CAT 2020 Question Paper VARC Slot 3

The aspects that guided/influenced the understanding of feminist scholars who examined Victorian women's travelling experiences need to be found out. We understand that the attempt made by feminist scholars was to "challenge the masculinist history of geography by (1) questioning who and what are relevant subjects of geographic study, and (2) what counts as geographic knowledge itself." And considering the role of women in travel writing during the Victorian era enabled these scholars to inspect new perspectives and achieve the aforementioned objectives {"...such questions are worked through ideological constructs that posit men as explorers and women as travelers—or, conversely, men as travelers and women as tied to the home..."}[Option C]. The varied viewpoints offered by women during this period originated from the difference in the gendered identities, implicitly indicating that the presence of an inequality/ineuity in the gender roles [Option A]. Additionally, studies concerning the manner in which travel altered a woman's gendered identities were also available; this further shaped the feminist scholars'  understanding of the travelling experiences of Victorian women [Option D]. It has not been presented or implied that the knowledge of "class" tensions, as stated in Option B, was an imperative element that influenced scholars' understanding. Hence, Option B is the correct answer.

We can zero-in on the answer based on the following excerpt: {...The completion of the first U.S. transcontinental highway during the 1920s . . . for example, inaugurated a new genre of travel literature about the United States—the automotive or road narrative. Such narratives highlight the experiences of mostly male protagonists “discovering themselves” on their journeys, emphasizing the independence of road travel and the value of rural folk traditions...}

Option A: talks about participation in local traditions which is not mentioned or implied.

Option B: is a distorted comment that does not align with the idea discussed. The author states that road journeys enabled the male protagonist's experience of "discovering themselves"; the phrase "desire for independence" would be incorrect in this regard.

Option C: is not even remotely discussed/implied.

Option D: It is mentioned that the inauguration of a transcontinental highway during the 1920s paved the way for a new genre that emphasised the freedom attached to such road travelling enterprises. Hence, it implicitly depicted travel as an experience celebrating an individual's independence {...emphasizing the independence...}. 

Hence, of the given options, Option D aptly captures the characteristics of American travel literature of the 1920s. 

The question requires us to probe the reason behind why the scholars argue that Victorian women experienced self-development through their travels. Let us pay heed to the following segment from the passage: {...Many studies from the 1970s onward demonstrated the ways in which women’s gendered identities were negotiated differently “at home” than they were “away,” thereby showing women’s self-development through travel...}. It is highlighted that travelling {being "away"} enabled women's identities to be "negotiated differently"{highlighting transformation/reconfiguration}, which in turn was the cause of their self-development. Option D is closest to this understanding. Options A, B and C fail to present the reason and are invalid statements/inferences.

A direct inference from the excerpt: {...Said’s work became a model for demonstrating cultural forms of imperialism in travel texts, showing how the political, economic, or administrative fact of dominance relies on legitimating discourses such as those articulated through travel writing. . .}. It is stated that Said's work rendered scholars with an understanding of "cultural imperialism" and the manner in which it was used to justify colonial domination {or similar pursuits thereof}. Option B aptly captures this aspect. Options A, B and C either diverge from the discussion or are distorted comments. 

Since travel writing involves the presentation and recounting of personal travel experiences and/or perspective of the world, the closest category to this would be autobiographical writing [Option C]. Political journalism and feminist writing can be hurled out the window. Associating travel literature to historical fiction would be inappropriate as well. Hence, of the given choices, Option C is the correct answer.

We need to find a viewpoint that is presented in the passage. Let us inspect the individual options: 

Option A: The introductory lines of the passage helps us infer this: {...Although one of the most contested concepts in political philosophy, human nature is something on which most people seem to agree. By and large, according to Rutger Bregman in his new book Humankind, we have a rather pessimistic view - not of ourselves exactly, but of everyone else. We see other people as selfish, untrustworthy and dangerous and therefore we behave towards them with defensiveness and suspicion...}

Option B: The author calls the viewpoints of Hobbes and Rousseau as polar opposites {"Hobbes and Rousseau are seen as the two poles of the human nature argument"} and does not present a similarity, especially any comment of the form: "both believed in the need for a strong state." Thus, we can eliminate this option.

Option C: No such view has been presented. 

Option D: The author's opinion of Frans de Waal's “veneer theory” is not evident/not highlighted. Hence, we can eliminate this option.

Thus, of the given statements, Option A is the correct answer. 

Bregman considers the aftermath of civilizational collapse as a period that allows for certain changes or alterations in the society {...“Civilisation has become synonymous with peace and progress and wilderness with war and decline,” writes Bregman. “In reality, for most of human existence, it was the other way around.” Whereas traditional history depicts the collapse of civilisations as “dark ages” in which everything gets worse, modern scholars, he claims, see them more as a reprieve, in which the enslaved gain their freedom and culture flourishes... }. Option A correctly captures this point. Options B, C and D are either not stated or distorted interpretations. 

Bregman disagrees with Hobbes' standpoint of humans being inherently selfish or bestial and instead takes Rousseau's side. He asserts that civilizational progress caused by the post-agricultural setup is responsible for the negative/undesired circumstances. In this regard, he presents the contrasting picture of pre and post-agricultural societies {attaches the image of "a prelapsarian idyll" to the nomadic lifestyle, while considers the discovery of agriculture as a misevent}. Thus, this depiction supplements "his argument that people are basically decent, but progress as we know it can make them selfish." Option D is the appropriate answer.   

Option A: The aspect of complexity is not the primary focal point. Thus, this option can be eliminated.

Option B: This diverges from the discussion onto a new line of discussion: "impact that settled farming had on population growth". Hence, we can discard this choice as well.

Option C: Again, the focus is not on the environment; hence, we can scrap off this option.  

At the end of the passage, the author states the following: {...There’s a great deal of reassuring human decency to be taken from this bold and thought-provoking book and a wealth of evidence in support of the contention that the sense of who we are as a species has been deleteriously distorted. But it seems equally misleading to offer the false choice of Rousseau and Hobbes when, clearly, humanity encompasses both...} Thus, he does not truly agree with Bregman's portrayal of the civilized society. Option D correctly captures this disagreement. 

This is a direct inference question that requires minimal effort and can be accurately answered using the option-elimination mechanism. The first sentence of the passage is as follows: " ...I’ve been following the economic crisis for more than two years now...". It is evident that the author has been following {events/information associated with} the economic crisis for at least two years if not more. Thus, Option A is a sensible inference to draw from this statement. Options B, C and D are inane interpretations of the same and can be effortlessly eliminated. 

In the final paragraph, the author highlights the crisis as an ironical situation: a group of individualistic entities facing an issue with collective impact and thereby, needs to be dealt with "together" or by shifting from the existing self-centred setup {"...That’s one of the strangest ironies of this story: after decades in which the ideology of the Western world was personally and economically individualistic, we’ve suddenly been hit by a crisis which shows in the starkest terms that whether we like it or not—and there are large parts of it that you would have to be crazy to like—we’re all in this together...."}. Option D is the closest choice that captures this element. Option A is contrary to the point presented in the concluding para. Options B and C are either divergent to the point made or merely distorted comments. Hence, Option D is the correct answer. 

A predominant idea discussed by the author is regarding the lack of financial literacy that could be truly beneficial to our understanding of the world. This is emphasised via the following excerpt: 

{...It seems to me that there is a much bigger gap between the world of finance and that of the general public and that there is a need to narrow that gap, if the financial industry is not to be a kind of priesthood, administering to its own mysteries and feared and resented by the rest of us. Many bright, literate people have no idea about all sorts of economic basics, of a type that financial insiders take as elementary facts of how the world works. I am an outsider to finance and economics, and my hope is that I can talk across that gulf....} 

Option C aligns with this concern and is, consequently, an idea that the author is bound to support. Option B appears as another likely candidate; however, economic research is not one of the focal points mentioned. Options A and D contain elements that are not discussed or are opposite to the author's ideas. Hence, Option C is a programme that the author is most likely to be supportive of.

Let us inspect the individual options:

Option A: If true, this statement could be antithetical to the point put forth in the concluding paragraph: the author believes that an individualistic ideology isn't the right way forward; instead, we need to deal with such crises collectively. Thus, this is a conflicting viewpoint and thereby, the correct answer. 

Option B: If true, aligns with the author's point in the first paragraph: {...It seems to me that there is a much bigger gap between the world of finance and that of the general public and that there is a need to narrow that gap, if the financial industry is not to be a kind of priesthood, administering to its own mysteries and feared and resented by the rest of us...} 

Options C and D: If true, this is in tune with the author's claim {made in the final segment} about dealing with such crises together. 

Hence, of the given statements, Options A deviates from the author's argument and thus, is the correct answer. 

On skimming through the statements, it is evident that Options A and D do very little, if at all anything, to support the author's claim. Option C, in its current form, aligns with the author's assertion; however, if false, it is opposite to the author's argument about financial literacy {on negating the statement, it indicates that most people do have an understanding of the workings of the financial world}. Option B, if false, is in line with the assertions made in the concluding paragraph. 

Option A: This author will agree with this assertion. It has been mentioned in the third para: {... For some kids, there is premature thinning of their cerebral cortex...}.

Option B: Reduction in human contact or social engagement is one of the negative impacts of screen time that the author highlights in the passage. Option B is antithetical to this presentation and is, hence, not a claim that the author is likely to endorse. 

Option C: The author states this element in the third para: {... In adults, one study found an association between screen time and depression...}

Option D: A point along similar lines has been presented in the fifth para: {...There are fleets of psychologists and neuroscientists on staff at big tech companies working to hook eyes and minds to the screen as fast as possible and for as long as possible. And so human contact is rare...}

Hence, Option B is the correct answer.

At the very beginning, the author highlights the disparity in the screen time with regard to the wealthy and the common masses: {...As more screens appear in the lives of the poor, screens are disappearing from the lives of the rich. The richer you are, the more you spend to be off-screen...}. The statement in Option B supplements this assertion by further highlighting this observed difference in activity between the rich and the common: {...As more screens appear in the lives of the poor, screens are disappearing from the lives of the rich. The richer you are, the more you spend to be off-screen...}. None of the other options can be attached to the given statements. Hence, Option B is the correct answer.

The following excerpt from the fourth paragraph throws light into this matter: {...Tech companies worked hard to get public schools to buy into programs that required schools to have one laptop per student, arguing that it would better prepare children for their screen-based future. But this idea isn’t how the people who actually build the screen-based future raise their own children...}. It is understood that though tech companies manipulate public schools into engaging in a process involving more screen time, they avoid a similar course of activity when it comes to their own children {whom they subject to a screen-free education and upbringing}. Option D aptly captures this two-facedness. Option B is a distorted interpretation, while Options A and C cannot be inferred from the passage. 

Hence, Option D is the correct answer.

Option A: The author has already discussed a point along similar lines towards the end of the passage: {...There is also the reality that in our culture of increasing isolation, in which so many of the traditional gathering places and social structures have disappeared, screens are filling a crucial void...}. Hence, the author definitely considers this as one of the causes behind the increase in screen time.

Option B: The discussion in passage 4 and 5 highlights how the tech companies have {perhaps successfully} convinced schools to integrate a screen-based educational culture to prepare students for a "screen-based future". Thus, this is another factor that the author attributes to the rise in screen time.

Option C: This aspect has been discussed towards the end of the passage: {...There is a small movement to pass a “right to disconnect” bill, which would allow workers to turn their phones off, but for now, a worker can be punished for going offline and not being available...}. Hence, the author considers this as another factor contributing to the increase in screen time. 

Option D: There is no discussion mentioning or detailing the elements presented in D. Thus, we cannot conclusively comment on whether the author is likely to agree with this point. 

Hence, Option D is the correct answer.

Statement (2) introduces us to certain evolutionary influences in the bodily mechanisms of animals, especially mammals (bats). Statement (4) continues on the observed influence on the various apparatuses in mammals, specifically in the case of the most complex human organ: the central nervous system (CNS). The author mentions that the example of exaptation and Russian dolls serve to assist in our understanding of this complex organ (CNS). The significance of the Russian dolls is elaborated in Statement (3), specifically with regard to its structural implications: " smaller structures are contained within larger ones in multiple layers"—this portryas the presence of some structural hierarchy that can be observed in such complex apparatuses. Statement (1) highlights how the complex elements in the CNS are organised in a “nested hierarchic criterion", thereby, serving as a continuation to (3). Therefore, (2)-(4)-(3)-(1) forms a coherent paragraph. 

Statement (4) opens the discussion by mentioning an "antitrust law" and a few essential features attached to it. Statement (1) further describes this provision {"...It advocated..." }: the move to support an efficient market and curb anti-competitive practises. Statement (2) then elaborates on the latter point of anticompetitive practices and subsequently, highlights the relevance of this provision. Statement (3) further emphasises the  necessity of  "new legal solutions" to deal with the elements discussed earlier {in (2) and (3)}. Hence, (4)-(1)-(2)-(3) forms a logical arrangement. 

On reading the statements, the arrangement (2)-(4)-(1)-(5) can be linked to form a paragraph, while Statement (3) stands out. Statements (2) and (4) talk about hate speech detection and the algorithms involved, while Statements (1) and (5) indicate the issue associated with the aforementioned algorithms. Hence, (3) is the odd one out.

Statement (1) talks about how the "logic" of determining a woman's inner quality boiled down to the distinction between the perception of "being a woman and being feminine". Statement (5) highlights the difference in this understanding: the former being a 'biological category' and latter being a 'process'. Statement (2) continues on the manner in which the measure of "feminine ideal" was dependent on a woman's appearance. Statement (4) continues on this line by presenting how the incapacity to meet up to this ideal led to the denigration of working-class women and women of colour. We notice that Statement (3) is the odd one out here.

One predominant viewpoint: language originated to exchange factual information

An alternative viewpoint: language originated to facilitate social bonding and consequently, to ensure human survival.

The summary needs to highlight these two core viewpoints. Option C does this without deviating from the discussion.

Option A: The evolution of language is not the focal point here; the views held in this regard are. {"language has been continuously evolving to higher forms"} Thus, we can eliminate this option since it comes across as a misrepresentation.

Option B: This is a trap wherein the statement captures both the core viewpoints but there is a distortion involved: "...From the belief ..."  to "...scholars now..." indicates a shift in the viewpoint. However, this is not the case - the author simply states two prevalent perspectives on the subject. 

Option D: is again a distortion since experts are not "challenging any views; the author simply highlights the presence of two viewpoints {no conflict presented}

Hence, Option C is the correct answer.

The paragraph discusses two essential elements: it begins by presenting the facet of autonomy enjoyed by the representative in Aesthetic political representation and then highlights the cultivation of "disinterestedness" in this regard. Additionally, the author distinctly identifies the aforementioned concept as being not the same as that of "indifference". Post this, towards the end. The author presents the reason behind this assertion. Option B correctly captures these two aspects without distorting the overall meaning.

Option A: The author does not claim that the autonomy "manifested" through disinterestedness. 

Option C: The statement here contains added elements which cannot be inferred from the passage. 

Option D: This alternative fails to capture the essence of the discussion and describes a single component. {'political representation' might again be incorrect}

Hence, of the given summaries, Option B aptly captures the substance of the passage.

There are two key points discussed in the passage:

1. The prospect of "metabolic theory" being foundational to the field of ecology; the same as is the case in (2)

2. Genetic theory being the conceptual basis of evolutionary biology {given the diverse and extensive theoretical approaches and models available}. 

Thus, the summary needs to capture both these points. Option B fulfils this requirement.

Option A: is a distorted claim since it is not implied in the passage; the author does not assert that "metabolic theory need not evolve in a similar manner".  

Option C: is again a misinterpretation because the author does not claim that metabolic theory "must" contribute in a similar fashion. Instead, the focus is on the "potential" of this theory.

Option D: is divergent since the author does not discuss the "success" of a theory.

Hence, Option B is the correct answer.

Statement (3) opens the paragraph by introducing the subject: seven popular Japanese deities who bring good luck. Statement (1) then comments on the aspect of good fortune followed by statements (4) and (2). Statement (4) clarifies how only two of these seven entities qualify as indigenous Japanese gods while Statement (2) comments on the origin/background of the rest. Hence, (3)-(1)-(4)-(2) forms a coherent arrangement.