Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:
Economists have spent most of the 20th century ignoring psychology, positive or otherwise. But today there is a great deal of emphasis on how happiness can shape global economies, or — on a smaller scale — successful business practice. This is driven, in part, by a trend in "measuring" positive emotions, mostly so they can be optimized. Neuroscientists, for example, claim to be able to locate specific emotions, such as happiness or disappointment, in particular areas of the brain. Wearable technologies, such as Spire, offer data-driven advice on how to reduce stress. We are no longer just dealing with "happiness" in a philosophical or romantic sense — it has become something that can be monitored and measured, including by our behavior, use of social media and bodily indicators such as pulse rate and facial expressions.
There is nothing automatically sinister about this trend. But it is disquieting that the businesses and experts driving the quantification of happiness claim to have our best interests at heart, often concealing their own agendas in the process. In the workplace, happy workers are viewed as a "win-win." Work becomes more pleasant, and employees, more productive. But this is now being pursued through the use of performance-evaluating wearable technology, such as Humanyze or Virgin Pulse, both of which monitor physical signs of stress and activity toward the goal of increasing productivity.
Cities such as Dubai, which has pledged to become the "happiest city in the world," dream up ever-more elaborate and intrusive ways of collecting data on well-being — to the point where there is now talk of using CCTV cameras to monitor facial expressions in public spaces. New ways of detecting emotions are hitting the market all the time: One company, Beyond Verbal, aims to calculate moods conveyed in a phone conversation, potentially without the knowledge of at least one of the participants. And Facebook [has] demonstrated . . . that it could influence our emotions through tweaking our news feeds — opening the door to ever-more targeted manipulation in advertising and influence. As the science grows more sophisticated and technologies become more intimate with our thoughts and bodies, a clear trend is emerging. Where happiness indicators were once used as a basis to reform society, challenging the obsession with money that G.D.P. measurement entrenches, they are increasingly used as a basis to transform or discipline individuals.
Happiness becomes a personal project, that each of us must now work on, like going to the gym. Since the 1970s, depression has come to be viewed as a cognitive or neurological defect in the individual, and never a consequence of circumstances. All of this simply escalates the sense of responsibility each of us feels for our own feelings, and with it, the sense of failure when things go badly. A society that deliberately removed certain sources of misery, such as precarious and exploitative employment, may well be a happier one. But we won't get there by making this single, often fleeting emotion, the over-arching goal.
We can infer that the author adopts a cautionary tone in the passage. He warns that quantification of happiness might be useful in certain contexts but making measuring happiness the primary goal can lead to unwanted consequences. He warns that happiness will become a personal project if we take the metrics too seriously. Therefore, the author is likely to recommend economists to incorporate the research findings cautiously and hence, option B is the right answer.
In the penultimate paragraph, the author mentions "Where happiness indicators were once used as a basis to reform society, challenging the obsession with money that G.D.P. measurement entrenches, they are increasingly used as a basis to transform or discipline individuals". He states that wearable technologies shift the onus on the person for his depression. In the last paragraph, the author mentions how these technologies are helping in disciplining individuals to be happy rather than addressing the cause of depression. Therefore, option C is the right answer.
In the last paragraph, the author mentions that since 1970s, depression is viewed as the defect of the individual rather than as the effect of his circumstances. He feels that this approach puts the person under pressure since being depressed is being viewed as the fault of the individual. The author does not view the shift in a positive light. Only option C captures the fact that the development was a detrimental step and hence, option C is the right answer.
The primary intention of the author is to warn about the trend of collecting data to monitor emotions and in turn promote happiness as an overarching goal. He says that such a practice will lead to adoption of intrusive methods and make happiness a personal project to be worked on. If it is proved that less data is being collected than earlier, it will weaken the very basis of the authors arguments.
Options B and C indicate a trend that the author is warning about. Therefore, we can eliminate these 2 options.
Option D states that individuals worldwide are using technologies to monitor their well-being. The authors argument is not that such technologies should not be used. He just states that proliferation of such technologies, especially when used by external parties like nations and corporations, might put people under greater stress. Therefore, we can eliminate option D as well.
Option A states that stakeholders are moving away from collecting data. This statement goes against the warning issued by the author. Therefore, option A will undermine the authors arguments the most and hence, option A is the right answer.
The author does not consider happiness indicators to be the gold standard of happiness. Therefore, we cannot say that Dubai is on its way to becoming one of the happiest cities in the world just because it tries to discipline its citizens to be happy.
Nowhere has it been mentioned that Dubai collaborates with Facebook or incentivises companies that promote worker welfare.
Cities such as Dubai, which has pledged to become the "happiest city in the world," dream up ever-more elaborate and intrusive ways of collecting data on well-being — to the point where there is now talk of using CCTV cameras to monitor facial expressions in public spaces.
We can infer that Dubai comes up with new intrusive ways of collecting data on the well-being of its citizens. Therefore, option B is the right answer.
Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given
. . . “Everybody pretty much agrees that the relationship between elephants and people has dramatically changed,” [says psychologist Gay] Bradshaw. . . . “Where for centuries humans and elephants lived in relatively peaceful coexistence, there is now hostility and violence. Now, I use the term ‘violence’ because of the intentionality associated with it, both in the aggression of humans and, at times, the recently observed behavior of elephants.” . . .
Typically, elephant researchers have cited, as a cause of aggression, the high levels of testosterone in newly matured male elephants or the competition for land and resources between elephants and humans. But. . . Bradshaw and several colleagues argue. . . that today’s elephant populations are suffering from a form of chronic stress, a kind of species-wide trauma. Decades of poaching and culling and habitat loss, they claim, have so disrupted the intricate web of familial and societal relations by which young elephants have traditionally been raised in the wild, and by which established elephant herds are governed, that what we are now witnessing is nothing less than a precipitous collapse of elephant culture. . . .
Elephants, when left to their own devices, are profoundly social creatures. . . . Young elephants are raised within an extended, multitiered network of doting female caregivers that includes the birth mother, grandmothers, aunts and friends. These relations are maintained over a life span as long as 70 years. Studies of established herds have shown that young elephants stay within 15 feet of their mothers for nearly all of their first eight years of life, after which young females are socialized into the matriarchal network, while young males go off for a time into an all-male social group before coming back into the fold as mature adults. . . .
This fabric of elephant society, Bradshaw and her colleagues [demonstrate], ha[s] effectively been frayed by years of habitat loss and poaching, along with systematic culling by government agencies to control elephant numbers and translocations of herds to different habitats. . . . As a result of such social upheaval, calves are now being born to and raised by ever younger and inexperienced mothers. Young orphaned elephants, meanwhile, that have witnessed the death of a parent at the hands of poachers are coming of age in the absence of the support system that defines traditional elephant life. “The loss of elephant elders,” [says] Bradshaw . . . "and the traumatic experience of witnessing the massacres of their family, impairs normal brain and behavior development in young elephants.”
What Bradshaw and her colleagues describe would seem to be an extreme form of anthropocentric conjecture if the evidence that they’ve compiled from various elephant researchers. . . weren’t so compelling. The elephants of decimated herds, especially orphans who’ve watched the death of their parents and elders from poaching and culling, exhibit behavior typically associated with post-traumatic stress disorder and other trauma-related disorders in humans: abnormal startle response, unpredictable asocial behavior, inattentive mothering and hyperaggression. . . .
[According to Bradshaw], “Elephants are suffering and behaving in the same ways that we recognize in ourselves as a result of violence. . . . Except perhaps for a few specific features, brain organization and early development of elephants and humans are extremely similar.”
Through the passage, the author explains how the ways elephants behave is similar to the trauma related response evoked in individuals. He explains how the elephant society is affected by the human activity and the impact of the same on the brain development of young elephants.
The primary purpose of the passage is not to draw an analogy between elephants and humans in any way. Therefore, we can eliminate options A and D. Option C states that the relationship between elephants and humans has changed from one of coexistence to one of hostility. Though this point is true, it is not the central theme of the passage. The author places much emphasis on how the elephant behaviour can be explained as a species-wide trauma response and hence, option B is the right answer.
The author uses strong comparison in the given line. The author has not mentioned that the elephant society, which is like a fabric, is frayed by human activities. He uses the term the fabric of elephant society and this comparison is called a metaphor.
We can eliminate option A since it fails to capture the fact that a comparison has been used. Option D states that the line is an ode to the fragility of elephant society today. Option D fails to capture the fact that human activities are wrecking the social structure of elephants.
Option C states that the line is an exaggeration to bolster Bradshaws claims. The author is not exaggerating the facts to substantiate Bradshaws claims. He tries to capture the effects of human activities on the elephant society metaphorically. Therefore, option B is the right answer.
The author explains how elephants are profoundly social creatures like humans and how human activities are putting elephants under stress. Then, he explains how the recent elephant behaviour is similar to post traumatic stress syndrome observed in humans. Options A, B, and C can be inferred.
The author expresses apprehension that young calves are raised by inexperienced elephant mothers and this, in turn, affects the brain development of the calves. Nowhere has it been mentioned that elephant mothers are developing newer ways of rearing their calves. Therefore, option D is the right answer.
In the first paragraph of the passage, the author uses the line "Now, I use the term ‘violence’ because of the intentionality associated with it". Therefore, we can infer that the author specifically uses the term violence to emphasize that the actions of the elephants on humans are deliberate just like those of humans on elephants. Therefore, option B is the right answer.
The author tries to establish that the elephant behaviour is similar to stress related response induced in humans. From the tone of the passage, we can infer that the author is concerned about the elephants. He does not adopt a detached view point. The passage tries to evoke empathy from the audience and has not been written as a science research paper.
Options B, C, and D do not address the issue at hand. They are not steps towards addressing elephant aggression. Only option A proposes a method to treat the elephants and hence, option A is the right answer.
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:
The only thing worse than being lied to is not knowing you’re being lied to. It’s true that plastic pollution is a huge problem, of planetary proportions. And it’s true we could all do more to reduce our plastic footprint. The lie is that blame for the plastic problem is wasteful consumers and that changing our individual habits will fix it.
Recycling plastic is to saving the Earth what hammering a nail is to halting a falling skyscraper. You struggle to find a place to do it and feel pleased when you succeed. But your effort is wholly inadequate and distracts from the real problem of why the building is collapsing in the first place. The real problem is that single-use plastic—the very idea of producing plastic items like grocery bags, which we use for an average of 12 minutes but can persist in the environment for half a millennium—is an incredibly reckless abuse of technology. Encouraging individuals to recycle more will never solve the problem of a massive production of single-use plastic that should have been avoided in the first place.
As an ecologist and evolutionary biologist, I have had a disturbing window into the accumulating literature on the hazards of plastic pollution. Scientists have long recognized that plastics biodegrade slowly, if at all, and pose multiple threats to wildlife through entanglement and consumption. More recent reports highlight dangers posed by absorption of toxic chemicals in the water and by plastic odors that mimic some species’ natural food. Plastics also accumulate up the food chain, and studies now show that we are likely ingesting it ourselves in seafood. . . .
Beginning in the 1950s, big beverage companies like Coca-Cola and Anheuser-Busch, along with Phillip Morris and others, formed a non-profit called Keep America Beautiful. Its mission is/was to educate and encourage environmental stewardship in the public. . . . At face value, these efforts seem benevolent, but they obscure the real problem, which is the role that corporate polluters play in the plastic problem. This clever misdirection has led journalist and author Heather Rogers to describe Keep America Beautiful as the first corporate greenwashing front, as it has helped shift the public focus to consumer recycling behavior and actively thwarted legislation that would increase extended producer responsibility for waste management. . . . [T]he greatest success of Keep America Beautiful has been to shift the onus of environmental responsibility onto the public while simultaneously becoming a trusted name in the environmental movement. . .
So what can we do to make responsible use of plastic a reality? First: reject the lie. Litterbugs are not responsible for the global ecological disaster of plastic. Humans can only function to the best of their abilities, given time, mental bandwidth and systemic constraints. Our huge problem with plastic is the result of a permissive legal framework that has allowed the uncontrolled rise of plastic pollution, despite clear evidence of the harm it causes to local communities and the world’s oceans. Recycling is also too hard in most parts of the U.S. and lacks the proper incentives to make it work well.
In the penultimate paragraph, the author uses the line "[T]he greatest success of Keep America Beautiful has been to shift the onus of environmental responsibility onto the public while simultaneously becoming a trusted name in the environmental movement". From the tone of the line, we can infer that the author believes that the sole purpose of Keep America Beautiful was to shift the blame on the consumers. Therefore, option B is the right answer.
The author believes that the corporates are responsible for the plastic menace. He states that recycling the plastics or targeting the consumers are ineffective to tackle the problem.
Encouraging individuals to recycle more will never solve the problem of a massive production of single-use plastic that should have been avoided in the first place.
In the last paragraph, the author recommends responsible use of plastics. Therefore, he is unlikely to support a complete ban on single use plastics as well.
The author holds the corporates squarely responsible for the plastic menace. Therefore, the author is most likely to suggest passing regulations targeted at the producers rather than at the consumers. Therefore, option C is the right answer.
In the third paragraph, the author mentions that plastics get absorbed in the water and some animals mistake plastic for their natural food and consume them. Therefore, we can infer options B and C. In the same paragraph, the author explains how plastics we use for a few minutes will stay on the planet for millions of years. Therefore, we can infer option D as well.
The author has not mentioned about air pollution caused while recycling the plastics anywhere in the passage. Therefore, option A is the right answer.
The author believes that plastic production should be restricted. He finds asking consumers to stop using plastics or recycling plastics to be inadequate measures.
The author uses the analogy to drive home the point that focusing on consumer behaviour will be totally incommensurate to tackle plastic pollution. Therefore, option D is the right answer.
The author uses the term lie to emphasize that the fact that the consumers are made to believe that they are responsible for the plastic menace. Through out the passage, the author explains how the corporates tricked people into believing that the blame lies on them for using the plastics. Therefore, option C is the right answer.
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:
When researchers at Emory University in Atlanta trained mice to fear the smell of almonds (by pairing it with electric shocks), they found, to their consternation, that both the children and grandchildren of these mice were spontaneously afraid of the same smell. That is not supposed to happen. Generations of schoolchildren have been taught that the inheritance of acquired characteristics is impossible. A mouse should not be born with something its parents have learned during their lifetimes, any more than a mouse that loses its tail in an accident should give birth to tailless mice. .. .
Modern evolutionary biology dates back to a synthesis that emerged around the 1940s-60s, which married Charles Darwin’s mechanism of natural selection with Gregor Mendel’s discoveries of how genes are inherited. The traditional, and still dominant, view is that adaptations - from the human brain to the peacock’s tail - are fully and satisfactorily explained by natural selection (and subsequent inheritance). Yet [new evidence] from genomics, epigenetics and developmental biology [indicates] that evolution is more complex than we once assumed. . . .
In his book On Human Nature (1978), the evolutionary biologist Edward O Wilson claimed that human culture is held on a genetic leash. The metaphor [needs revision]. . . Imagine a dog-walker (the genes) struggling to retain control of a brawny mastiff (human culture). The pair’s trajectory (the pathway of evolution) reflects the outcome of the struggle. Now imagine the same dog-walker struggling with multiple dogs, on leashes of varied lengths, with each dog tugging in different directions. All these tugs represent the influence of developmental factors, including epigenetics, antibodies and hormones passed on by parents, as well as the ecological legacies and culture they bequeath. . . .
The received wisdom is that parental experiences can’t affect the characters of their offspring. Except they do. The way that genes are expressed to produce an organism’s phenotype - the actual characteristics it ends up with - is affected by chemicals that attach to them. Everything from diet to air pollution to parental behaviour can influence the addition or removal of these chemical marks, which switches genes on or off. Usually these socalled ‘epigenetic’ attachments are removed during the production of sperm and eggs cells, but it turns out that some escape the resetting process and are passed on to the next generation, along with the genes. This is known as ‘epigenetic inheritance’, and more and more studies are confirming that it really happens. Let’s return to the almond-fearing mice. The inheritance of an epigenetic mark transmitted in the sperm is what led the mice’s offspring to acquire an inherited fear. . . .
Epigenetics is only part of the story. Through culture and society, [humans and other animals] inherit knowledge and skills acquired by [their] parents. . . . All this complexity points to an evolutionary process in which genomes (over hundreds to thousands of generations), epigenetic modifications and inherited cultural factors (over several, perhaps tens or hundreds of generations), and parental effects (over single-generation timespans) collectively inform how organisms adapt. These extra-genetic kinds of inheritance give organisms the flexibility to make rapid adjustments to environmental challenges, dragging genetic change in their wake - much like a rowdy pack of dogs.
The author mentions "All these tugs represent the influence of developmental factors, including epigenetics, antibodies and hormones passed on by parents, as well as the ecological legacies and culture they bequeath".
Option A misses developmental factors and antibodies.
Option C misses ecological legacies.
Option D misses developmental factors.
Option B is the most comprehensive one among the given options and hence, it is the right answer.
The primary purpose of the passage is not to establish the scientific superiority of Wilsons theory over that of Darwins and Mendels theories. The author begins the passage with an example that the theory of natural selection fails to explain. Then, he explains about Epigenetic inheritance and elaborates on how epigenetic inheritance explains the transmission of acquired characteristics. Therefore, the authors main argument is that Darwins theory cannot fully explain evolution and hence, option B is the right answer.
The main message of the passage is that natural selection cannot fully explain evolution. Therefore, any argument that attacks this message is most likely to weaken the authors arguments. A study indicating the sole influence of natural selection and inheritance on evolution will question the legitimacy of the theory of epigenetic inheritance and hence, option A is the right answer.
The author uses the Emory University experiment to show that acquired characteristics can be passed on from one generation to another. In the second paragraph, the author explains how the acquired characteristics (fear in this case) should not have been passed according to the theory of natural selection. Option A is too narrow in scope. The author uses fear as an example of acquired characteristic. Therefore, option B is the right answer.
By the term "mood music", the author intends to convey that the war set the stage for the Independence and partition of the country. He does not mean that the war was an allied effort and Indias contribution to the war was merely supportive.
The author mentions that the political trajectory in both the countries has been against the popular remembrance of war. He states that the countries were focused on building a non-colonial identity and the war narrative did not fit in well in the picture.
Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:
[The] Indian government [has] announced an international competition to design a National War Memorial in New Delhi, to honour all of the Indian soldiers who served in the various wars and counter-insurgency campaigns from 1947 onwards. The terms of the competition also specified that the new structure would be built adjacent to the India Gate - a memorial to the Indian soldiers who died in the First World War. Between the old imperialist memorial and the proposed nationalist one, India’s contribution to the Second World War is airbrushed out of existence.
The Indian government’s conception of the war memorial was not merely absent-minded. Rather, it accurately reflected the fact that both academic history and popular memory have yet to come to terms with India’s Second World War, which continues to be seen as little more than mood music in the drama of India’s advance towards independence and partition in 1947. Further, the political trajectory of the postwar subcontinent has militated against popular remembrance of the war. With partition and the onset of the India-Pakistan rivalry, both of the new nations needed fresh stories for self-legitimisation rather than focusing on shared wartime experiences.
However, the Second World War played a crucial role in both the independence and partition of India. . . . The Indian army recruited, trained and deployed some 2.5 million men, almost 90,000 of which were killed and many more injured. Even at the time, it was recognised as the largest volunteer force in the war...
India’s material and financial contribution to the war was equally significant. India emerged as a major military-industrial and logistical base for Allied operations in south-east Asia and the Middle East. This led the United States to take considerable interest in the country’s future, and ensured that this was no longer the preserve of the British government.
Other wartime developments pointed in the direction of India’s independence. In a stunning reversal of its long-standing financial relationship with Britain, India finished the war as one of the largest creditors to the imperial power. Such extraordinary mobilization for war was achieved at great human cost, with the Bengal famine the most extreme manifestation of widespread wartime deprivation. The costs on India’s home front must be counted in millions of lives. Indians signed up to serve on the war and home fronts for a variety of reasons. . . . [M]any were convinced that their contribution would open the doors to India’s freedom. . . . The political and social churn triggered by the war was evident in the massive waves of popular protest and unrest that washed over rural and urban India in the aftermath of the conflict. This turmoil was crucial in persuading the Attlee government to rid itself of the incubus of ruling India. . . . Seventy years on, it is time that India engaged with the complex legacies of the Second World War. Bringing the war into the ambit of the new national memorial would be a fitting - if not overdue - recognition that this was India’s War.
By the term "mood music", the author intends to convey that the war set the stage for the Independence and partition of the country. He does not mean that the war was an allied effort and Indias contribution to the war was merely supportive.
The author mentions that the political trajectory in both the countries has been against the popular remembrance of war. He states that the countries were focused on building a non-colonial identity and the war narrative did not fit in well in the picture.
The author uses the phrase "mood music" to indicate that (the contribution of Indians to) the Second World War is not given the importance it deserves. The author does not state that the war led to the rivalry. Though he mentions the illeffects of the war on India, he does not refer to them when he uses the term "mood music". He feels that the war is largely seen as a warmer to the Independence and partition of the country. Therefore, option D is the right answer.
In the fourth paragraph, the author states "This led the United States to take considerable interest in the country’s future". We can infer that Indias strategic location led to USs interests towards India and hence, we can eliminate option A.
In the first line of the second paragraph, the author mentions that the Second World War played a crucial role in the independence of India.
In the sixth paragraph, the author mentions that the war was achieved at great human cost. He states that the Bengal famine was the most extreme manifestation of the human costs of the war.
In the fifth paragraph, the author states "In a stunning reversal of its long-standing financial relationship with Britain, India finished the war as one of the largest creditors to the imperial power". From this line, we can infer that India lent its resources to Britain, not the other way around. Therefore, option B is an incorrect interpretation of the given sentence and hence, option B is the right answer.
In the second paragraph, the author mentions "Rather, it accurately reflected the fact that both academic history and popular memory have yet to come to terms with India’s Second World War". The author states that the act was not merely absent-minded. Therefore, the author considers the omission to be reflective of Indias academic and popular views and hence, option D is the right answer.
The author states that the new war memorial to commemorate various soldiers who lost their lives since independence will be built near India gate, a World War I memorial. The author regrets the fact that the contribution of Indian soldiers to World War II is being air brushed out of existence. The author laments the fact that the nation fails to recognize the sacrifice of the Indian soldiers who served in the World War II and hence, option B is the right answer.
Knowledge production is restricted in the perspective to the selected members of the professional community, most notably to the university faculties and professional colleges. Power is understood as a negative mechanism, which prevents the non-professional actors from offering their ideas and information
as legitimate knowledge.
Let us note down the important points.
Professions-approach structures and institutionalizes knowledge but knowledge production is restricted to the select members of the community. It prevents the non-professional actors from offering their ideas.
Options A, B, and C do not capture the negative aspects of the professions-approach at all. They just focus on the advantages offered by the approach but the given paragraph places a huge emphasis on the limitations of the approach as well. Only option D captures both the advantage offered by the approach and its limitations. Therefore, option D is the right answer.
E In 1934, the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of the bumblebee to be aerodynamically impossible.
On reading the sentences, we can infer that the author draws an analogy between translators and bumblebees in the paragraph.
Option A, should be the opening sentence since it introduces the fact that the paragraph is going to be about the similarities of translators and bumblebees. After sentence 1, the author should have explained how they are analogous.
Option E, states that the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of bumblebees to be aerodynamically impossible.
Option C, talks about similar statements made about translations.
Option D, should be the last sentence since it concludes by saying that both translators and bees have continued their work unaware of these deliberations.
Options AECD can be put together into a coherent paragraph.
Option B, does not add any valuable information to the topic of discussion. The author does not use the fact that the factoid (impossibility of the flight of the bumblebee) has been disproved to support his argument. Option B, should be the one out of context and hence, Option B is the correct answer.
E Rapid displacement would have helped sensitize the public to its human costs.
On reading the sentences, we can infer that the paragraph revolves around the displacement of people in Bengal due to erosion. C should be the opening sentence since it introduces the topic of discussion - displacement in Bengal. C should be followed by option B since it elaborates that the displacement is due to the shifting of the course of the Ganges and the erosion. We have to decide the pair between E, D, and A. Option D, is definitely a part of the paragraph since it fits well with both the sentences. Also, it states an important detail - the displacement is spread out over a period of time and hence, remains invisible. Since the displacement is not rapid, its magnitude is not significant. Options D and A, form a pair and hence, Option E, is the one out of context.
The conceptualization of landscape as a geometric object first occurred in Europe and is historically related to the European conceptualization of the organism, particularly the human body, as a geometric object with parts having a rational, three-dimensional organization and integration. The European idea of landscape appeared before the science of landscape emerged, and it is no coincidence that Renaissance artists such as Leonardo da Vinci, who studied the structure of the human body, also facilitated an understanding of the structure of landscape. Landscape which had been a subordinate background to religious or historical narratives, became an independent genre or subject of art by the end of sixteenth century or the beginning of the seventeenth century.
Let us note down the main points of the given paragraph:
The given paragraph describes how the study of landscape gained prominence and became an independent genre. Renaissance artists facilitated the development of the field as an independent genre. Let us evaluate the options one by one.
Option A states that understanding of the organism in Europe led to a similar approach towards the understanding of landscape. Though this option is true, it fails to capture the fact that the field evolved as an independent genre with the help of Renaissance artists.
Option B states that Landscape became a major subject of art at the turn of the sixteenth century. Again, option B fails to capture the role played by the Renaissance artists.
Option D states that Renaissance artists were responsible for the study of landscape as a subject of art. The paragraph mentions that the artists facilitated in the transformation of the field into an independent genre. Option D establishes a strong relationship and holds Renaissance artists responsible for the study of landscape as a subject of art. The parts within the quotes disregard the fact that the artists just aided the process. They were not solely responsible for the
development. Therefore, we can eliminate option D.
Only option C captures the fact that the renaissance artists aided in the development of the study of landscape as an independent genre and hence, option C is the right answer.
1) Impartiality and objectivity are fiendishly difficult concepts that can cause all sorts of injustices even if transparently implemented.
2) It encourages us into bubbles of people we know and like, while blinding us to different perspectives, but the deeper problem of ‘transparency’ lies in the words “…and much more”.
3) Twitter’s website says that “tweets you are likely to care about most will show up first in your timeline…based on accounts you interact with most, tweets you engage with, and much more.”
4) We are only told some of the basic principles, and we can’t see the algorithm itself, making it hard for citizens to analyse the system sensibly or fairly or be convinced of its impartiality and objectivity.
On reading the sentences, we can infer that the paragraph is about the difficulty in implementing impartiality and objectivity. Sentence 3 states that Twitters website says that algorithm shows tweets that are likely to suit the taste of the user and much more. Sentence 2 continues sentence 3 by stating that the catch lies in the term much more. Also, it criticizes how catering to the taste of the user forces him into a bubble. Sentence 2 should be followed by sentence 4 since it
states the implications of the term much more and how it makes believing in the impartiality and objectivity of twitter hard.
Sentences 324 form a group. The entire group has been provided as an illustration to explain how hard it is to implement impartiality and objectively. Therefore, sentence 1 should be the opening sentence. Sentences 1324 form a coherent paragraph. Hence, 1324 is the correct answer.
E Not only do they have to think that they prefer to spend time going to the camp next month rather than today, they also have to believe that they will indeed go next month.
All sentences except sentence 4 talk about how time inconsistency prevents people from immunizing their children. Sentence 4 states that the cost of immunization acts as a deterrent which is not in line with the other 4 sentences. 1 should be the opening sentence since it is a general statement introducing time inconsistency. Sentence 1 should be followed by sentence 3 since explains how time inconsistency, in itself, acts as a deterrent in the specific case of immunization. Sentences 2 and 5 form a pair. Sentence 2 states how people should be fooling themselves to postpone their childs immunization. Sentence 5 explains how they should be fooling themselves to not get their child immunized. Sentences 1325 can be put together into a coherent paragraph. Therefore, 4 is the correct answer.
development when the embryo splits in two. Twinning happens in the first days after egg and sperm join, while the embryo is made of just a small number of unspecialized cells. Each half of the embryo continues dividing on its own, ultimately developing into separate, complete individuals. Since they developed from
the same fertilized egg, the resulting individuals are genetically identical.
The author mentions that artificial embryo twinning is low tech to introduce the topic. Then, he explains how the process is exactly similar to the process of development of twins. He states that the process mimics the natural development of twins. He has not highlighted any of the differences between the 2 processes.
Let us evaluate the options.
Option C states that artificial embryo twinning is low tech unlike the natural development of twins. The author makes no such comparison in the paragraph and hence, option C can be eliminated.
Option D states that the twins are formed during fertilization but the paragraph mentions that the twins are formed after the process of fertilization (i.e, after the sperm and the egg join).
Option B fails to capture the fact that the twins are genetically identical. Also, it states that the artificial twinning process is close to the natural development of twins. Though this option is not incorrect, option A is worded in a better way.
Option A states that the process is mimetic of the natural development of the twins (emphasizing that no difference has been highlighted), the twins are genetically identical and the process is similar to the process of development of twins after fertilization. Therefore, option A is the right answer.
1. The eventual diagnosis was skin cancer and after treatment all seemed well.
2. The viola player didn’t know what it was; nor did her GP.
3. Then a routine scan showed it had come back and spread to her lungs.
4. It started with a lump on Cathy Perkins’ index finger.
Sentence 4 should be the opening sentence since it sets the scene and introduces the person suffering from cancer.
Sentence 2 states that the viola player and her physician did not know what it was. It refers to the lump on the finger.
Sentence 1 should follow sentence 2 since it states what the eventual diagnosis was. The GP did not know what the lump was and later it was identified to be skin cancer. Sentence 1 states that all seemed well after the treatment, implying it was not.
Sentence 3 should be the last sentence since it states that the cancer had spread to her lungs.
Sentences 4213 form a coherent paragraph and hence, 4213 is the right answer.
1) But now we have another group: the unwitting enablers.
2) Democracy and high levels of inequality of the kind that have come to characterize the United States are simply incompatible.
3) Believing these people are working for a better world, they are, actually, at most, chipping away at the margins, making slight course corrections, ensuring the system goes on as it is, uninterrupted.
4) Very rich people will always use money to maintain their political and economic power.
2 should be the opening sentence since it sets the context for the discussion. It states that democracy and high levels of inequality are not compatible. Sentence 2 should be followed by sentence 4 since it states that very rich people will always try to buy power. The author is not surprised by this fact. Sentence 1 should follow sentence 4 since it states what the really unexpected thing is. The author states that we have a new group of people, the unwitting enablers.
Sentence 3 should follow sentence 4 since it elaborates on the nature of the unwitting enablers. Sentences 2413 form a coherent paragraph and hence, 2413 is the right answer.
1) The woodland’s canopy receives most of the sunlight that falls on the trees.
2) Swifts do not confine themselves to woodlands, but hunt wherever there are insects in the air.
3) With their streamlined bodies, swifts are agile flyers, ideally adapted to twisting and turning through the air as they chase flying insects - the creatures that form their staple diet.
4) Hundreds of thousands of insects fly in the sunshine up above the canopy, some falling prey to swifts and swallows
1 should be the opening sentence since it sets the context. Sentence 1 states that the woodlands canopy receives most of the sunshine that falls on the trees. Sentence 4 continues sentence 1 by stating that thousands of insects fly above the canopy in the sunlight. The insects fall prey to the swifts and swallows.
We have to decide whether the order of the remaining 2 sentences is 32 or 23. Sentence 3 states that swifts are agile flyers, adapted to chasing flying insects. Sentence 3 states that flying insects form the staple diet of the swifts. Sentence 2 states that swifts do not confine themselves to woodlands and hunt
wherever they can find insects. Therefore, sentence 3 should precede sentence 2 (We cannot introduce that insects form the staple diet after stating that swifts hunt wherever they can find flying insects). Sentences 1432 form a coherent paragraph. Therefore, 1432 is the correct answer.