lewis reviewed several studies on unions. Some papers reported that unions strongly increased wages; others reported exactly the opposite. The old approach had been sweeping in its ambition. But what good were ambitious goals if the best you could do was “on the one hand/on the other hand”-style equivocation or plain gibberish? Many economists concluded that the path to knowledge lay in solid answers to modest questions. Henceforth, the emphasis would be on “clean identification.” “I've always been someone who's thought it's better to answer a small question well than to fail to answer a big question,” Levitt says. While still a student, he wondered whether money drives election results or if the better candidate raises more money. He ingeniously demonstrated the latter. Another early paper found that a slight increase in the chance of arrest dramatically deterred auto theft. Levitt discerned this by studying cities that had approved the use of Lojack,a transmitter that leads police to stolen cars. In 2001, Levitt published his most controversial finding: a paper highlighting the connection between the legalization of abortion in the ‘70s and the falling crime rates of the ‘90s. Levitt argued that unwanted children are most at risk of becoming criminals. Abortion, he concluded, lowered crime rates by reducing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these papers made important contributions. The Lojack paper helped demonstrate that theft is a rational phenomenon and can,therefore, be discouraged. A few years later, Levitt debuted a new kind of paper: an investigation into offbeat phenomena from daily life. One pondered the strategies soccer players employ when taking penalty kicks. Another paper studied corruption in sumo wrestling tournaments as a window onto the power of incentives. Not long after, Levitt conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Weakest Link, a game show in which contestants voted to remove a player after each round of trivia questions. Tallying the voting data revealed that contestants were discriminating against Latinos and the elderly, but not blacks and women.

But while the game show provided a pure setting for observing discrimination, there was no reason to think we could extrapolate from Weakest Link contestants to hiring and promotion decisions, where discrimination often intersects with economics. Most such decisions don't take place in a Hollywood studio before a national TV audience.

Levitt's voice is high, except when it's trailing off at the end of a sentence. He leans heavily on the word “OK.” He is lanky and concave-chested and makes little eye contact. But Levitt has a droll magnetism, an anti-charisma, which, combined with his eclectic interests, made a talk he gave at Harvard in 2002 a hit. “He talked about his kick-ass creative papers,” recalls one attendee. “Here are the lessons you can draw to improve your own research, how you can do clever, appealing papers yourself.” As he was wrapping up, Levitt reflected on the choices facing grad students: If you think you can do as well in traditional topics as someone like Marty Feldstein — a giant of the profession — you should pursue that, he said. Knowing laughter broke out. But, he continued, if you don't feel like you're up to that, you might want to think about alternative topics. The message resonated. One student watched classmates spend the next several weeks on high alert for some curiosity of daily life around which they could build a paper. Levitt has become famous for saying that “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” What is one to make of a discipline that heaps scorn on its own raison d'etre?

When I raise this with Levitt, he is almost apologetic: “There needs to be a core for work on the periphery to make any sense. I don't think we would want to have a whole profession with dilettantes like me out doing what I do.” But he quickly adds: “The simple fact is that it's hard to do good research. To the extent that you can do interesting research that teaches us something about the world, and entertains along the way, that's not so bad.

Q.80 According to the passage, the 1980's saw the data-crunchers:

Passage 4

Directions for Q.80 to Q.84 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

With the 2005 publication of Steven Levitt's Freakonomics, the world has come to see that economists can be spectacularly clever. In the search for “clean identification” — a situation in which it is easy to discern the causal forces in play —Levitt has turned to such offbeat contexts as Japanese sumo-wrestling and the seedy world of Chicago real estate. He has studied racial discrimination on a game show and reflected on white-collar bagel filching. This has inspired a flurry of imitators, including papers on point shaving in college basketball, under-used gym memberships and the parking tickets of UN diplomats. Within the tedious body of economics scholarship, these papers stand out as fantastically entertaining. Judging from the dizzying sales of Freakonomics and the thousands of lecture halls across the U.S. now bursting with econ majors, they've also been wildly successful at ginning up interest in the discipline. But what if all the cleverness has crowded out some of the truly deep questions we rely on economists to answer?

For more than a generation after the Second World War, the economists who dealt with real world data were mostly earnest, stubborn men. They tackled the era's thorniest questions. Zvi Griliches of Harvard devoted decades to the problem of productivity growth, the chief determinant of rising living standards. His colleague Simon Kuznets spent half his career devising the measure of economic growth we still use today. In the ‘80s, however, the data-crunchers had a crisis of confidence. In one famous episode, the eminent economist Gregg Lewis reviewed several studies on unions. Some papers reported that unions strongly increased wages; others reported exactly the opposite. The old approach had been sweeping in its ambition. But what good were ambitious goals if the best you could do was “on the one hand/on the other hand”-style equivocation or plain gibberish? Many economists concluded that the path to knowledge lay in solid answers to modest questions. Henceforth, the emphasis would be on “clean identification.” “I've always been someone who's thought it's better to answer a small question well than to fail to answer a big question,” Levitt says. While still a student, he wondered whether money drives election results or if the better candidate raises more money. He ingeniously demonstrated the latter. Another early paper found that a slight increase in the chance of arrest dramatically deterred auto theft. Levitt discerned this by studying cities that had approved the use of Lojack,a transmitter that leads police to stolen cars. In 2001, Levitt published his most controversial finding: a paper highlighting the connection between the legalization of abortion in the ‘70s and the falling crime rates of the ‘90s. Levitt argued that unwanted children are most at risk of becoming criminals. Abortion, he concluded, lowered crime rates by reducing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these papers made important contributions. The Lojack paper helped demonstrate that theft is a rational phenomenon and can,therefore, be discouraged. A few years later, Levitt debuted a new kind of paper: an investigation into offbeat phenomena from daily life. One pondered the strategies soccer players employ when taking penalty kicks. Another paper studied corruption in sumo wrestling tournaments as a window onto the power of incentives. Not long after, Levitt conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Weakest Link, a game show in which contestants voted to remove a player after each round of trivia questions. Tallying the voting data revealed that contestants were discriminating against Latinos and the elderly, but not blacks and women.

But while the game show provided a pure setting for observing discrimination, there was no reason to think we could extrapolate from Weakest Link contestants to hiring and promotion decisions, where discrimination often intersects with economics. Most such decisions don't take place in a Hollywood studio before a national TV audience.

Levitt's voice is high, except when it's trailing off at the end of a sentence. He leans heavily on the word “OK.” He is lanky and concave-chested and makes little eye contact. But Levitt has a droll magnetism, an anti-charisma, which, combined with his eclectic interests, made a talk he gave at Harvard in 2002 a hit. “He talked about his kick-ass creative papers,” recalls one attendee. “Here are the lessons you can draw to improve your own research, how you can do clever, appealing papers yourself.” As he was wrapping up, Levitt reflected on the choices facing grad students: If you think you can do as well in traditional topics as someone like Marty Feldstein — a giant of the profession — you should pursue that, he said. Knowing laughter broke out. But, he continued, if you don't feel like you're up to that, you might want to think about alternative topics. The message resonated. One student watched classmates spend the next several weeks on high alert for some curiosity of daily life around which they could build a paper. Levitt has become famous for saying that “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” What is one to make of a discipline that heaps scorn on its own raison d'etre?

When I raise this with Levitt, he is almost apologetic: “There needs to be a core for work on the periphery to make any sense. I don't think we would want to have a whole profession with dilettantes like me out doing what I do.” But he quickly adds: “The simple fact is that it's hard to do good research. To the extent that you can do interesting research that teaches us something about the world, and entertains along the way, that's not so bad.

Q.81 It cannot be concluded that many old day economists who dealt with real world data ended up:

Passage 4

Directions for Q.80 to Q.84 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

With the 2005 publication of Steven Levitt's Freakonomics, the world has come to see that economists can be spectacularly clever. In the search for “clean identification” — a situation in which it is easy to discern the causal forces in play —Levitt has turned to such offbeat contexts as Japanese sumo-wrestling and the seedy world of Chicago real estate. He has studied racial discrimination on a game show and reflected on white-collar bagel filching. This has inspired a flurry of imitators, including papers on point shaving in college basketball, under-used gym memberships and the parking tickets of UN diplomats. Within the tedious body of economics scholarship, these papers stand out as fantastically entertaining. Judging from the dizzying sales of Freakonomics and the thousands of lecture halls across the U.S. now bursting with econ majors, they've also been wildly successful at ginning up interest in the discipline. But what if all the cleverness has crowded out some of the truly deep questions we rely on economists to answer?

For more than a generation after the Second World War, the economists who dealt with real world data were mostly earnest, stubborn men. They tackled the era's thorniest questions. Zvi Griliches of Harvard devoted decades to the problem of productivity growth, the chief determinant of rising living standards. His colleague Simon Kuznets spent half his career devising the measure of economic growth we still use today. In the ‘80s, however, the data-crunchers had a crisis of confidence. In one famous episode, the eminent economist Gregg Lewis reviewed several studies on unions. Some papers reported that unions strongly increased wages; others reported exactly the opposite. The old approach had been sweeping in its ambition. But what good were ambitious goals if the best you could do was “on the one hand/on the other hand”-style equivocation or plain gibberish? Many economists concluded that the path to knowledge lay in solid answers to modest questions. Henceforth, the emphasis would be on “clean identification.” “I've always been someone who's thought it's better to answer a small question well than to fail to answer a big question,” Levitt says. While still a student, he wondered whether money drives election results or if the better candidate raises more money. He ingeniously demonstrated the latter. Another early paper found that a slight increase in the chance of arrest dramatically deterred auto theft. Levitt discerned this by studying cities that had approved the use of Lojack,a transmitter that leads police to stolen cars. In 2001, Levitt published his most controversial finding: a paper highlighting the connection between the legalization of abortion in the ‘70s and the falling crime rates of the ‘90s. Levitt argued that unwanted children are most at risk of becoming criminals. Abortion, he concluded, lowered crime rates by reducing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these papers made important contributions. The Lojack paper helped demonstrate that theft is a rational phenomenon and can,therefore, be discouraged. A few years later, Levitt debuted a new kind of paper: an investigation into offbeat phenomena from daily life. One pondered the strategies soccer players employ when taking penalty kicks. Another paper studied corruption in sumo wrestling tournaments as a window onto the power of incentives. Not long after, Levitt conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Weakest Link, a game show in which contestants voted to remove a player after each round of trivia questions. Tallying the voting data revealed that contestants were discriminating against Latinos and the elderly, but not blacks and women.

But while the game show provided a pure setting for observing discrimination, there was no reason to think we could extrapolate from Weakest Link contestants to hiring and promotion decisions, where discrimination often intersects with economics. Most such decisions don't take place in a Hollywood studio before a national TV audience.

Levitt's voice is high, except when it's trailing off at the end of a sentence. He leans heavily on the word “OK.” He is lanky and concave-chested and makes little eye contact. But Levitt has a droll magnetism, an anti-charisma, which, combined with his eclectic interests, made a talk he gave at Harvard in 2002 a hit. “He talked about his kick-ass creative papers,” recalls one attendee. “Here are the lessons you can draw to improve your own research, how you can do clever, appealing papers yourself.” As he was wrapping up, Levitt reflected on the choices facing grad students: If you think you can do as well in traditional topics as someone like Marty Feldstein — a giant of the profession — you should pursue that, he said. Knowing laughter broke out. But, he continued, if you don't feel like you're up to that, you might want to think about alternative topics. The message resonated. One student watched classmates spend the next several weeks on high alert for some curiosity of daily life around which they could build a paper. Levitt has become famous for saying that “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” What is one to make of a discipline that heaps scorn on its own raison d'etre?

When I raise this with Levitt, he is almost apologetic: “There needs to be a core for work on the periphery to make any sense. I don't think we would want to have a whole profession with dilettantes like me out doing what I do.” But he quickly adds: “The simple fact is that it's hard to do good research. To the extent that you can do interesting research that teaches us something about the world, and entertains along the way, that's not so bad.

Q.82 Which one of the following is eminent on Levitt’s wish list for economists:

Passage 4

Directions for Q.80 to Q.84 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

With the 2005 publication of Steven Levitt's Freakonomics, the world has come to see that economists can be spectacularly clever. In the search for “clean identification” — a situation in which it is easy to discern the causal forces in play —Levitt has turned to such offbeat contexts as Japanese sumo-wrestling and the seedy world of Chicago real estate. He has studied racial discrimination on a game show and reflected on white-collar bagel filching. This has inspired a flurry of imitators, including papers on point shaving in college basketball, under-used gym memberships and the parking tickets of UN diplomats. Within the tedious body of economics scholarship, these papers stand out as fantastically entertaining. Judging from the dizzying sales of Freakonomics and the thousands of lecture halls across the U.S. now bursting with econ majors, they've also been wildly successful at ginning up interest in the discipline. But what if all the cleverness has crowded out some of the truly deep questions we rely on economists to answer?

For more than a generation after the Second World War, the economists who dealt with real world data were mostly earnest, stubborn men. They tackled the era's thorniest questions. Zvi Griliches of Harvard devoted decades to the problem of productivity growth, the chief determinant of rising living standards. His colleague Simon Kuznets spent half his career devising the measure of economic growth we still use today. In the ‘80s, however, the data-crunchers had a crisis of confidence. In one famous episode, the eminent economist Gregg Lewis reviewed several studies on unions. Some papers reported that unions strongly increased wages; others reported exactly the opposite. The old approach had been sweeping in its ambition. But what good were ambitious goals if the best you could do was “on the one hand/on the other hand”-style equivocation or plain gibberish? Many economists concluded that the path to knowledge lay in solid answers to modest questions. Henceforth, the emphasis would be on “clean identification.” “I've always been someone who's thought it's better to answer a small question well than to fail to answer a big question,” Levitt says. While still a student, he wondered whether money drives election results or if the better candidate raises more money. He ingeniously demonstrated the latter. Another early paper found that a slight increase in the chance of arrest dramatically deterred auto theft. Levitt discerned this by studying cities that had approved the use of Lojack,a transmitter that leads police to stolen cars. In 2001, Levitt published his most controversial finding: a paper highlighting the connection between the legalization of abortion in the ‘70s and the falling crime rates of the ‘90s. Levitt argued that unwanted children are most at risk of becoming criminals. Abortion, he concluded, lowered crime rates by reducing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these papers made important contributions. The Lojack paper helped demonstrate that theft is a rational phenomenon and can,therefore, be discouraged. A few years later, Levitt debuted a new kind of paper: an investigation into offbeat phenomena from daily life. One pondered the strategies soccer players employ when taking penalty kicks. Another paper studied corruption in sumo wrestling tournaments as a window onto the power of incentives. Not long after, Levitt conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Weakest Link, a game show in which contestants voted to remove a player after each round of trivia questions. Tallying the voting data revealed that contestants were discriminating against Latinos and the elderly, but not blacks and women.

But while the game show provided a pure setting for observing discrimination, there was no reason to think we could extrapolate from Weakest Link contestants to hiring and promotion decisions, where discrimination often intersects with economics. Most such decisions don't take place in a Hollywood studio before a national TV audience.

Levitt's voice is high, except when it's trailing off at the end of a sentence. He leans heavily on the word “OK.” He is lanky and concave-chested and makes little eye contact. But Levitt has a droll magnetism, an anti-charisma, which, combined with his eclectic interests, made a talk he gave at Harvard in 2002 a hit. “He talked about his kick-ass creative papers,” recalls one attendee. “Here are the lessons you can draw to improve your own research, how you can do clever, appealing papers yourself.” As he was wrapping up, Levitt reflected on the choices facing grad students: If you think you can do as well in traditional topics as someone like Marty Feldstein — a giant of the profession — you should pursue that, he said. Knowing laughter broke out. But, he continued, if you don't feel like you're up to that, you might want to think about alternative topics. The message resonated. One student watched classmates spend the next several weeks on high alert for some curiosity of daily life around which they could build a paper. Levitt has become famous for saying that “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” What is one to make of a discipline that heaps scorn on its own raison d'etre?

When I raise this with Levitt, he is almost apologetic: “There needs to be a core for work on the periphery to make any sense. I don't think we would want to have a whole profession with dilettantes like me out doing what I do.” But he quickly adds: “The simple fact is that it's hard to do good research. To the extent that you can do interesting research that teaches us something about the world, and entertains along the way, that's not so bad.

Q.83 According to the author, the voting data from the show ‘Weakest Link’ proved that:

Passage 4

Directions for Q.80 to Q.84 – Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow.

With the 2005 publication of Steven Levitt's Freakonomics, the world has come to see that economists can be spectacularly clever. In the search for “clean identification” — a situation in which it is easy to discern the causal forces in play —Levitt has turned to such offbeat contexts as Japanese sumo-wrestling and the seedy world of Chicago real estate. He has studied racial discrimination on a game show and reflected on white-collar bagel filching. This has inspired a flurry of imitators, including papers on point shaving in college basketball, under-used gym memberships and the parking tickets of UN diplomats. Within the tedious body of economics scholarship, these papers stand out as fantastically entertaining. Judging from the dizzying sales of Freakonomics and the thousands of lecture halls across the U.S. now bursting with econ majors, they've also been wildly successful at ginning up interest in the discipline. But what if all the cleverness has crowded out some of the truly deep questions we rely on economists to answer?

For more than a generation after the Second World War, the economists who dealt with real world data were mostly earnest, stubborn men. They tackled the era's thorniest questions. Zvi Griliches of Harvard devoted decades to the problem of productivity growth, the chief determinant of rising living standards. His colleague Simon Kuznets spent half his career devising the measure of economic growth we still use today. In the ‘80s, however, the data-crunchers had a crisis of confidence. In one famous episode, the eminent economist Gregg Lewis reviewed several studies on unions. Some papers reported that unions strongly increased wages; others reported exactly the opposite. The old approach had been sweeping in its ambition. But what good were ambitious goals if the best you could do was “on the one hand/on the other hand”-style equivocation or plain gibberish? Many economists concluded that the path to knowledge lay in solid answers to modest questions. Henceforth, the emphasis would be on “clean identification.” “I've always been someone who's thought it's better to answer a small question well than to fail to answer a big question,” Levitt says. While still a student, he wondered whether money drives election results or if the better candidate raises more money. He ingeniously demonstrated the latter. Another early paper found that a slight increase in the chance of arrest dramatically deterred auto theft. Levitt discerned this by studying cities that had approved the use of Lojack,a transmitter that leads police to stolen cars. In 2001, Levitt published his most controversial finding: a paper highlighting the connection between the legalization of abortion in the ‘70s and the falling crime rates of the ‘90s. Levitt argued that unwanted children are most at risk of becoming criminals. Abortion, he concluded, lowered crime rates by reducing unwanted pregnancies. Some of these papers made important contributions. The Lojack paper helped demonstrate that theft is a rational phenomenon and can,therefore, be discouraged. A few years later, Levitt debuted a new kind of paper: an investigation into offbeat phenomena from daily life. One pondered the strategies soccer players employ when taking penalty kicks. Another paper studied corruption in sumo wrestling tournaments as a window onto the power of incentives. Not long after, Levitt conducted an exhaustive inquiry into Weakest Link, a game show in which contestants voted to remove a player after each round of trivia questions. Tallying the voting data revealed that contestants were discriminating against Latinos and the elderly, but not blacks and women.

But while the game show provided a pure setting for observing discrimination, there was no reason to think we could extrapolate from Weakest Link contestants to hiring and promotion decisions, where discrimination often intersects with economics. Most such decisions don't take place in a Hollywood studio before a national TV audience.

Levitt's voice is high, except when it's trailing off at the end of a sentence. He leans heavily on the word “OK.” He is lanky and concave-chested and makes little eye contact. But Levitt has a droll magnetism, an anti-charisma, which, combined with his eclectic interests, made a talk he gave at Harvard in 2002 a hit. “He talked about his kick-ass creative papers,” recalls one attendee. “Here are the lessons you can draw to improve your own research, how you can do clever, appealing papers yourself.” As he was wrapping up, Levitt reflected on the choices facing grad students: If you think you can do as well in traditional topics as someone like Marty Feldstein — a giant of the profession — you should pursue that, he said. Knowing laughter broke out. But, he continued, if you don't feel like you're up to that, you might want to think about alternative topics. The message resonated. One student watched classmates spend the next several weeks on high alert for some curiosity of daily life around which they could build a paper. Levitt has become famous for saying that “economics is a science with excellent tools for gaining answers but a serious shortage of interesting questions.” What is one to make of a discipline that heaps scorn on its own raison d'etre?

When I raise this with Levitt, he is almost apologetic: “There needs to be a core for work on the periphery to make any sense. I don't think we would want to have a whole profession with dilettantes like me out doing what I do.” But he quickly adds: “The simple fact is that it's hard to do good research. To the extent that you can do interesting research that teaches us something about the world, and entertains along the way, that's not so bad.

Q.84 According to the passage, Levitt can be summed up as:

Passage 5

Directions for Q.85 to Q.87 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content.After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Thomas Hardy's impulses as a writer, all of which he indulged in his novels, were numerous and divergent, and they did not always work together in harmony. Hardy was to some degree interested in exploring his characters' psychologies, though impelled less by curiosity than by sympathy. Occasionally he felt the impulse to comedy (in all its detached coldness) as well as the impulse to farce, but he was more often inclined to see tragedy and record it. He was also inclined to literary realism in the several senses of that phrase. He wanted to describe ordinary human beings; he wanted to speculate on their dilemmas rationally (and, unfortunately, even schematically); and he wanted to record precisely the material universe. Finally, he wanted to be more than a realist. He wanted to transcend what he considered to be the banality of solely recording things exactly and to express as well his awareness of the occult and the strange.

In his novels, these various impulses were sacrificed to each other inevitably and often. Inevitably, because Hardy did not care in the way that novelists such as Flaubert or James cared, and therefore took paths of least resistance. Thus, one impulse often surrendered to a fresher one and, unfortunately, instead of exacting a compromise, simply disappeared. A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give way abruptly to the desire on the part of (on the part of: with regard to the one specified)what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a flower. In this instance, the new impulse was at least an energetic one, and thus its indulgence did not result in a relaxed style. But on other occasions, Hardy abandoned a perilous, risky, and highly energizing impulse in favor of what was for him the fatally relaxing impulse to classify and schematize abstractly. When a relaxing impulse was indulged, the style—that sure index of an author's literary worth—was certain to become verbose. Hardy's weakness derived from his apparent inability to control the comings and goings of these divergent impulses and from his unwillingness to cultivate and sustain the energetic and risky ones. He submitted to the first one and then another, and the spirit blew where it listed; hence the unevenness of any one of his novels. His most controlled novel, Under the Greenwood Tree, prominently exhibits two different but reconcilable impulses—a desire to be a realist-historian and a desire to be a psychologist of love—but the slight interlockings of the plot are not enough to bind the two completely together. Thus even this book splits into two distinct parts.

Q.85 The author of the passage considers a writer's style to be

Passage 5

Directions for Q.85 to Q.87 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content.After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Thomas Hardy's impulses as a writer, all of which he indulged in his novels, were numerous and divergent, and they did not always work together in harmony. Hardy was to some degree interested in exploring his characters' psychologies, though impelled less by curiosity than by sympathy. Occasionally he felt the impulse to comedy (in all its detached coldness) as well as the impulse to farce, but he was more often inclined to see tragedy and record it. He was also inclined to literary realism in the several senses of that phrase. He wanted to describe ordinary human beings; he wanted to speculate on their dilemmas rationally (and, unfortunately, even schematically); and he wanted to record precisely the material universe. Finally, he wanted to be more than a realist. He wanted to transcend what he considered to be the banality of solely recording things exactly and to express as well his awareness of the occult and the strange.

In his novels, these various impulses were sacrificed to each other inevitably and often. Inevitably, because Hardy did not care in the way that novelists such as Flaubert or James cared, and therefore took paths of least resistance. Thus, one impulse often surrendered to a fresher one and, unfortunately, instead of exacting a compromise, simply disappeared. A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give way abruptly to the desire on the part of (on the part of: with regard to the one specified)what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a flower. In this instance, the new impulse was at least an energetic one, and thus its indulgence did not result in a relaxed style. But on other occasions, Hardy abandoned a perilous, risky, and highly energizing impulse in favor of what was for him the fatally relaxing impulse to classify and schematize abstractly. When a relaxing impulse was indulged, the style—that sure index of an author's literary worth—was certain to become verbose. Hardy's weakness derived from his apparent inability to control the comings and goings of these divergent impulses and from his unwillingness to cultivate and sustain the energetic and risky ones. He submitted to the first one and then another, and the spirit blew where it listed; hence the unevenness of any one of his novels. His most controlled novel, Under the Greenwood Tree, prominently exhibits two different but reconcilable impulses—a desire to be a realist-historian and a desire to be a psychologist of love—but the slight interlockings of the plot are not enough to bind the two completely together. Thus even this book splits into two distinct parts.

Q.86 Which of the following statements best describes the organization of lines “Thus, one impulse often …abstractly” of the passage?

Passage 5

Directions for Q.85 to Q.87 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content.After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Thomas Hardy's impulses as a writer, all of which he indulged in his novels, were numerous and divergent, and they did not always work together in harmony. Hardy was to some degree interested in exploring his characters' psychologies, though impelled less by curiosity than by sympathy. Occasionally he felt the impulse to comedy (in all its detached coldness) as well as the impulse to farce, but he was more often inclined to see tragedy and record it. He was also inclined to literary realism in the several senses of that phrase. He wanted to describe ordinary human beings; he wanted to speculate on their dilemmas rationally (and, unfortunately, even schematically); and he wanted to record precisely the material universe. Finally, he wanted to be more than a realist. He wanted to transcend what he considered to be the banality of solely recording things exactly and to express as well his awareness of the occult and the strange.

In his novels, these various impulses were sacrificed to each other inevitably and often. Inevitably, because Hardy did not care in the way that novelists such as Flaubert or James cared, and therefore took paths of least resistance. Thus, one impulse often surrendered to a fresher one and, unfortunately, instead of exacting a compromise, simply disappeared. A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give way abruptly to the desire on the part of (on the part of: with regard to the one specified)what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a flower. In this instance, the new impulse was at least an energetic one, and thus its indulgence did not result in a relaxed style. But on other occasions, Hardy abandoned a perilous, risky, and highly energizing impulse in favor of what was for him the fatally relaxing impulse to classify and schematize abstractly. When a relaxing impulse was indulged, the style—that sure index of an author's literary worth—was certain to become verbose. Hardy's weakness derived from his apparent inability to control the comings and goings of these divergent impulses and from his unwillingness to cultivate and sustain the energetic and risky ones. He submitted to the first one and then another, and the spirit blew where it listed; hence the unevenness of any one of his novels. His most controlled novel, Under the Greenwood Tree, prominently exhibits two different but reconcilable impulses—a desire to be a realist-historian and a desire to be a psychologist of love—but the slight interlockings of the plot are not enough to bind the two completely together. Thus even this book splits into two distinct parts.

Q.87 The author implies which of the following about Under the Greenwood Tree in relation to Hardy’s other novels?

Passage 6

Directions for Q.88 to Q.90 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content. After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

As the Moorish states in all parts of Spain fell into progressive political, military, and literary decadence, the atmosphere of the established Christian centers became increasingly more favorable to an intensive and varied literary development. The growth of cities had produced a comparatively urban and cultured population with sufficient leisure and security to find time for literary entertainment. The growth of commerce had brought Spaniards into contact with other societies that had developed original and stimulating literary traditions. The growth of a recognized and responsible central government, following the definitive unification of Castile and León under Ferdinand III early in the thirteenth century, had provided a court or central cultural focus toward which men of literary ability could gravitate. The growing self-awareness of the writer as a unique creative personality, from the anonymity of the cantares de gestato the tentative identification we see in the poetry of Berceo, to intense and affirmative individualism of the later mesterdeclerecíain Juan Ruiz and López de Ayala, demands an ever broader field in which to realize and fulfill itself. In obedience to this sort of aesthetic need and nurtured on the expanding possibilities of a settled and prospering society, the fifteenth century represents a period of great fecundity in the development and widening of literary genres.

The medieval cantar de gesta, which had so magnificently served the needs of a society of embattled warriors, undergoes a major change, possibly through the influence of the mester de clerecía. In the new society there was neither time, place, nor public for the recitation of the long and usually complex epic poems, but the great deeds, the great heroes still held their magic for the general public. These survive in a new poetic form, the romances. The anonymous romances are short poems of regular meter and assonance which capture an intense and dramatic moment—of sorrow, of defeat, of parting, of return—in simple and direct language. They are generally fragmentary, combining lyricism and narration taken from the dramatic high points of the epics. Some critics have thought that the oldest romances represent a survival of the raw material from which the long cantaresgrew, but the more generally accepted opinion is that they represent the opposite process; as the old cantaresfell into oblivion, the best moments and the most stirring passages were conserved and polished and given new life.

Supporting this view is the fact that the earliest romances go back only to the middle of the fourteenth century, a time in which the cantareswere in a period of final decadence and the oldest epic poems already forgotten. They share the realism and directness of the cantares, and also the greater polish and lyricism of the mester de clerecía. Some thousands of them have been collected and not all relate to the material of the Spanish epics.

Q.88The passage implies that

Passage 6

Directions for Q.88 to Q.90 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content. After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

As the Moorish states in all parts of Spain fell into progressive political, military, and literary decadence, the atmosphere of the established Christian centers became increasingly more favorable to an intensive and varied literary development. The growth of cities had produced a comparatively urban and cultured population with sufficient leisure and security to find time for literary entertainment. The growth of commerce had brought Spaniards into contact with other societies that had developed original and stimulating literary traditions. The growth of a recognized and responsible central government, following the definitive unification of Castile and León under Ferdinand III early in the thirteenth century, had provided a court or central cultural focus toward which men of literary ability could gravitate. The growing self-awareness of the writer as a unique creative personality, from the anonymity of the cantares de gestato the tentative identification we see in the poetry of Berceo, to intense and affirmative individualism of the later mesterdeclerecíain Juan Ruiz and López de Ayala, demands an ever broader field in which to realize and fulfill itself. In obedience to this sort of aesthetic need and nurtured on the expanding possibilities of a settled and prospering society, the fifteenth century represents a period of great fecundity in the development and widening of literary genres.

The medieval cantar de gesta, which had so magnificently served the needs of a society of embattled warriors, undergoes a major change, possibly through the influence of the mester de clerecía. In the new society there was neither time, place, nor public for the recitation of the long and usually complex epic poems, but the great deeds, the great heroes still held their magic for the general public. These survive in a new poetic form, the romances. The anonymous romances are short poems of regular meter and assonance which capture an intense and dramatic moment—of sorrow, of defeat, of parting, of return—in simple and direct language. They are generally fragmentary, combining lyricism and narration taken from the dramatic high points of the epics. Some critics have thought that the oldest romances represent a survival of the raw material from which the long cantaresgrew, but the more generally accepted opinion is that they represent the opposite process; as the old cantaresfell into oblivion, the best moments and the most stirring passages were conserved and polished and given new life.

Supporting this view is the fact that the earliest romances go back only to the middle of the fourteenth century, a time in which the cantareswere in a period of final decadence and the oldest epic poems already forgotten. They share the realism and directness of the cantares, and also the greater polish and lyricism of the mester de clerecía. Some thousands of them have been collected and not all relate to the material of the Spanish epics.

Q.89 From the passage the reader can infer that

Passage 6

Directions for Q.88 to Q.90 – The passage is followed by questions based on its content. After reading the passage, choose the best answer to each question. Answer all questions about the passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

As the Moorish states in all parts of Spain fell into progressive political, military, and literary decadence, the atmosphere of the established Christian centers became increasingly more favorable to an intensive and varied literary development. The growth of cities had produced a comparatively urban and cultured population with sufficient leisure and security to find time for literary entertainment. The growth of commerce had brought Spaniards into contact with other societies that had developed original and stimulating literary traditions. The growth of a recognized and responsible central government, following the definitive unification of Castile and León under Ferdinand III early in the thirteenth century, had provided a court or central cultural focus toward which men of literary ability could gravitate. The growing self-awareness of the writer as a unique creative personality, from the anonymity of the cantares de gestato the tentative identification we see in the poetry of Berceo, to intense and affirmative individualism of the later mesterdeclerecíain Juan Ruiz and López de Ayala, demands an ever broader field in which to realize and fulfill itself. In obedience to this sort of aesthetic need and nurtured on the expanding possibilities of a settled and prospering society, the fifteenth century represents a period of great fecundity in the development and widening of literary genres.

The medieval cantar de gesta, which had so magnificently served the needs of a society of embattled warriors, undergoes a major change, possibly through the influence of the mester de clerecía. In the new society there was neither time, place, nor public for the recitation of the long and usually complex epic poems, but the great deeds, the great heroes still held their magic for the general public. These survive in a new poetic form, the romances. The anonymous romances are short poems of regular meter and assonance which capture an intense and dramatic moment—of sorrow, of defeat, of parting, of return—in simple and direct language. They are generally fragmentary, combining lyricism and narration taken from the dramatic high points of the epics. Some critics have thought that the oldest romances represent a survival of the raw material from which the long cantaresgrew, but the more generally accepted opinion is that they represent the opposite process; as the old cantaresfell into oblivion, the best moments and the most stirring passages were conserved and polished and given new life.

Supporting this view is the fact that the earliest romances go back only to the middle of the fourteenth century, a time in which the cantareswere in a period of final decadence and the oldest epic poems already forgotten. They share the realism and directness of the cantares, and also the greater polish and lyricism of the mester de clerecía. Some thousands of them have been collected and not all relate to the material of the Spanish epics.

Q.90 According to the passage, the theory that the romances come from the same raw material as the cantaresis questionable because

Directions for questions Q.91-92: The question consists of four sentences on a topic. Type the answer choices corresponding to the sentences that are correct in terms of grammar in the box below the sentence. For example, if the correct sentences are B and D, type in BD in the box.

Q.91)

Directions for questions Q.91-92: The question consists of four sentences on a topic. Type the answer choices corresponding to the sentences that are correct in terms of grammar in the box below the sentence. For example, if the correct sentences are B and D, type in BD in the box.

Q.92)

Directions for questions 93-96: Each of the following questions has a paragraph from which the last sentence has been deleted. Type the answer choice that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.

Q.93 Politics is about power and its legitimacy. It is not about the extremely regressive and reactionary idea of civil society that unthinking commentators seem to be offering, day in and day out. Constant harping on civil society leads to sentimentality, nostalgia and illiberalism of the worst kind, along with malignant notions of nationalism and communitarianism.___________________

Directions for questions 93-96: Each of the following questions has a paragraph from which the last sentence has been deleted. Type the answer choice that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.

Q.94 In the 1920s, Riga was where Kremlin watchers like Loy Henderson and George F. Kennan cut their teeth. Other members of this group, which drove U.S. foreign policy towards the Soviet Union in the pre-war period, were James Forrestal, the Dulles brothers, and William Bullitt._______________________

Directions for questions 93-96: Each of the following questions has a paragraph from which the last sentence has been deleted. Type the answer choice that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.

Q.95 2005 is also the year we start implementing our new European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP). Having finally overcome 60 years of division in Europe, we are determined not to create a new set of dividing lines in Europe, and want to capitalise on our new members' relations with their neighbours to project the EU's stability, prosperity and security beyond our shores.___________________________

Directions for questions 93-96: Each of the following questions has a paragraph from which the last sentence has been deleted. Type the answer choice that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.

Q.96 The official reactions to the London blackout were very revealing. The elected London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, had no hesitation in appearing on radio and television. The private electricity company, National Grid, put up a technical functionary who was obviously ill at ease and could only keep repeating the technical explanation for the shutdown.________________________________

Directions for questions 97-98: Each question is based on a word which is used in 4 sentences. Type the answer choice corresponding to the sentence where the usage of the word is inappropriate. For example, if the incorrect usage is in sentence B, type in B in the box.

Q.97 HANG

Directions for questions 97-98: Each question is based on a word which is used in 4 sentences. Type the answer choice corresponding to the sentence where the usage of the word is inappropriate. For example, if the incorrect usage is in sentence B, type in B in the box.

Q98 HARD

Directions for questions 99 to 100:Four alternative summaries are given below each text. Type the answer choice corresponding to the sentence that best captures the essence of the text in the box below the sentences. For example, if the correct sentence is B, type in B in the box.

Q.99 Greece has both natural and cultural assets. But it has lacked in infrastructure — be it inadequate, or unsuitable public transport from the airport, or poor service at a restaurant, or in a shop. Representatives from across the sector of the Greek tourism industry — hoteliers, restaurant owners, travel agents, tour bus operators, tour guides, ferry companies, and so on — have long touted the problems they have faced. From its first day in government, the New Democracy indicated its intention to address these problems. And in the first few months it has been in power, it has already gone beyond simply stating its intentions and has actually begun to do something.

Directions for questions 99 to 100:Four alternative summaries are given below each text. Type the answer choice corresponding to the sentence that best captures the essence of the text in the box below the sentences. For example, if the correct sentence is B, type in B in the box.

Q.100 If one wishes to form a true estimate of the full grandeur of religion, one must keep in mind what it undertakes to do for men. It gives them information about the source and origin of the universe, it assures them of protection and final happiness amid the changing vicissitudes of life, and it guides their thoughts and actions by means of precepts which are backed by the whole force of its authority. It fulfils, therefore, three functions. In the first place, it satisfies man’s desire for knowledge; it is here doing the same thing that science attempts to accomplish by its own methods, and here, therefore, enters into rivalry with it. It is to the second function that it performs that religion no doubt owes the greater part of its influence. In so far as religion brushes away man’s fear of the dangers and vicissitudes of life, in so far as it assures them of a happy ending, and comforts them in their misfortunes, science cannot compete with it.