IPM Indore 2025 Question Paper

In the first paragraph, the author writes, "Yet, that is the nature of the social media beast, designed to amplify bias." From this, we can infer that the author considers the inherent nature of social media to amplify bias its biggest negative. This argument about 'bias' is best expressed in option C, 'prejudice' is spread by social media due to its inherent nature.

The author writes: "However, consumption does not usually lead to happiness. While consumers should ideally be blaming their heightened expectations for their lack of happiness, they blame the commodity instead.

They feel that they should have waited for the next version of a mobile phone or automobile before buying the one they did. The version they bought is somehow inferior and therefore cannot make them happy. Baudrillard argues that consumers have replaced 'real' happiness with 'signs' of happiness. This results in the endless deferment of the arrival of total happiness."

From this we can infer that the consumer is usually confused with the commodities (or the signs of happiness) being the same as real happiness. If a person is to realise this distinction, he will come to understand how can consumption be made more satisfying.  This is captured in option B, therefore, it is the correct answer.

From "Baudrillard argues that consumers have replaced 'real' happiness with 'signs' of happiness," we can infer option A to be true. Option B is way too narrow in the context of the arguments presented in the passage. Option C borrow the word 'magical' from what the Melanesian people considered planes to be as adjectives to describe production and consumption, and is incorrect. Option D is not talked about in the passage and can also be eliminated.

Baudrillard discusses the cargo myth of the Melanesian people because he believes it is "an important analogy for the ways in which consumers engage with objects of consumption." Option B captures this and is the correct answer. Options A, C, and D, are not said to be the reasons why Baudrillard uses this analogy and are all not the correct answer.

The author says that the consumers view commodities as signs of happiness and buy them for this very reason, he mentions that ".. as a result, commodities appear to be distanced from the social processes which lead to their production. In effect, objects of consumption are divorced from the reality which produces them." Option B is narrow and can be eliminated. Option C is not discussed in the passage and can also be eliminated. Option D is a distortion to the 'real vs signs of happiness' aspect of commodities. Option A is the only option which captures the arguments made in the passage, and is, therefore, the correct answer.

The passage clarifies that "Baudrillard argues that consumers have replaced 'real' happiness with 'signs' of happiness. This results in the endless deferment of the arrival of total happiness." We can thus infer that, according to Baudrillard, at least when it comes to consumption, happiness is perpetually delayed. Option A is likely the correct answer. Option B emphasises on patience and waiting, which have not been discussed in the passage. Option C implies that happiness prioritises product overconsumption, which is not true as it's the want of happiness that might lead to overconsumption, happiness itself is free from 'signs' of happiness. Option D has also not been discussed in the passage.

Baudrillard argues that consumption can never cause happiness. He puts forward arguments that support his proposition. For him, therefore, consumption is not a reasonable process as it inhibits the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, option D, 'consumption is an irrational process' is the likely answer.

The phrases given in the options have the following meanings them:

1. put him down: the phrase simply means to put someone down
2. put him aside: it might imply ignoring, but it does not have an indirect meaning usually
3. put up with him: the phrase means to tolerate someone (or their actions, despite them being bad)
4. put along with him: although it might not have a meaning in particular, it can be close to the meaning of 'go along with'
   

In the given sentence, Deepak is described as an unpleasant person. It makes sense that people are tolerating him because they have a friend who is a close relative of his; therefore, option C is the correct answer.

"Usher in" means to mark the beginning of something; it fits perfectly in this context, as the people are hoping that the new government will bring economic growth; "set in" is also used to mark beginnings, but it is primarily used in a negative context, which is not the tone here. Hence, usher in is a better choice here. 

"Turn up" means to increase, and "set forth " means to present ideas, neither of which aligns with the semantic demands of the context.

Hence, the correct option here is (A) usher in 

When the woman inherited jewellery from a distant relative, she didn't know its value and needed to take action to determine its worth. The correct phrase to complete the sentence is "to have it appraised" (Option C) because this specifically means getting a professional valuation of the jewellery's monetary worth. This is exactly what someone would do when they inherit valuable items and need to understand their financial value.

The other options don't fit the context correctly. "To get an approval" (Option A) would mean seeking permission rather than determining value. "To get it appreciated" (Option B)suggests making the jewellery more valued emotionally, not assessing its price. "To have it apprised" (Option D) is incorrect because "apprise" means to inform someone about something, which has nothing to do with valuation. Only "appraised" correctly describes the process of professionally evaluating the jewellery's worth.

Option C is the correct choice here.