Have Been Tried From Time To Time," As Churchill Famously Said (Third Paragraph) "?

WILEY CAT VARC BOOK
ADDITIONAL MOCK CAT VARC TEST 4

Questions: 34 Time Allotted: 60 minutes
Directions: The passages given below are followed by a set of questions each. Choose the best answer to
each question.
Passage 1
Roughly a third of American voters think that the Marxist slogan “From each according to his ability to each
according to his need” appears in the American Constitution. About as many are incapable of naming even
one of the three branches of the government. The problem of voter ignorance undermines democracy, and
the ignorance of the many has long galled the few, especially the few who consider themselves intellectuals.
Plato, one of the earliest to see democracy as a problem, saw its typical citizen as shiftless and flighty. It
would be much safer, Plato thought, to entrust power to carefully educated guardians. A more practical
suggestion came from J. S. Mill, in the nineteenth century: give extra votes to citizens with university degrees
or intellectually demanding jobs.
Democracy is far from perfect— “the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been
tried from time to time,” as Churchill famously said. So, if we value its power to make good decisions, why
not try a system that’s a little less fair but makes good decisions even more often? Jamming the stub of the
Greek word for “knowledge” into the Greek word for “rule,” we get the word “epistocracy,” meaning
“government by the knowledgeable.” It’s an idea against which advocates of democracy, and other enemies
of despotism, have raised some objections.
One could deny that truth is a suitable standard for measuring political judgment. After all, in debates over
contentious issues, such as whether human activity is warming the planet, appeals to the truth tend to be
incendiary. Truth peremptorily claims to be acknowledged and precludes debate, and debate constitutes the
very essence of political life. One could also deny that some citizens know more about good government
than others, and even if they know more, how does knowing more impart political authority.
There are also two practical arguments against epistocracy. The first is the possibility that an epistocracy’s
method of screening voters might be biased in a way that couldn’t readily be identified and therefore couldn’t
be corrected for. The second is that universal suffrage is so established in our minds as a default that giving
the knowledgeable power over the ignorant will always feel more unfair than giving those in the majority
power over those in the minority. As defences of democracy go, these are even less rousing than Churchill’s
shruggie.
The basic argument of epistocracy is that it’s entirely justifiable to limit the political power that the irrational,
the ignorant, and the incompetent have over others. To counter the concern for fairness, it is argued that the
public’s welfare is more important than anyone’s hurt feelings; after all, few would consider it unfair to
disqualify jurors who are morally or cognitively incompetent.
But advocates of democracy while conceding that many voters are ignorant argue that people rarely vote for
their narrow self-interest, and ill-informed voters, far from being lazy or self-sabotaging, should be seen as
rational actors. If the odds that your vote will be decisive are minuscule, then learning about politics isn’t
worth even a few minutes of your time. It’s only because of the worthlessness of an individual vote that so
many voters look beyond their narrow self-interest: in the polling booth, the warm, fuzzy feeling of altruism
can be had cheap.
1. Which of the following best conveys the views of Churchill about democracy as given in the passage:
“Democracy is far from perfect— “the worst form of government except all those other forms that
have been tried from time to time,” as Churchill famously said (Third paragraph)”?
1. Democracy is the worst form of government.

2. Democracy is the best form of government.
3. Democracy is the least bad form of government.
4. Democracy is an imperfect form of government.
1
2. Which of the following can be inferred from the statement “…in debates over contentious issues
…appeals to the truth tend to be incendiary (Fourth paragraph)” in the context of the passage?
1. Appeals to truth make for strong arguments.

2. Even the truth can be contentious.
3. Truth is the first casualty in politics.
4. Political debates rely on appeals to truth.
3. Which of the following support the idea of epistocracy as an alternative to democracy in the context of
the passage, EXCEPT?
1. Governments of the knowledgeable are likely to make good decisions more frequently than
otherwise.
2. Rule of the knowledgeable over the ignorant is better than the rule of the majority over the
minority.
3. Limiting the political power of the irrational, the ignorant, and the incompetent over others is
entirely justifiable.
4. Knowing more about good government does not bestow political authority on such people.
4. In the context of the passage, which of the following strengthen the defence of democracy as opposed
to epistocracy despite democracy’s inherent problem of ignorant voters, EXCEPT?
1. It is unfair and discriminatory to give voting rights to some people and not to others.
2. Even ignorant voters vote rationally when they understand the worthlessness of their individual
votes.
3. Public welfare is more important than the hurt feelings of those denied voting rights.
4. Truth or knowledge is not a suitable standard for measuring political judgement.
5. In the context of the passage, which of the following can be inferred from the last sentence of the
passage “…in the polling booth, the warm, fuzzy feeling of altruism can be had cheap”?
1. Voting for the general public good and not for one’s narrow self-interest is an act of altruism that
does not require much expenses or sacrifice.
2. Voting decisively and rationally is an expression of altruism in a democracy.
3. Even ignorant or ill-informed voters can vote in an unselfish manner.
4. Voting does not require expenses so why not act in an altruistic manner by voting for other
people’s benefit.
6. What is the tone of the author in the last sentence, fifth paragraph: “As defences of democracy go,
these are even less rousing than Churchill’s shruggie”?
1. Supercilious.
2. Sarcastic.
3. Incredulous.
4. Apologetic.
Passage 2
The problem facing the humanities, in my view, isn’t just about the humanities. It’s about the liberal arts
generally, including math, science, and economics. These form half of the so-called STEM (science,
technology, engineering, math) subjects, but if the goal of an education is simply economic advancement
and technological power, those disciplines, just like the humanities, will be—and to some degree already
are—subordinated to future employment and technological progress. The supremacy of a certain kind of
economic-bureaucratic logic—one of “outcomes,” “assessment,” and “the bottom-line”—is eroding the
values that undergird not just our society’s commitment to the humanities, but to democracy itself. Why
shouldn’t educational institutions predominately offer classes like Business Calculus and Algebra for
Nurses? Why should anyone but hobbyists and the occasional specialist take courses in astronomy, human
evolution, or economic history? So, what good, if any, is the study of the liberal arts, particularly subjects
like philosophy? Why, in short, should plumbers study Plato?
2
My answer is that we should strive to be a society of free people, not simply one of well-compensated
managers and employees. Henry David Thoreau is as relevant as ever when he writes, “We seem to have
forgotten that the expression ‘a liberal education’ originally meant among the Romans one worthy of free
men; while the learning of trades and professions by which to get your livelihood merely, was considered
worthy of slaves only.”
Traditionally, the liberal arts have been the privilege of an upper class. There are three big reasons for this.
First, it befits the leisure time of an upper class to explore the higher goods of human life: to play Beethoven,
to study botany, to read Aristotle, to go on an imagination-expanding tour of Italy. Second, because their
birth-right is to occupy leadership positions in politics and the marketplace, members of the aristocratic class
require the skills to think for themselves. Whereas those in the lower classes are assessed exclusively on
how well they meet various prescribed outcomes, those in the upper class must know how to evaluate
outcomes and consider them against a horizon of values. Finally (and this reason generally goes unspoken),
the goods of the liberal arts get coded as markers of privilege and prestige, so that the upper class can
demarcate themselves clearly from those who must work in order to make their leisure and wealth possible.
We don’t intellectually embrace a society where the privileged few get to enjoy the advantages of leisure and
wealth while the masses toil on their behalf. Yet that’s what a sell-out of the liberal arts entails. For the most
part, the wealthy in our country (the U.S.) continue to pay increasingly exorbitant tuition to private prep
schools, good liberal arts colleges, and elite universities, where their children get strong opportunities to
develop their minds, dress themselves in cultural capital, and learn the skills necessary to become influential
members of society. Meanwhile, the elite speak of an education’s value for the less privileged in terms of
preparation for the global economy. Worse yet, they often support learning systems designed to produce
“good employees”—i.e., compliant labourers. Then, money for public education is slashed, and tuition soars.
Those in the middle class, let alone the poor, have to fight an ever-steepening uphill battle to spend their
time and money on the arts appropriate to free people.
7. Based on this passage, what can be concluded about the relation between the humanities, STEM
subjects and the liberal arts?
1. Liberal arts is the union of humanities and STEM subjects.

2. Humanities and STEM subjects are mutually exclusive, and humanities are a subset of liberal arts.
3. Humanities and STEM subjects are mutually exclusive, and liberal arts are a subset of STEM
subjects.
4. Liberal arts and STEM subjects are mutually exclusive, and humanities are a subset of liberal arts.
8. Which of the following can be inferred from the statement “Yet that’s what a sell-out of the liberal arts
entails” in the context of the passage?
1. A democratic society of free people with an education system that prepares its people for future
jobs in the global economy.
2. An aristocratic society of an educated elite with lower classes toiling away much like the Roman
society.
3. A democratic society where the goal of the education system is economic advancement and
technological power.
4. An unequal society where access to a liberal education is only available to a wealthy privileged
elite.
9. The underlying argument of the author is that “a liberal education is one that is worthy of free men
and undergirds democratic values”. Which of the following, if true, would strengthen the argument,
EXCEPT?
1. A liberal education helps people explore the higher goods of human life and acquire broad
knowledge of the wider world.
2. A liberal education helps develop the capacity to think freely and evaluate things within a value
framework.
3. A liberal education is the privilege of the leisurely classes who are entitled to be influential
members of the society.
4. A liberal education empowers individuals and prepares them to deal with complexity, diversity, and
change.
3
10. The author asks the question “Why, in short, should plumbers (ordinary people) study Plato
(philosophy)? In which of the following possible situations would knowledge of philosophy be useful to
ordinary people, EXCEPT?
1. A prisoner of war bore physical torture with fortitude strengthened by the stoics’ philosophy that
one can be truly free and happy with proper spiritual discipline.
2. A mother who had authorized for her crippled son a risky surgery that led to his death found
consolation in Kant’s precept that the consequences of an action play no role in its moral worth.
3. Many Muslims found it reasonable that the disputed land at Ayodhya be handed over to Hindus for
building a Ram temple guided by the utilitarian goal of the greatest happiness of the greatest
number.
4. Many white supremacists find moral justification for racism in Darwin’s theory of evolution.
11. According to the passage, which of the following are the reasons why liberal arts have traditionally
remained the preserve of the upper classes, EXCEPT?
1. Because it is the birth-right of upper classes to occupy leadership positions in government and the
business world.
2. Because through an education in the liberal arts, the upper classes are demarcated as distinct
from the middle and lower classes.
3. Because the upper classes want to prepare themselves for future employment in a technologically
advanced society.
4. Because the upper classes have the wealth and the leisure time to explore the world including the
finer aspects of life and higher pursuits of the mind.
Passage 3
Has art ended? That art has ended does not mean that there will be no new artworks. It only means that art
has some kind of goal, or line of development, which has been completed; plenty more will happen in art,
but there is nothing left to achieve. Just as Francis Fukuyama claimed in 1989 that history had ended—
meaning not that nothing more would ever happen, only that all ‘viable systematic alternatives to Western
liberalism’ had been exhausted—so too some philosophers claim that art as a practice will continue, but has
no more ways of progressing.
Two of the more prominent philosophers to have made this sort of argument were G W F Hegel in the early
19th century, and Arthur Danto in the late 20th century.
Hegel gave one of the earliest and most ambitious accounts of art’s development, and its importance in
shaping and reflecting our common culture. He traced its beginnings in the ‘symbolic art’ of early cultures
and their religious art, admired the clarity and unity of the ‘classical’ art of Greece, and followed its
development through to modern, ‘romantic’ art, best typified, he claimed, in poetry. Art had not just gone
through a series of random changes: in his view, it had developed. Art was one of the many ways in which
humanity was improving its understanding of its own freedom, and improving its understanding of its
relationship to the world. Art had gone as far as it could go and stalled; it could progress no further.
In 1964, Danto attended an exhibition at the Stable Gallery in New York. He came across Andy Warhol’s
artwork Brillo Boxes (1964)—a visually unassuming, highly realistic collection of plywood replicas of the
cardboard boxes in which Brillo cleaning products were shipped. Danto left the exhibition dumbstruck. Art,
he was convinced, had ended. One could not tell the artworks apart from the real shipping containers they
were aping. Art’s progress was over, Danto felt; and the reign of art theory had begun.
What do philosophers mean when they say art has or will come to an end? Is it just hyperbole? And why does
art keep ending, for philosophers, while the rest of us see it carrying on, taking new directions?
For Hegel, and Danto, art’s narrative had ended; it had progressed as far as it could in solving the task it had
set itself. But art’s chronicle would never end: there would be new artworks for just as long as there were
human beings to create them. Art’s end, in this sense, was a good thing. Art was released from labouring
away at a task (given by the narrative); it was now free to be anything. Art could revisit and re-use all the
many tools and techniques the history of art had thrown up, and recombine them at will. The age of pluralism
4
is upon us. It does not matter any longer what you do, which is what pluralism means. When one direction is
as good as another direction, there is no concept of direction any longer to apply.
12. Why was Arthur Danto dumbstruck on seeing Andy Warhol’s artwork Brillo Boxes at the art exhibition?
1. Because it struck him that art had ended and art’s progress was over.
2. Because art had been reduced to merely aping reality.
3. Because one could not tell the artworks apart from the real shipping containers of Brillo cleaning
products.
4. Because even ordinary objects, such as shipping containers of Brillo cleaning products could
inspire a reputed artist to produce an artwork that reproduced realistic replicas of the containers.
13. The author has said that “art’s end is a good thing because it was now free to be anything”. Which of
the following would logically follow if we were to extend the analogy of ‘art’s end’ to ‘history’s end’,
which Francis Fukuyama had claimed?
1. History’s end is a good thing because the world had experienced all kinds of politico-economic
systems.
2. History’s end is a good thing because now the world is open to experimenting with different
politico-economic systems and combinations thereof to suit a nation-state’s unique conditions.
3. History’s end is a good thing because development of new politico-economic theories had come to
an end and the world had realized that there were no better alternatives to Western liberalism.
4. History’s end is a good thing because fresh conflicts over which politico-economic system is better
than another will not arise.
14. Which of the following best explains the distinction between ‘narrative’ and ‘chronicle’ in the context
of art, as used in the passage?
1. Narrative represents an overarching set of aims and values of art itself; chronicle documents the
creation of important artworks.
2. Narrative is about milestones achieved by art; chronicle is about documenting historical events
related to art.
3. Narrative is about solving certain predetermined tasks that great artists had set for themselves;
chronicle is about describing a series of important art movements in history.
4. Narrative is the story of art; chronicle is a record of artworks in the order of their creation.
15. Which of the following can be inferred from the fact that “the reign of art theory had begun”?
1. Art historians and critics will study and analyse different art forms and movements in their
historical contexts and debate and discuss art theory for a better understanding of art.
2. The focus of artists will shift from creating new artworks to developing new art theories.
3. Art historians and critics will take stock of the situation and develop a common art theory for the
guidance of future artists.
4. Artists will fade away and art experts will dominate the cultural space.
16. According to the passage, which of the following are the goals of art’s development, EXCEPT?
1. Reflecting and shaping our common culture.

2. Charting the development of different art forms and art movements.
3. Improving our understanding of our relationship to the world.
4. Improving our understanding of our own freedom.
Passage 4
A lovely, intuitive idea about why otters juggle rocks—that it helps them practice survival skills—might not be
correct, new tests show. The term “juggling” is itself overenthusiastic. Otters don’t keep stones flying around
in some tall, aerial circle. Instead, the animals shuffle rocks back and forth quickly between their front paws,
keeping them very close to the body.
Such deft fiddling looks as if it might make a great example of how animal play could serve as practice for
real-life challenges. In the wild, small-clawed otters need paw dexterity to tweak shreds of seafood out of
5
crustacean or mollusk shells. And yet, three kinds of tests found no evidence that juggling builds otters’ food-
picking skills.
The question of how play evolved has long fascinated biologists. According to the latest thinking, play
behaviours serve no immediate practical need. Yet even the mild tussles of puppies and kittens take energy
and carry some risk of injury, so it seems that some benefit must counterbalance those downsides.
Asian small-clawed otters (Aonyx cinerea), the littlest of the 13 otter species, are “very playful”. Smooth-
coated otters (Lutrogale perspicillata) also juggle rocks but eat fish that don’t require deft plucking of food
tidbits from shells. Because the otters eat in different ways, researchers originally predicted that the active
paws of the shellfish eaters in three wildlife collections would surpass the simple fish grabbers in their skill
at pulling bits of meat out of crevices. Regardless of their differences in feeding styles, however, both kinds
of otters proved equally able to winkle some meat out of challenging objects. Rock play didn’t seem to matter
in learning a life skill.
What’s called “juggling” in otters means quickly switching pebbles from paw to paw close to the chest. A new
study points out that Asian small-clawed otters in zoos and wildlife parks do this most often as the thrill of
feeding time approaches. What the species does in the wild is not clear.
Researchers tested both species by tucking minced meat into three kinds of inconvenient and unfamiliar
containers: plastic medicine bottles with screw-on caps, pierced green tennis balls and toys resembling
clamshells made of two oversized Lego-like blocks. Especially frequent rock-twiddling among the small-
clawed otters, however, didn’t give individuals a noticeable edge in working tidbits out of awkward
containers. Instead, the study linked surges of rock juggling to the approach of feeding time, with more
juggling as lunch drew near. Also, it wasn’t just youngsters that played with rocks: Elderly otters past
reproductive age likewise did a lot of paw fiddling. So, again, juggling may not be only a way for youngsters
to practice skills for feeding.
The possible disconnect between play and real-life skills doesn’t startle the researchers. Over decades, they
has analyzed play behaviour, refining definitions and even reporting play in such unexpected animals as a
turtle romping with a basketball in a zoo. The thinking about the evolution of play has by now expanded
beyond simple notions of the benefits of instinctive practice.
Play is more likely to evolve among animals with parental care that give youngsters enough surplus food and
a safe space for goofing around. It is called the “surplus resource” hypothesis, and otters are a good example
of it. Otters that juggle may be doing so “for pleasure, out of boredom, or both”. Either way, they’re drawing
on “part of their evolutionary heritage”.
17. Which of the following, if true, would cast doubts on the intuitive idea that otters juggle rocks because
it helps them practice survival skills, EXCEPT?
1. Juggling rocks helps improve paw dexterity to tweak shreds of seafood out of crustacean or
mollusc shells.
2. Juggling rocks is also practised by species of otters that feed themselves by grabbing fish.
3. Juggling rocks is not just practised by youngsters but also by elderly otters past their reproductive
age.
4. Juggling rocks helps otters overcome boredom.
18. “The researchers tested both species by tucking minced meat into inconvenient and unfamiliar
containers… (Sixth paragraph)” in order to confirm the following, EXCEPT:
1. whether juggling rocks was only practice for young otters to improve paw dexterity in picking food
or mere play.
2. whether there were differences in food-picking skills between the two species.
3. whether there were similarities in food-picking skills between the two species.
4. whether juggling rocks by otters was individual or social play.
19. According to the passage, which of the following are conditions that help explain the evolution of
animal play as per the “surplus resource” hypothesis, EXCEPT?
6
1. Parents should provide surplus food resources so that youngsters don’t have to worry about
searching for food.
2. Parents should provide care and protection to youngsters while they are at play.
3. Parents should encourage youngsters to participate in play along with them.
4. Parents should provide a congenial environment free of stress and danger for the youngsters.
20. Which of the following can be inferred from the last sentence of the passage: “Either way, they’re
drawing on “part of their evolutionary heritage” in the context of the passage?
1. Juggling rocks is a behavioural pattern of animal play passed on from generation to generation
from the beginning of the evolutionary history of the species.
2. Juggling rocks is a behavioural pattern for picking food passed on from generation to generation
from the beginning of the evolutionary history of the species.
3. Juggling rocks is an acquired habit that otters indulge in for pleasure or out of boredom or both.
4. Juggling rocks is part of the species’ behavioural repertoire build during the evolution of the
species.
Passage 5
When the scientific evidence is unwelcome, people try to reason it away. If the research results are not
consistent with their world view, they are likely to believe science can't supply all the answers.
In an experiment, researchers took two groups of people, one in favour of the death penalty, the other against
it, and then presented each with a piece of scientific evidence that supported their pre-existing view, and a
piece that challenged it; murder rates went up or down, for example, after the abolition of capital punishment
in a state. The results were as you might imagine. Each group found extensive methodological holes in the
evidence they disagreed with, but ignored the very same holes in the evidence that reinforced their views.
Some people go even further than this when presented with unwelcome data, and decide that science itself
is broken. Politicians will cheerfully explain that the scientific method simply cannot be used to determine
the outcomes of a drugs policy. Alternative therapists will explain that their pill is special, among all pills, and
you simply cannot find out if it works by using a trial.
How deep do these views go, and how far do they generalise? Researchers took about 100 students and
told them they were participating in a study on "judging the quality of scientific information". First, their views
on whether homosexuality might be associated with mental illness were assessed, and then they were
divided into two groups. The first group were given five research studies that confirmed their pre-existing
view. Students who thought homosexuality was associated with mental illness, for example, were given
papers explaining that there were more gay people in psychological treatment centres than the general
population. The second group were given research that contradicted their pre-existing view. (After the study
was finished, we should be clear, they were told that all these research papers were fake, and were given
the opportunity to read real research on the topic if they wanted to.)
Then they were asked about the research they had read, and were asked to rate their agreement with the
following statement: "The question addressed in the studies summarised … is one that cannot be answered
using scientific methods." As you would expect, the people whose pre-existing views had been challenged
were more likely to say that science simply cannot be used to measure whether homosexuality is associated
with mental illness.
But then, moving on, the researchers asked a further set of questions, about whether science could be
usefully deployed to understand all kinds of stuff, all entirely unrelated to stereotypes about homosexuality:
"the existence of clairvoyance", "the effectiveness of spanking as a disciplinary technique for children", "the
effect of viewing television violence on violent behaviour", "the accuracy of astrology in predicting personality
traits" and "the mental and physical health effects of herbal medications".
Their views on each issue were added together to produce one bumper score on the extent to which they
thought science could be informative on all of these questions, and the results were truly frightening. People
whose pre-existing stereotypes about homosexuality had been challenged by the scientific evidence
presented to them were more inclined to believe that science had nothing to offer, on any question, not just
on homosexuality, when compared with people whose views on homosexuality had been reinforced. When
7
presented with unwelcome scientific evidence, it seems, in a desperate attempt to retain some consistency
in their world view, people would rather conclude that science in general is broken.
21. Which of the following best states the primary purpose of the author?
1. To explain why people think science cannot supply all the answers.
2. To highlight that the influence of science is limited.
3. To demonstrate through research people’s biased reactions to scientific evidence.
4. To analyse how people’s views can be influenced with fresh scientific evidence.
22. Which of the following would the author most likely agree with?
1. People have a tendency to retain consistency in their world view.

2. People have a tendency to generalise.
3. People have a tendency to form opinions early.
4. People have a tendency to rely more on intuition than scientific evidence.
23. Which are the possible kinds of scientific evidence related to the death penalty could the researchers
have presented to the two groups in the experiment discussed in the second paragraph, EXCEPT?
1. Data on people awarded death penalty but later found not guilty of the charges against them.
2. Data on difference in murder rates before and after the abolition of death penalty in a state or
country.
3. Data on reformed rapists and murderers who went on to serve the society as good citizens once
their jail term was over.
4. Data on people who believe that society has no right to take life by playing God.
24. According to the passage, which of the following are ways that people can reason away scientific
evidence that challenges their pre-existing views, EXCEPT?
1. That there are methodological flaws in the scientific evidence.

2. That the issue under consideration does not fall under the purview of scientific investigation.
3. That the scientific evidence is not consistent with the person’s views.
4. That science itself is broken.
25. Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a
meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your
answer and key it in.
1. The overall plot of the movie is straight forward and works as both a rational and a
political allegory.
2. World War II was fought for intensely moral reasons —a conflict between good and evil,
and Casablanca (1942) is about the need to be clear about your moral purpose.
3. Rick Blaine, the protagonist, says several times, “I stick my head out for nobody.” ; but
eventually he sticks out his neck for Victor Laszlo, the resistance figure who has to be
smuggled out one step ahead of the Nazis to lead the worldwide struggle against fascism.
4. We don’t pick a fight with anyone unless when we see someone being picked on, and then
we step in—That’s been extremely important to American memory of the war.
5. The movie shows Americans as they like to see themselves, in the character of Rick.
Answer:
26. The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4) given below, when properly sequenced would yield a coherent
paragraph. Decide on the proper sequence of the order of the sentences and key in the sequence of
the four numbers as your answer.
1. Salience bias refers to the fact that we tend to focus on information that stands out more, even if
it’s not particularly relevant.
2. Twin deaths are unusual, which makes them newsworthy, but coverage can distort our
perceptions.
8
3. Reports of the deaths of two pairs of twins in Britain and two pairs of brothers, all within hours or
days of each other due to coronavirus must be interpreted with caution.
4. So we need to be careful not to read too much into events that might stand out for reasons that
are not actually related to the issue we’re interested in.
Answer:
1. We may have a profoundly different sense of ourselves, our communities, our systems of
production and our future.
2. When this storm clears, we may, as do people who have survived a serious illness or accident, see
where we were and where we should go in a new light.
3. When a storm subsides, the air is washed clean of whatever particulate matter has been obscuring
the view, and you can often see farther and more sharply than at any other time.
4. We may feel free to pursue change in ways that seemed impossible while the ice of the status quo
was locked up.
Answer:
1. But there is still a strange ambivalence about those who might be thought, by refusing to take part,
to have seen the wrongness most clearly.
2. He admits that he felt the awful guilt of standing aside as a conscientious objector, but this isn't a
story of ideal decisions taken with reference to purely disinterested perceptions.
3. From Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen onwards, people have written about the horrors of war.
4. In A Cack-Handed War, the author says that in the first world war, conscientious objectors were
martyrized; in the second world war they were put into positions of obscure discomfort.
Answer:
29. Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a
meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your
answer and key it in.
1. The problem with reinventing physiognomy (facial recognition) is not merely that it has been tried
without success before.
2. For scientists to take their moral responsibilities seriously, they need to be aware of the harms
that might result from their research.
3. Study of physiognomy was invented mainly for propping up colonial and class structures—and the
only thing it’s capable of measuring is the racism inherent in those structures.
4. Researchers who persist in looking for cold fusion after the scientific consensus has moved on
also face criticism for chasing unicorns—but disapproval of cold fusion falls far short of
opprobrium.
5. The difference is that the potential harms of cold fusion research are much more limited in
contrast to facial recognition which has so few nonharmful uses.
Answer:
30. The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best
captures the essence of the passage.
I think we should all be realistically inclined enough to understand that it is likely Karl Marx fell prey to
the Swimmer’s Body Illusion: the swimmer has a perfect body not because she is a swimmer; she is a
swimmer because she has the perfect body for swimming. Accordingly, humanity is not evil because
the economic system is; the economic system is evil because humanity is. In the end, we are the atoms
9
of economics, the agents of trade. Economics is dependent on us, not vice versa. History indicates that
communal projects—such as the North American Phalanx, a secular utopian socialist commune in New
Jersey in the 1840s—are susceptible to hatred, mistrust, bribery and fraud. In the 1960s and ’70s, the
Milgram experiment and the Stanford prison experiment both suggested that we live under the tyranny
of capitalism because we are either inherently tyrannical beings or because we simply obey. The
capitalist system just suits our nature. All signs indicate that we don’t have the capacities for universal
benevolent compassion, uncontaminated by a proclivity to evil, hatred and competition. We cannot all
live like monks, even if this would ensure that one’s basic material needs would be looked after by the
community.
1. Karl Marx thought capitalism is inherently evil and makes people evil, but history and social
experiments show otherwise—people are in fact inherently evil and capitalism just suits our nature.
2. Karl Marx fell prey to the Swimmer’s Body Illusion and thought capitalism is evil because people
are inherently evil, but history and social experiments show otherwise.
3. Human nature is better suited for capitalism than for communism as we cannot all live like monks,
even if our basic material needs are looked after by the community.
4. Humanity is not evil because the economic system is as Karl Marx thought; in the end, we are the
atoms of economics, the agents of trade—Economics is dependent on us, not vice versa.
31. Five sentences related to a topic are given below in a jumbled order. Four of them form a coherent
and unified paragraph. Identify the odd sentence that does not go with the four. Key in the number of
the option that you choose.
1. “For centuries citizens worshipped the notion of a God-blessed virgin land that belonged to them—
an ownership that allowed them unfettered use (and misuse) of the land for survival, profit, and as
a means to understand American identity.”
2. “The time has come to inquire seriously what will happen when our forests are gone, when the
coal, the iron, the oil, and the gas are exhausted, when the soils shall have been still further
impoverished and washed into the streams, polluting the rivers, denuding the fields, and
obstructing navigation.”
3. President Theodore Roosevelt’s opening speech in 1908 was a pivotal moment in conservation—It
positioned conservation “in a way that reassessed America’s past actions and presaged its
possible future if nature was not saved.”
4. By planning ahead, he said, these fates could be avoided. "One distinguishing characteristic of
really civilized men is foresight…and if we do not exercise that foresight, dark will be the future!"
5. Conservation “is the chief material question that confronts us, second only—and second always—
to the great fundamental questions of morality,” he said.
Answer:
Foucault never denied the reality of state power in the Hobbesian sense. But his political philosophy
emanates from his skepticism about the assumption (and it was a mere assumption until Foucault
called it into question) that the only real power is sovereign power. Foucault’s skeptical supposition
thus allowed him to conduct careful enquiries into the actual functions of power. What these studies
reveal is that power, which easily frightens us, turns out to be all the more cunning because its basic
forms of operation can change in response to our ongoing efforts to free ourselves from its grip. To take
just one example, Foucault wrote about the way in which a classically sovereign space such as the
judicial court came to accept into its proceedings the testimony of medical and psychiatric experts
whose authority and power were exercised without recourse to sovereign violence. An expert diagnosis
of ‘insanity’ today or ‘perversity’ 100 years ago could come to mitigate or augment a judicial decision.
1. Foucault’s studies revealed that power can cleverly change its basic forms of operation in
response to our ongoing efforts to free ourselves from its grip.
2. Foucault’s studies revealed that power can manifest itself in different forms even in a classically
sovereign space such as the judicial court.
3. Foucault showed how sovereign power was not the only real power; the expertise of medical and
psychiatric experts can itself be a source of power (without recourse to violence) to free us from
the judiciary’s sovereign power.
10
4. Foucault’s political philosophy emerged from his careful enquiries into the actual functions of
power as illustrated in the plea of insanity in a judicial court testified by medical experts.
1. Our caveman ancestors, in their wise state of nature, ate nothing but acorns and barbecued
mammoth—"Me eat nut butter and grass-fed steak!”
2. But we also like to run things in the opposite direction: if we believe something is natural, whatever
that means, we often assume it must also be healthy and good.
3. There’s a set of common fallacies that equate the “natural”, the “healthy” and the “good”.
4. We often decide that something we think is good must also be healthy (that morning cup of coffee
or nightly glass of red wine, say) or natural (polyamory for some, religion for others).
Answer:
Plato wrote his philosophy in dialogues, a form that requires different voices, and the ebb and flow of
argument. It was already noted in antiquity that the Socrates who is the hero of these dialogues, and
Plato himself, are shifting figures, readily admitting different interpretations: "It is well known that
Socrates was in the habit of concealing his knowledge, or his beliefs; and Plato approved of the habit,"
said Saint Augustine. Plato felt philosophy was more a matter of an activity than of absorbing a static
body of doctrine. It is a question of process, not product. Socrates remains the great educator, and
those who came to him would be listeners and interrogators, participants in conversation, and would
have to throw themselves into the labyrinths of thought. Passive reception of the word would count for
nothing.
1. For Plato, philosophy was a process of exploring, and discussing basic questions of metaphysical
speculation admitting different interpretations rather than absorbing a static body of doctrine.
2. Plato wrote his philosophy in dialogues revealing knowledge and beliefs in an incremental manner
in order to arouse curiosity and draw the participants into the labyrinths of philosophical thought.
3. For Plato, philosophy was a process, not a product, actively engaging the participants in trying to
find answers to the basic philosophical questions.
4. For Plato, philosophy was not the passive reception of a static body of doctrine but the active
engagement in dialogues between wise men, such as, Socrates and himself.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
11
WILEY CAT VARC BOOK
ANSWER KEY & EXPLANATORY NOTES
ANSWER KEY
1. (3) 2. (2) 3. (4) 4. (3) 5. (1)

6. (2) 7. (2) 8. (4) 9. (3) 10. (4)
11. (3) 12. (4) 13. (2) 14. (1) 15. (1)
16. (2) 17. (1) 18. (4) 19. (3) 20. (4)
21. (3) 22. (1) 23. (4) 24. (3) 25. 1
26. 3214 27. 3241 28. 3142 29. 2 30. (1)
31. 1 32. (3) 33. 3421 34. (1)
EXPLANATORY ANSWERS
READING COMPREHENSION
Passage 1
SUITABLE TITLE: The Problem of Voter Ignorance Undermines Democracy
Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

1. gall: (v) to irritate, vex.
2. shiftless: (adj) characterized by laziness, indolence, and a lack of ambition.
3. flighty: (adj) fickle and irresponsible.
4. Epistocracy: (n) 1. rule by citizens with political knowledge, or a proposed political system which
concentrates political power in citizens according to their knowledge of public affairs, whether by
distributing votes to citizens by their knowledge of political matters or some other means, as
contrasted with democracy, in which the right to vote and political power are theoretically equally
shared among all citizens; 2. government run by citizens with political knowledge.
5. contentious: (adj) causing or likely to cause an argument; controversial.
6. appeal to the truth: (LOGIC) making the claim that something is "self-evident" when it is not self-
evident in place of arguing a claim with reason. The concept of self-evidence is contentious and
argued among philosophers based on their ideas of epistemology. This means that what is "self-
evident" to one person is not necessarily self-evident to another.
7. incendiary: (adj) tending to stir up conflict.
8. peremptory: (adj) insisting on immediate attention or obedience, especially in a brusquely
imperious way; not open to appeal or challenge; final.
9. preclude: (v) to prevent from happening; make impossible; (of a situation or condition) prevent
someone from doing something.
10. universal suffrage: (n) the right of almost all adults to vote in political elections.
11. rousing: (adj) exciting; stirring.
12. shruggie: (n) A person shrugging their shoulders to indicate a lack of knowledge about a particular
topic, or a lack of care about the result of a situation; dismissive remark.
13. dismissive: (adj) feeling or showing that something is unworthy of consideration.
14. incompetent: (adj) not having or showing the necessary skills to do something successfully.
15. altruism: (n) disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.
16. supercilious: (adj) behaving or looking as though one thinks one is superior to others.
17. incredulous: (adj) (of a person or their manner) unwilling or unable to believe something;
disbelieving.
18. apologetic: (adj) expressing or showing regretful acknowledgement of an offence or failure.
SUMMARY
The problem of voter ignorance undermines democracy and consequently, the idea of epistocracy—
“government by the knowledgeable”—as an alternative to democracy has been mooted by a number of
philosophers.
12
The basic argument of epistocracy is that if we value good decisions, epistocracy will make good decisions
more frequently than democracy does. And it is entirely justifiable to limit the political power that the
irrational, the ignorant and the incompetent have over others.
Counterargument by advocates of democracy: In a democracy, people realise that their individual vote is
not decisive and hence worthless; so even ignorant and ill-informed voters rarely vote for their narrow self-
interest. In fact, they vote rationally and altruistically for the general public good. Hence, voter ignorance is
not really a problem.
On the other hand, there are a number of objections against epistocracy raised by advocates of
democracy:
1. Truth or knowledge is not a suitable standard for political judgement because even the question of
“what is the truth” can be contentious, such as whether human activity is warming the planet. And
truth can preclude debate, which is the very essence of political life.
2. Knowing more about good government than others does not necessarily give a person political authority
over others.
3. In epistocracy, the process of screening voters who are supposedly knowledgeable could become
unintentionally biased without any way to identify the bias and correct it.
4. People living in a democracy have come to believe that universal suffrage is the norm or default, so any
deviation from it in an epistocracy will be seen as “unfair” and discriminatory.
Counter-argument by advocates of epistocracy: Is it unfair to disqualify jurors who are morally and
cognitively incompetent? If not, then why is it unfair to disqualify voters who are irrational, ignorant or
incompetent. Isn’t public welfare more important than the hurt feelings of those denied voting rights.
1. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: What Churchill meant was that all forms of governments that have been tried in history,
such as, communism, socialism, Nazism, fascism, etc. including democracy were “bad” or far from
perfect, but democracy was the “least bad” of the lot.
Option 1 makes the mistake of taking the first part literally without linking it with the second part—
“…except all those other forms…”. Option 2 is not INCORRECT per se because democracy is better
than the other forms and hence, the best; but it is misleading because Churchill also considered
democracy to be an imperfect system. Therefore, Option 4 is also not INCORRECT per se, but it does
not relate or compare democracy with the other forms which are also “bad” or imperfect. Hence,
Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
2. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Option 2: The point is that “truth” itself can be contentious in many political issues: for example, some
“knowledgeable” experts may say that human activity is the main cause of global warming and
climate change, while other “knowledgeable” experts may say that human activity hardly has any
effect. So what is the “truth” and which set of “knowledgeable” experts can we rely on? This is one of
the objections or arguments against epistocracy.
Option 1 is just the opposite of what the author is saying; in fact, appeal to truth can lead to fallacious
arguments because “what is the truth” itself is not established. Option 3 is basically saying that
“politicians lie (kill the truth) all the time”, which is NOT what the passage is saying and it is irrelevant
in the context of the passage. Option 4 is just the opposite of what the author is saying: “Truth
peremptorily claims to be acknowledged and precludes debate, and debate constitutes the very
essence of political life (Fourth paragraph)”. Hence, Options 1, 3 and 4 can be eliminated.
13
3. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: is the exception because it does NOT support BUT undermines the idea of epistocracy: “One
could also deny that some citizens know more about good government than others, and even if they
know more, how does knowing more impart political authority (Fourth paragraph)”.
Options 1, 2 and 3 clearly support the idea of epistocracy and are stated in the passage. Option 1 is
directly from— “So, if we value its power to make good decisions, why not try a system that’s a little
less fair but makes good decisions even more often? (Third paragraph)”. Option 2 can be inferred
from— “…giving the knowledgeable power over the ignorant will always feel more unfair than giving
those in the majority power over those in the minority (Fifth paragraph)” BUT it (epistocracy) is better
for the general public good. Option 3 is directly from— “The basic argument of epistocracy is that it’s
entirely justifiable to limit the political power that the irrational, the ignorant, and the incompetent
have over others (Penultimate paragraph)”. Hence, Options 1, 2 and 3 can be eliminated.
4. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: is the exception because it weakens the defence of democracy as clear from the counter-
argument given below:
(a) Argument by advocates of democracy: People living in a democracy have come to believe that
universal suffrage is the norm, so any deviation from it in an epistocracy will be seen as “unfair”
and discriminatory.
(b) Counter-argument by advocates of epistocracy: Is it unfair to disqualify jurors who are morally and
cognitively incompetent? If not, then why is it unfair to disqualify voters who are irrational,
ignorant or incompetent. Isn’t public welfare more important than the hurt feelings of those
denied voting rights.
Option 1 is an argument against epistocracy and therefore strengthens the defence of democracy,
where every adult has the voting right. Option 2 is the essence of the argument in the last paragraph
in defence of democracy: “In a democracy, people realise that their individual vote is not decisive and
hence worthless; so even ignorant and ill-informed voters rarely vote for their narrow self-interest. In
fact, they vote rationally and altruistically for the general public good. Hence, voter ignorance is not
really a problem.” Option 4 is the essence of the argument against epistocracy given in the fourth
paragraph and therefore strengthens the defence of democracy: “Truth or knowledge is not a suitable
standard for political judgement because even the question of “what is the truth” can be contentious,
such as whether human activity is warming the planet. And truth can preclude debate, which is the
very essence of political life.” Hence, Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
5. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: The last line sums up the argument in the last paragraph, which is: “In a democracy, people
realise that their individual vote is not decisive and hence worthless; so even ignorant and ill-informed
voters rarely vote for their narrow self-interest. In fact, they vote rationally and altruistically for the
general public good.” By the words “…altruism can be had cheap”, the author is making a witty
comment at the end. We know that altruism usually requires giving charity to the needy (as
philanthropists do) or helping others by devoting your time to their care or making sacrifices so that
others can benefit. But casting their vote in a polling booth does not require any of these expenses or
sacrifices on their part—people are merely voting with the “general public good in mind (which itself is
an act of altruism)” and NOT for their limited self-interest. Hence, “altruism can be had cheap” —by
simply casting their vote and without incurring any expenses.
Options 2 and 3 miss out the part about what makes voting an act of altruism or an unselfish act:
“voting for the general public good—beyond their narrow self-interest”. Options 2 and 3 also do not
explain the expression “…altruism can be had cheap”. Option 4 distorts the meaning by saying that
because “altruism can be had cheap” so what does a person lose by voting altruistically. Hence,
Options 2, 3 and 4 can be eliminated.
14
6. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Option 2: The tone of the author is “sarcastic” which emerges from the choice of words “rousing” and
“shruggie” — “As defences of democracy go, these even less rousing (“stirring or stimulating” to mean
“convincing”) than Churchill’s shruggie (“dismissive” remark) that “democracy is the worst (least bad)
form…except all those other forms”. The author is referring to the two practical arguments against
epistocracy (and therefore in defence of democracy) discussed in the fifth paragraph:
(a) In epistocracy, the process of screening voters who are supposedly knowledgeable could become
unintentionally biased without any way to identify the bias and correct it.
(b) People living in a democracy have come to believe that universal suffrage is the norm or default,
so any deviation from it in an epistocracy will be seen as “unfair” and discriminatory.
What the author is conveying through the tone of sarcasm is that “these defences of democracy are
even less convincing than Churchill’s dismissive remarks” —can’t advocates or defenders of
democracy come up with some substantial or convincing arguments in favour of democracy? Are
these poor defences all they have to present?
Other options can easily be eliminated.
Passage 2
SUITABLE TITLE: A Liberal Education is One That is Worthy of Free People.

1. humanities: (n) are academic disciplines that study aspects of human society and culture.
The Humanities includes areas like History, English, Foreign Language, Philosophy, Religion—
fields typically thought of as non-technical and non-scientific.
2. liberal arts: (n) Liberal Arts is the overarching study of humans—including humanity's history, the
physical world we live in, and the natural laws of science we're bound by. All Humanities are part
of Liberal Arts, but not all Liberal Arts subjects are in the Humanities.
3. subordinate: (v) to treat or regard as of lesser importance than something else.
4. undergird: (v) to provide support or a firm basis for.
5. bottom-line: (n) the final total of an account or balance sheet; net profit.
6. liberal education: (n) A liberal education is a system of education suitable for the cultivation of
a free (Latin: liber) human being. (It is based on the medieval concept of the liberal arts or, more
commonly now, the liberalism of the Age of Enlightenment. ) It is “a philosophy of education that
empowers individuals with broad knowledge and transferable skills, and a stronger sense of
values, ethics, and civic engagement ... characterised by challenging encounters with important
issues, and more a way of studying than a specific field of study”.
7. sell-out: (n) a betrayal of one's principles for reasons of expedience.
8. entail: (v) to involve (something) as a necessary or inevitable part or consequence.
9. cultural capital: (n) Cultural capital is the accumulation of knowledge, behaviours, and skills that a
person can tap into to demonstrate one's cultural competence and social status.
10. elite: (n) a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or
society.
11. white supremacy: (n) White supremacy or white supremacism is the racist belief that white
people are superior to those of other races and therefore should be dominant over them. White
supremacy has roots in the now-discredited doctrine of scientific racism and often relies
on pseudoscientific arguments.
SUMMARY
The problem with our (the U.S.) education system is that the value of humanities or liberal arts generally
has been eroded because the focus of policy-makers has mainly been on future employment (or
employability), economic advancement and technological progress. Why should a “liberal education” not
be widely available for people from all classes and at affordable cost; after all, in a democracy we should
strive for a society of “free people” (with developed, enlightened minds).
15
Traditionally, the liberal arts have been the privilege of the upper class for the following three reasons:
(1) Because the upper classes have the wealth and the leisure time to explore the world including the
finer aspects of life and higher pursuits of the mind; while the other classes are busy earning a
livelihood.
(2) Because their birth-right or entitlement is to occupy leadership positions in government and the
business world—they require the skills to think for themselves, and evaluate outcomes against a
horizon of values. The lower classes are assessed exclusively on how well they meet prescribed
outcomes set by the leadership.
(3) Because the upper class must clearly stand out from the rest with their cultural capital and
developed minds as markers of privilege and prestige. The lower classes must work over many
generations before they can accumulate wealth and have leisure time.
By foregoing our commitment to a liberal education for people of all classes, we today live in a society
where the privileged few get to enjoy the advantages of leisure and wealth while the masses toil way on
their behalf. Only the privileged few and their children can afford the increasingly exorbitant tuition in elite,
private colleges of liberal arts, while policy-makers slash funds for public education with a limited focus on
employment, depriving not just the poor but also the middle class of a liberal education. This is not the
democratic society of free people that we set out to establish.
7. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Option 2: can be inferred from the first two sentences of the passage— “The problem facing the
humanities isn’t just about the humanities. It’s about the liberal arts generally, including math,
science, and economics. These form half the so-called STEM subjects.” Therefore, it is clear that
“liberal arts” = “humanities” + math, science and economics (of which math and science are two of
the four STEM subjects). In addition, we already know that there is no overlap between the
“humanities” and STEM subjects.
Option 1 is incorrect as “liberal arts” include only 2 of the 4 STEM subjects. Option 3 second part is
incorrect and Option 4 first part is incorrect. Hence, Options 1, 3 and 4 can be eliminated.
8. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: can be inferred from: “We don’t intellectually embrace a society where the privileged few
get to enjoy the advantages of leisure and wealth while the masses toil on their behalf. Yet that’s
what a sell-out of the liberal arts entails (Last paragraph)”. The phrase “that’s what…” in the second
sentence links back to the first sentence, which refers to an unequal society where only the privileged
few enjoy the advantages of leisure and wealth—which come with “access to a liberal education”—
which is not available to the other classes (as clear from the rest of the last paragraph).
Options 1 and 3 are incorrect because of the phrases “democratic society” and “free people”—people
are not “free” unless their minds are developed and enlightened through receiving a “liberal
education” (NOT an education that prepares people for future jobs, economic and technological
progress) , and a society is not “democratic” unless the people are “free”. Option 2 is an option trap
because it rightly draws the analogy with the ancient Roman society but does not relate it to a “liberal
education” or its sell-out. And the phrase “educated elite” is ambiguous because it could relate either
to an education in STEM subjects or to an education in the liberal arts. Hence, Options 1, 2 and 3 can
be eliminated.
9. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: is the exception as it weakens (INSTEAD OF strengthening) the underlying argument by
asserting that “a liberal education is the privilege of the leisurely classes (wealthy people)”—this is
contrary to “democratic values”.
Options 1, 2 and 4, IF TRUE, strengthen the author’s underlying argument, as clear from (Third and
Fourth paragraphs): Option 1— “…to explore the higher goods of human life: to play Beethoven, to
16
study botany, to read Aristotle, to go on an imagination-expanding tour of Italy”; Option 2— “…the
skills to think for themselves” and “…how to evaluate outcomes and consider them against a horizon
of values”; and Option 4— “…leadership positions in politics and the marketplace” and “…develop
their minds, dress themselves in cultural capital, and learn the skills necessary to become influential
members of the society”. Hence, Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
10. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: is the exception as white supremacists are distorting or misinterpreting a scientific theory
(NOT philosophy) for asserting that the white races are genetically superior to other races in order to
justify their exploitation/ill-treatment of non-white races. Since this case is not related to any
philosophical principle or theory, it is the exception.
Options 1, 2 and 3 give examples of possible situations where some tenet/precept/principle of a

school of philosophy or a philosopher proved useful: Option 1—in providing strength to the prisoner of
war to bear physical torture; Option 2—in assuring the mother that her decision to authorize the risky
surgery for her son was NOT morally wrong; and Option 3—in providing a philosophical guideline or
moral justification for the Hindu’s claim to the disputed land, which many Indian Muslims found
reasonable.
11. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: is the exception because this is NOT what the upper classes want for themselves BUT what
they recommend for the lower or less privileged classes: “…the elite (upper classes) speak of an
education’s value for the less privileged in terms of preparation for the global economy (for future
employment). Worse yet, they often support learning systems designed to produce “good
employees”—i.e., compliant labourers (for the lower classes NOT for themselves)”.
Options 1, 2 and 4 are the reasons for liberal arts to have been the privilege or preserve of the upper
classes as directly given in the third paragraph: “Traditionally, the liberal arts have been the privilege
of an upper class. There are three big reasons for this. (Option 4) First, it befits the leisure time of an
upper class to explore the higher goods of human life... (Option 1) Second, because their birth-right is
to occupy leadership positions in politics and the marketplace… (Option 2) Finally, the goods of the
liberal arts get coded as markers of privilege and prestige, so that the upper class can demarcate
themselves clearly from those who must work in order to make their leisure and wealth possible.”
Hence, Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
Passage 3
SUITABLE TITLE: Art (and art’s narrative) has ended; the age of pluralism in art and the reign of art theory
have begun.

1. classical: (adj) relating to ancient Greek or Latin literature, art, or culture.
2. romantic: (adj) relating to or denoting the artistic and literary movement of romanticism;
romanticism is a movement in the arts and literature that originated in the late 18th century,
emphasizing inspiration, subjectivity, and the primacy of the individual.
3. stall: (v) to stop or cause to stop making progress.
4. unassuming: (adj) not pretentious or arrogant; modest.
5. dumbstruck: (adj) so shocked or surprised as to be unable to speak.
6. reign: (n) be the best or most important in a particular area or domain.
7. hyperbole: (n) exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
8. narrative: (n) a representation of a particular situation or process in such a way as to reflect or
conform to an overarching set of aims or values.
9. chronicle: (n) a fictitious or factual work describing a series of events; a factual written account of
important or historical events in the order of their occurrence.
10. pluralism: (n) a condition or system in which two or more states, groups, principles, sources of
authority, etc., coexist.
17
MAIN IDEA: The passage presents the argument that “art and art’s narrative has ended”—art has
completed its development, its progress, its tasks and goals. And now the age of pluralism in art is upon
us—art is now free to be anything; art can revisit and re-use all the many tools and techniques the history of
art has thrown up, and recombine them at will; it does not matter any longer what an artist does because
when one direction is as good as another direction, there is no concept of direction any longer to apply.
Two of the more prominent philosophers to have made this sort of argument were G W F Hegel in the early
19th century, and Arthur Danto in the late 20th century.
12. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: Danto was shocked to see that artists were back to “representational art”, much like taking
a photograph, and the choice of their objects were as ordinary as “shipping containers of Brillo
cleaning products”. So it does not matter any longer what an artist does, the artist is free to do
anything—signs of the age of pluralism in art.
Other options are directly stated in the passage but do not really explain why Danto was shocked to
see this particular artwork at the exhibition. Option 4 is the only option that explains “Why Danto was
dumbstruck?” Hence, Options 1, 2 and 3 can be eliminated.
13. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Option 2: The author says that with art’s end, “the age of pluralism has started. Art could revisit and
re-use all the many tools and techniques the history of art had thrown up, and recombine them at will
(Last paragraph)”. So if we extend the analogy of ‘art’s end’ to ‘history’s end’, nations can now
experiment with different politico-economic systems and combinations thereof to suit its unique
conditions.
Other options do not relate “history’s end” to “the age of pluralism” and do NOT extend the analogy in
accordance with what the author says about “art’s end”. Hence, Options 1, 3 and 4 can be
eliminated.
14. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: The author explains that “art has ended” means “art’s narrative has ended”—its progress or
line of development has ended; it has developed; it has achieved its goals; it has solved the task it
had set itself. But art’s chronicle would never end because new artworks will continue to be created.
Option 1 best explains this distinction.
Options 2 and 3 do not make a clear relation of “narrative” with development, goals, tasks, values of
art itself and of “chronicle” with documenting specific artworks created over time. In Option 4,
describing “narrative” merely as the “story of art” is inadequate and also unclear. Hence, Options 2, 3
and 4 can be eliminated.
15. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: After art and art’s narrative has ended, artists will debate and discuss art’s progress or line
of development, and its overarching set of goals, tasks and values. Their focus will be on “art theory”
for a better understanding of art with all its pluralism of tools and techniques that history has thrown
up.
Option 2 is incorrect in talking about “developing new art theory” when art’s narrative has ended.
Option 3 is contrary to the spirit of the age of pluralism where artists are free to do anything beyond
rules and guidelines. Option 4 is incorrect in saying that “artists will fade away”—this is nowhere
suggested in the passage. In fact, the passage suggests that artists will be empowered to create
anything they want to and artworks will keep getting created. Hence, Options 2, 3 and 4 can be
eliminated.
18
16. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Option 2: is the exception as it relates more to the “history of art” which is the job of art historians
NOT to “goals of art’s development” or “art’s narrative”.
Other options are clear from the third paragraph: “Hegel gave one of the earliest and most ambitious
accounts of art’s development, and (Option 1) its importance in shaping and reflecting our common
culture. Art had not just gone through a series of random changes: in his view, it had developed…. Art
was one of the many ways in which (Option 4) humanity was improving its understanding of its own
freedom, and (Option 3) improving its understanding of its relationship to the world.” Hence, Options
1, 3 and 4 can be eliminated.
Passage 4
SUITABLE TITLE: Otters juggling rocks—Is it practice of survival skills or just animal play?

1. intuitive: (adj) using or based on what one feels to be true even without conscious reasoning;
instinctive.
2. deft: (adj) neatly skilful and quick in one's movements.
3. dexterity: (n) skill in performing tasks, especially with the hands.
4. crustacean: (n) an arthropod of the large, mainly aquatic group Crustacea, such as a crab, lobster,
shrimp, or barnacle.
5. mollusk: (n) an invertebrate of a large phylum which includes snails, slugs, mussels, and
octopuses. They have a soft unsegmented body and live in aquatic or damp habitats, and most
kinds have an external calcareous shell.
6. tweak: (v) to twist or pull (something) sharply.
7. goofing around: (v) to behave in a silly way or playful way.
8. repertoire: (n) a stock of skills or types of behaviour that a person habitually uses; the whole body
of items which are regularly performed.
SUMMARY
When researchers found otters juggling rocks, they intuitively thought that they did this to help them
practice “food-picking” skills required for their survival. Then they conducted some experiments and found
the following:
1. Of two species of otters, one that tweaked shreds of seafood from shells and crevices and one that ate
fish, both were found to practise juggling rocks and had equally good food-picking skills.
2. Both youngsters and elderly otters were found to practise juggling rocks.
3. Surges of rock juggling occurred at the approach of feeding time.
These experiments clearly showed a disconnect between juggling rocks and survival skills and suggested
that juggling rocks may be part of animal play. In the study of evolution of animal play, it has been found
that play is more likely to evolve among animals with parental care that give youngsters enough surplus
food and a safe space for goofing around. It is called the “surplus resource” hypothesis.
17. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: is the exception as it supports the intuitive idea that juggling rocks helps practice “food-
picking” skills required for their survival.
Option 2 weakens or cast doubts on the idea because researches found another species of otters
that eat fish by grabbing them as they swim in water—so juggling rocks does not help them improve
survival skills, but they still practise juggling rocks. Option 3 also weakens the idea because even
elderly otters practice juggling rocks who already have developed food-picking skills; in their case
there is no need for practice, but they still practise juggling rocks. Option 4 directly weakens the idea
by providing another reason, NOT survival skills, why otters juggle rocks. Hence, Options 2, 3 and 4
can be eliminated.
19
18. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: is the exception because researchers were mainly trying to confirm or refute whether
juggling rocks was practice for improving food-picking skills. They were not researching whether otters
juggle rocks as part of individual or social play.
Researchers were testing both species—one that picked shreds of seafood out of crustacean or
mollusk shells with its paws for eating and the other that grabbed fish swimming by with its paws for
eating. They basically were trying to confirm or refute whether juggling rocks was practice for
improving food-picking skills. Option 1—they wanted to confirm whether only youngsters practised
juggling rocks to improve their survival skills or even elderly otters did so. Options 2 and 3—they
wanted to confirm whether the species that ate shreds of seafood picked from shells had better food-
picking skills than the one that ate fish. Hence, Options 1, 2 and 3 can be eliminated.
19. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: is the exception as it is not mentioned in the passage. Other options are directly stated in
the last paragraph in connection with “surplus resource” hypothesis: “Play is more likely to evolve
among animals with (Option 2) parental care that give youngsters (Option 1) enough surplus food and
(Option 4) a safe space for goofing around. It is called the “surplus resource” hypothesis, and otters
are a good example of it.” Hence, Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
20. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: What the author means by “part of their evolutionary heritage” is that juggling rocks was
part of the range of behavioural patterns learned or acquired during the long period of evolution of
otters. At some stage of their evolution, they had practised juggling rocks to improve paw dexterity for
picking food from crevices and shells for their survival. But as food became surplus or some species
switched to eating fish, even then juggling rocks remained an instinctive behavioural pattern
practised as part of animal play—for pleasure, out of boredom or both.
Option 1 incorrectly suggests that juggling rocks has always been part of animal play—since the
beginning passed on as evolutionary heritage. Option 2 incorrectly suggests that juggling rocks has
always been for picking food—since the beginning passed on as evolutionary heritage. Option 3 does
not relate the behaviour to “the evolution of the species” or “passed on as evolutionary heritage”.
Hence, Options 1, 2 and 3 can be eliminated.
Passage 5
SUITABLE TITLE: When scientific evidence does not support pre-existing views, it is reasoned away as
flawed or that science does not have all the answers or that science itself is broken.

1. consistent: (adj) (of an argument or set of ideas) not containing any logical contradictions.
2. world view: (n) a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.
3. broken: (adj) flawed, problematic.
4. clairvoyance: (n) the supposed faculty of perceiving things or events in the future or beyond
normal sensory contact.
5. confirmation bias: (n) the psychological tendency of people to embrace new evidence or
information as confirmation of their existing beliefs or theories and to ignore evidence that
doesn’t.
MAIN IDEA: Researchers conducted experiments and found that when scientific evidence does not support
pre-existing views, it is reasoned away as flawed or that science itself is broken or science does not have
all the answers. On the other hand, when scientific evidence reinforced pre-existing views, there was no
such adverse reaction to the scientific evidence presented or to science itself. Such biased reaction is
explained by the desperate need for people to retain some consistency in their world view.
20
21. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: The passage is full of details of the specific experiments/research to show that when
scientific evidence does not support pre-existing views, it is reasoned away as flawed or that science
itself is broken or science does not have all the answers. On the other hand, when scientific evidence
reinforces pre-existing views, there is no such adverse reaction. Hence, Option 3 best states the
primary purpose of the author.
Option 1—the primary purpose is NOT to explain WHY, BUT to show what research indicates, though
the reason WHY is also given in brief in the last sentence of the passage: “to retain some consistency
in their world view”. Option 2 is too broad a purpose for this short passage. Option 4 is contrary to
what the passage is saying: it is difficult to influence or change people’s pre-existing views because
they reject anything that challenges their views.
22. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: is clearly stated in the passage as the reason why people react in a biased manner to
scientific evidence and science in general: (1) “When the scientific evidence is unwelcome, people try
to reason it away. If the research results are not consistent with their world view, they are likely to
believe science can't supply all the answers (First paragraph)”; and (2) “When presented with
unwelcome scientific evidence, it seems, in a desperate attempt to retain some consistency in their
world view, people would rather conclude that science in general is broken (Last paragraph)”.
Other options are NOT discussed in the passage as such, BUT they explain why people may possibly
have strong pre-existing views to start with. Since they have not been discussed there is no way of
knowing whether the author agrees with them or not. Hence, Options 2, 3 and 4 can be eliminated.
23. Ans. 4.
Explanation
Option 4: is the exception because it relates to the theological argument against the death penalty
that since God has given life, society has no right to take it away. Hence, Option 4 is not presenting
any scientific evidence and can be eliminated as irrelevant.
Option 1 provides data related to the argument that innocent people may be awarded the death
penalty due to our flawed investigative and justice system; and if they are later found innocent, there
is no way to recompense them because they are already dead. Option 2 provides data related to the
argument that death penalty acts as a deterrent for further heinous crimes. Option 3 provides data
related to the argument that even people who have committed heinous crimes deserve an opportunity
to reform. Options 1, 2, and 3 provide scientific evidence (in the form of statistical data) to support or
challenge different arguments for or against the death penalty; hence, they can be eliminated.
24. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: is the exception because a person cannot “reason away” scientific evidence by simply
saying that “it is not consistent with his views, therefore it is flawed”—this is a fallacious argument.
On the other hand, a person can “reason away” scientific evidence that is unwelcome because it
challenges the person’s pre-existing views by raising objections at Options 1, 2 and 4 as discussed in
the passage: Option 1— “Each group found extensive methodological holes in the evidence they
disagreed with, but ignored the very same holes in the evidence that reinforced their views”; Option
2— “Politicians will cheerfully explain that the scientific method simply cannot be used to determine
the outcomes of a drugs policy. Alternative therapists will explain that their pill is special, among all
pills, and you simply cannot find out if it works by using a (scientific) trial”; Option 4— “…science had
nothing to offer…that science in general is broken.”
21
VERBAL ABILITY

1. allegory: (n) a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically
a moral or political one.
2. protagonist: (n) the leading character or one of the major characters in a play, film, novel, etc.
3. resistance: (n) the underground movement formed in France during the Second World War to fight
the German occupying forces and the Vichy government.
4. fascism: (n) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing
opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive
nationalism and often racism.
5. pick on (someone): (v) repeatedly single (someone) out for criticism or unkind treatment in a way
perceived to be unfair.
25. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Answer: 1: The coherent paragraph is 2354. The paragraph starts with 2 connecting the movie and
World War II, both having a “moral purpose”. Then 3 talks of the basic plot of the movie and relates it
to the moral purpose of World War II—to fight fascism worldwide. 5-4 make a mandatory pair
explaining how the Americans see themselves in the character of the movie’s protagonist (Rick
Blaine)—Americans do not pick up a fight unless they are picked on, harking back to the words of Rick:
“I stick my head out for nobody” in 3. Hence, 2354 form a coherent paragraph.
Sentence 1 which talks about the plot of the movie being an allegory can possibly come between 2
and 3, making 21354 a coherent 5-sentence paragraph. It is not possible to break up the mandatory
pair 5-4 and drop 4 (which is strongly linked with 3) to get 2135 as a coherent 4-sentence paragraph.
But 1 can be dropped without any disconnect in the overall thought-flow; hence, 1 is out-of-context
and 2354 is the coherent 4-sentence paragraph.
26. Ans. 3214.
Explanation
Answer: 3214: The paragraph talks about how “salience bias” can distort our perception by giving the
examples of twins and brothers. The paragraph starts with the mandatory pair 3-2—3 says that we
should interpret deaths of two pairs of twins and of two pairs of brothers due to coronavirus with
caution and 2 gives the reason why: the news coverage can distort our perceptions (we are likely to
jump to the conclusion that genetics and response to coronavirus are related). Then 1 introduces
“salience bias” and links back with 2 to explain “how distort our perceptions”. Hence, 3-2-1 are
linked. The paragraph then concludes with 4 asking us to be “…careful not…events that might stand
out” (linking back with “information that stands out more” in 1), making 1-4 a mandatory pair, which
brings out the meaning of “salience bias” clearly by repeating the phrase “stand out”. Hence, 3214
form a coherent paragraph.
Another possible option could be 1324: start with 1 by introducing “salience bias”, then discuss the
examples in 3-2 and conclude with 4. But as you can see, switching from 1 to 3 is very awkward and
“events that might stand out” in 4 does not link clearly with “coverage can distort…” in 2. Hence,
1324 as an alternative can be eliminated.
27. Ans. 3241.
Explanation
Answer: 3241: The paragraph is using the metaphor of “a storm” for the coronavirus pandemic and
highlighting that it would have changed our thinking in profound ways once it has subsided. The
paragraph starts with the mandatory pair 3-2— “When this storm clears…” referring to the specific
case in 2 links back with the general case: “When a storm subsides…” in 3. This is followed by the
pair 4-1— “…pursue change…while ice of status quo was locked up” in 4 is naturally followed by “…a
profoundly different sense of…” in 1. Hence, 3241 form a coherent paragraph.
22
1. ambivalence: (n) the state of having mixed feelings or contradictory ideas about something or
someone.
2. conscientious objector: (n) a person who for reasons of conscience objects to complying with a
particular requirement, especially serving in the armed forces.
3. disinterested: (adj) not influenced by considerations of personal advantage.
4. martyrize: (v) to kill (someone) because of their beliefs; to cause great pain or distress to.
28. Ans. 3142.
Explanation
Answer: 3142: The paragraph is about “conscientious objectors”, how others do not understand their
position, and how they have been persecuted in the past two world wars. The paragraph starts with
the pair 3-1 bringing out the irony— (3) many authors have written about the horrors of war, (1) but we
are still “ambivalent” about conscientious objectors who see the wrongness of war so clearly. Then
the pair 4-2 talk about the author of the book “A Cack-Handed War”— (4) who brings out the
persecution of conscientious objectors during the two world wars, and (2) who himself felt guilty at
being a conscientious objector and yet felt justified of his position (an example of “ambivalence”).
Hence, 3142 form a coherent paragraph.

1. physiognomy: (n) a person's facial features or expression, especially when regarded as indicative
of character or ethnic origin.
2. chase unicorns: (phrase) to chase illusions or myths.
29. Ans. 2.
Explanation
Answer: 2: The coherent paragraph is 1453. The paragraph starts with 1 introducing the topic—the
problem of reinventing physiognomy (facial recognition). Then 4-5 draw a parallel between pursuing
research in cold fusion and facial recognition—critics disapprove the former for chasing illusions when
scientific consensus has moved on, but critics have strong opprobrium for the latter because of its
harmful uses. The paragraph concludes with 3—highlighting that “racism” is the harmful effect of the
study of physiognomy (facial recognition), which was the precise reason why it was invented during
colonial times. Hence, 1453 form a coherent paragraph.
Sentence 2 is a general assertion about moral responsibilities of scientists and can fit after 2, making
1452 a possible sequence. But without 3 which highlights “racism” as the harmful effect of facial
recognition, the paragraph is at a loose end—incomplete. Hence, 2 can be dropped as out-of-context.
30. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: best captures the essence of the passage: CAUSE—Human Nature is evil, and therefore
EFFECT—Economic System (Capitalism) is evil, NOT the other way around, as Karl Marx thought,
having fallen prey to the Swimmer’s Body Illusion.
Options 2 is INCORRECT in saying: “Karl Marx thought capitalism is evil because people are inherently
evil”. Option 3 does not bring out the cause-and-effect relationship clearly and does not bring out in
which way Karl Marx was mistaken. Option 4 does not bring out the cause-and-effect relationship
clearly and makes no reference to history and social experiments. Hence, Options 2, 3 and 4 can be
eliminated.
31. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Answer: 1: The coherent paragraph is 3524. At first glance, we can see that 2-4 form a mandatory
pair— “these fates…” in 4 links back with 2. The paragraph can only start with the pair 3-5 introducing
President Theodore Roosevelt’s speech in which he stressed on the imperative of “conservation”.
“The time has come…” in 2 links the opening pair 3-5 with 2-4. Hence, 3524 form a coherent
paragraph.
23
Sentence 1 can possibly fit after the opening pair 3-5 and form 35124 as a coherent 5-sentence
paragraph. But since we need a 4-sentence paragraph, 1 can be dropped as out-of-context.

1. state power: (n) police power (United States constitutional law), the capacity of a state to regulate
behaviours and enforce order within its territory.
2. Hobbesian: (adj) relating to or characteristic of the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes or his
ideas; according to Hobbes, the only way to escape civil war and to maintain a state of peace in a
commonwealth is to institute an impartial and absolute sovereign power that is the final authority
on all political issues.
3. skepticism: (n) a sceptical attitude; doubt as to the truth of something.
4. sovereign power: (n) sovereignty is a political concept that refers to dominant power or supreme
authority; in a democracy, sovereign power resides in the elected government.
5. recourse: (n) a source of help in a difficult situation.
32. Ans. 3.
Explanation
Option 3: Foucault questioned the assumption that the only real power is sovereign power, while not
denying its reality. This allowed him to examine the functions of power more widely and its forms of
operation. The author gives the example of the expertise of medical and psychiatric experts being in
itself a source of power (without recourse to violence) in a judicial court which could mitigate or
augment the sovereign power of the judicial court. Option 3 best captures this essence of the
paragraph.
Other options do not cover Foucault’s skepticism of the assumption that “the only real power is
sovereign power”, which is a crucial point. Hence, Options 1, 2 and 4 can be eliminated.
33. Ans. 3421.
Explanation
Answer: 3421: The paragraph starts with 3 highlighting that equating “the natural”, “the healthy” and
“the good” leads to a set of common fallacies. 3 is followed by examples in 4-2: 4— “the good” = “the
healthy” or “the natural”; 2— “the natural” = “the healthy” and “the good”. The paragraph ends with 1
which gives an example of how our caveman ancestors equated “the natural” with “the healthy” and
“the good”, exemplifying 2. Hence, 3421 form a coherent paragraph.

1. Plato: Plato was an Athenian philosopher during the Classical period in Ancient Greece, founder of
the Platonist school of thought, and the Academy, the first institution of higher learning in the
Western world.
2. Plato’s Dialogues: In these influential dialogues—Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo,
Symposium—Plato employs the dialectic method to examine the trial and death of his mentor,
Socrates, and address the eternal questions of human existence.
3. Socrates: Socrates was a Greek philosopher from Athens who is credited as one of the founders of
Western philosophy, and as being the first moral philosopher of the Western ethical tradition of
thought. The Socratic method, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between
individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out
ideas and underlying presuppositions.
4. antiquity: (n) the ancient past, especially the period of classical and other human civilizations
before the Middle Ages.
5. labyrinth: (n) a complicated irregular network of passages or paths in which it is difficult to find
one's way; a maze.
6. incremental: (adj) relating to or denoting an increase or addition, especially small and one of a
series.
24
34. Ans. 1.
Explanation
Option 1: best summarizes the paragraph by covering all the important points: (1) Philosophy was a
process of exploring and discussing basic questions, NOT a product—a static body of doctrine; (2) In
these philosophical discussions, there was an openness to different interpretations, NOT passive
reception of the word (doctrine/dogma).
Option 2 describes how Plato’s Dialogues were composed rather than his views on what philosophy is
and what it is not, which is the essence of the paragraph. Option 3 is a close option but “trying to find
answers” is NOT what the paragraph says because once answers are found, then philosophy will
become “a static body of doctrine”. Philosophy is the process of exploring and discussing and
speculating as in Option 1 (the correct answer): “more a matter of an activity”; “It is a question of
process”: “throw themselves into the labyrinths of thought”. Option 4 is INCORRECT in limiting
philosophy to dialogues between two wise men (Plato’s Dialogues actually has many participants
raising questions, making arguments, expressing views, etc.); the paragraph is about Plato’s views on
“what philosophy is” NOT about Plato’s book “Dialogues”. Hence, Options 2, 3 and 4 can be
eliminated.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
25

Have Been Tried From Time To Time," As Churchill Famously Said (Third Paragraph) "?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Have Been Tried From Time To Time," As Churchill Famously Said (Third Paragraph) "?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WILEY CAT VARC BOOK

ADDITIONAL MOCK CAT VARC TEST 4

1. Democracy is the worst form of government.

1. Appeals to truth make for strong arguments.

1. Liberal arts is the union of humanities and STEM subjects.

1. Reflecting and shaping our common culture.

1. People have a tendency to retain consistency in their world view.

1. That there are methodological flaws in the scientific evidence.

1. (3) 2. (2) 3. (4) 4. (3) 5. (1)

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Other options can easily be eliminated.

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Options 1, 2 and 3 give examples of possible situations where some tenet/precept/principle of a

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

26. Ans. 3214.

27. Ans. 3241.

28. Ans. 3142.

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

33. Ans. 3421.

Difficult Words/Phrases (in the order of their appearance)

You might also like