Which of the following options best captures the relationship similar to INSPECT : VIVISECT?
XAT 2016 Question Paper - VALR
For the following questions answer them individually
Solution
'Inspect' means to examine something carefully, while 'Vivisect' means to dissect or cut open a living organism for scientific examination - it's a much more invasive, intensive form of inspection.
Option A: Observing is not necessarily a more intensive form of enquiring; these are different activities.
Option B: Exploring isn't a more intensive version of inquiring
Option C: Investigating means to examine systematically, while interrogation is a more intensive, direct questioning of a person. This shows progression from a general examination to a more intensive, targeted approach. This option best captures the relationship.
Option D: A query is a question, while a survey is a broader collection of information, not a more intensive version.These are opposite actions, not varying intensities of the same action
Option E: These are opposite actions, not varying intensities of the same action.
Therefore, Option C is the correct answer.
Read the following poem and answer the question that follows:
I sought a soul in the sea
And found a coral there
Beneath the foam for me
An ocean was all laid bare.
Into my heart’s night
Along a narrow way
I groped; and lo! The light,
An infinite land of day.
Which of the following would best capture the ESSENCE of the poem above?
Solution
Share
The author wants to convey that if we search our inner self, we can find the truth and reality. Using the analogy of oceans and his own heart, he has reiterated this point. Option C concurs with this.
Option A is extreme.
Other options are out of scope.
Hence, option C is the correct answer.
“Assumptions are analogous to the basic ingredients in a gourment recipe. Only the final product of the recipe dictates whether the ingredients suffice………”
Which of the following is ANALOGOUS to the statement above?
Solution
It can be inferred from the given line that assumptions are analogous to ingredients in a recipe. Only the taste of the final food can tell whether the ingredients were appropriate or not. Option E is the most relevant.
Hence, option E is the correct answer.
The FIRST and the LAST sentences of the paragraph are numbered 1 & 6. The others, labelled as P, Q, R and S are given below:
1.Suppose I know someone, Smith.
P. One day you come to me and say: “Smith is in Cambridge.”
Q. I inquire, and find you stood at Guildhall and saw at the other end a man and said: “That was Smith.”
R. I’d say: “Listen. This isn’t sufficient evidence.”
S. I’ve heard that he has been killed in a battle in this war.
6. If we had a fair amount of evidence he was killed I would try to make you say that you’re being credulous.
Which of the following combinations is the MOST LOGICALLY ORDERED?
Solution
Statement S is connected to statement 1 in which the author provides information about Smith and his knowledge about him.
'Inquire' in statement Q refers to the fact mentioned in statement P. So, statement Q should follow P. 'Evidence' mentioned in statement R refers to the argument mentioned in statement Q. So, statement R should follow statement Q. Thus, the correct order is 1 - S - P - Q - R - 6.
Hence, option A is the correct answer.
The FIRST and the LAST sentences of the paragraph are numbered 1 & 6. The others, labelled as P, Q, R and S are given below:
1. The word “symmetry” is used here with a special meaning, and therefore needs to be defined.
P. For instance, if we look at a vase that is left-and-right symmetrical, then turn it 180° around the vertical axis, it looks the same.
Q. When we have a picture symmetrical, one side is somehow the same as the other side.
R. When is a thing symmetrical - how can we define it?
S. Professor Hermann Weyl has given this definition of symmetry: a thing is symmetrical if one can subject it to a certain operation and it appears exactly the same after operation.
6.We shall adopt the definition of symmetry in Weyl’s more general form, and in that form we shall discuss symmetry of physical laws.
Which of the following combinations is the MOST LOGICALLY ORDERED?
Solution
Statement R will come first as it asks a question. Statement Q answers the question asked in statement R. Statement S provides one definition of 'symmetry' and statement P further elaborates the definition. Thus, the correct order is 1 - R - Q - S - P - 6.
Hence, option D is the correct answer.
In recent past, Indian football team has lost most of the matches in international football tournaments. The most successful coaches in Indian club football tournaments are from Latin American countries. In most of the Latin American countries, football is more popular sport than cricket.
From the passage above, choose the correct option:
Solution
There is no mention of popularity of cricket in India. Option A cannot be concluded.
It is given that football is popular in Latin America. But, we cannot conclude that football is also successful there. Option B cannot be inferred.
The paragraph gives information about coaches of Indian club football teams. We cannot infer option C.
Option D is out of the scope of the passage.
Option E is true that the relation between expertise of a coach and the popularity of that sport in his country cannot be established based on the information provided in the passage.
hence, option E is the correct answer.
Choose the best pronunciation of the word, Sobriquet, from the following options:
Solution
The correct pronunciation of "sobriquet" is "soh-bruh-key".
Hence, option A is the correct answer.
Consider the two related statements below:
Statement I: Offices and positions for the marginalized sections should be open to those with greater savings among them.
Statement II: Offices and positions must be open to everyone based on the principle of fair opportunity
Which of the following is true?
Solution
Supporting equal opportunity does not contradict meritocracy. Option C is wrong.
Statement I does not assume that marginalized sections of society are incapable of saving or that they depend on subsidies. Options A and E are, therefore, irrelevant.
Statement II mentions that offices and positions must be 'open to everyone' based on 'fair opportunity,' therefore, it assumes that opportunities are open to everyone or that everyone is exposed to opportunities, which is an unfounded assumption. Option B is correct.
Statement II only talks about opportunity, and does not mention equal competence or intelligence, option D is, therefore, incorrect.
This season will pass. The Prime Minister may not win Lok Sabha elections, or she may; she may not continue as Prime Minister, or she may. The country will survive whatever the texture of politics in this decade or the next.
Which of the following, IF TRUE, will BEST reinforce the author’s view?
Solution
Option A and B are irrelevent.
Option C is contradictory to what author states, because then if prime minister falls country will not be able to survive.
The main point of the passage is country will survive as it is independent of any other factors.
The author is presenting several alternative futures and stating that the country would thrive in every future and this fact will not depend on any of the current factors responsible. If this thing would have happened earlier also and the country is still thriving, this will most strongly support the author's argument.
Hence, option D is the correct answer.
The subject of this book is knavery, skullduggery, cheating, betrayal, unfairness, crime, sneakiness, malingering, cutting corner, immorality, dishonesty, betrayal, graft, wickedness, and sin.
Which of the following options best captures ALL the italicized words above?
Solution
Some of the behaviours mentioned above are aggressive, some are illegal, some are banned. So, the common umbrella under which all these behaviours would come is "deviant behaviours".
Hence, option C is the correct answer.
Read the following conversation:
OINOS: I can comprehend you thus far-that certain operations of what we term Nature, or the natural laws, will, under certain conditions, give rise to that which has all the appearance of creation. Shortly before the final overthrow of the earth, there were, I well remember, many very successful experiments in what some philosophers were weak enough to denominate the creation of animaculae.
AGATHOS: The cases of which you speak were, in fact, instances of the secondary creation - and of the only species of creation which has ever been, since the first word spoke into existence the first law.
Which of the following options CANNOT be DEFINITELY inferred based on the above conversation?
Solution
In the given passage, nowhere in the conversation is it stated that philosophers created natural laws. Oinos only mentions that some philosophers mistakenly referred to the creation of animaculae as true creation, but this does not imply that they themselves created natural laws. Therefore, the correct answer is option D.
Option A: Agathos discusses "secondary creation" and explains that the only type of creation that has occurred is through natural laws.
Option B: Oinos mentions "shortly before the final overthrow of the earth," implying that the Earth no longer exists at the time of the conversation.
Option C: Oinos states that certain natural laws give rise to the appearance of creation, and he recalls successful experiments in creating animaculae. Agathos confirms these as "secondary creation," which aligns with natural laws.
Option E: Agathos says, "since the first word spoke into existence the first law," implying that law was created through a spoken command.
… there is a degree of convergence in the definition of trust which can be summarized as follows: Trust is a particular level of the subjective probability with which an agent assesses that another agent or group of agents will perform a particular action. When we say we trust someone or that someone is trustworthy, we implicitly mean that the probability that he will perform an action that is beneficial to us….
Which of the following statement BEST COMPLETES the passage above?
Solution
"Trust is a particular level of the subjective probability with which an agent assesses that another agent or group of agents will perform a particular action."
Options A, C, and E can be eliminated as they are irrelevant to the current discussion of trust to 'perform a particular action'.
Option B: The passage suggests that trust is based on a high subjective probability that another person will act beneficially. In such cases, we would feel comfortable engaging in cooperation because we believe the other party will act fairly. Thus, this is the correct option.
Option D : While trust may reduce the need for defenses, the passage defines trust as expecting beneficial actions, not merely the absence of aggression. This option emphasizes defense and aggression too much, rather than positive cooperation. Thus,we can eliminate this
The correct option is B.
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:
An effective way of describing what interpersonal communication is or is not, is perhaps to capture the underlying beliefs using specific game analogies.
Communication as Bowling: The bowling model of message delivery is probably the most widely held view of communication. I think that’s unfortunate. This model sees the bowler as the sender, who delivers the ball, which is the message. As it rolls down the lane (the channel), clutter on the boards (noise) may deflect the ball (the message). Yet if it is aimed well, the ball strikes the passive pins (the target audience) with a predictable effect. In this one - way model of communication, the speaker (bowler) must take care to select a precisely crafted message (ball) and practice diligently to deliver it the same way every time. Of course, that makes sense only if target listeners are interchangeable, static pins waiting to be bowled over by our words - which they aren’t.
This has led some observers to propose an interactive model of interpersonal communication.
Communication as Ping - Pong: Unlike bowling, Ping - Pong is not a solo game. This fact alone makes it a better analogy for interpersonal communication. One party puts the conversational ball in play, and the other gets into position to receive. It takes more concentration and skill to receive than to serve because while the speaker (server) knows where the message is going, the listener (receive) doesn’t. Like a verbal or nonverbal message, the ball may appear straightforward yet have a deceptive spin. Ping - Pong is a back - and - forth game; players switch roles continuously. One moment the
person holding the paddle is an initiator; the next second the same player is a responder, gauging the effectiveness of his or her shot by the way the ball comes back. The repeated adjustment essential for good play closely parallels the feedback process described in a number of interpersonal communication theories.
Communication as Dumb Charades The game of charades best captures the simultaneous and collaborative nature of interpersonal communication. A charade is neither an action, like bowling a strike, nor an interaction, like a rally in Ping - Pong. It’s a transaction. Charades is a mutual game; the actual play is cooperative. One member draws a title or slogan from a batch of possibilities and then tries to act it out visually for teammates in a silent mini drama. The goal is to get at least one partner to say the exact words that are on the slip of paper. Of course, the actor is prohibited from talking out loud. Suppose you drew the saying “God helps those who help themselves.” For God you might try folding your hands and gazing upward. For helps you could act out offering a helping hand or giving a leg - up boost over a fence. By pointing at a number of real or imaginary people you may elicit a response of them, and by this point a partner may shout out, “God helps those who help themselves.” Success.
Like charades, interpersonal communication is a mutual, on - going process of sending, receiving, and adapting verbal and nonverbal messages with another person to create and alter images in both of our minds. Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlap increases. But even if our mental pictures are congruent, communication will be partial as long as we interpret them differently. The idea that “God helps those who help themselves’ could strike one person as a hollow promise, while the other might regard it as a divine stamp of approval for hard work. Dumb Charade goes beyond the simplistic analogy of bowling and ping pong. It views interpersonal communications as a complex transaction in which overlapping messages simultaneously affect and are affected by the other person and multiple other factors.
The meaning CLOSEST to ‘interchangeable’ in the ‘Communication as Bowling’ paragraph is:
Solution
The word interchangeable means "equivalent/similar". Among the options, only E has the given meaning and hence, is the answer.
Complementary means something that enhances the effect.
Contiguous means sharing a border/touching.
Conforming means complying with rules, standards, or laws.
Compatible means existing without causing a conflict.
Hence, the answer is option E.
Which of the following options is the CLOSEST to the necessary condition of communication:
Solution
The passage states "Communication between us begins when there is some overlap between two images, and is effective to the extent that overlap increases."
This suggests that communication requires a shared understanding between participants. The necessary condition for communication is not just exchange, response, or emotion, but rather the overlap of shared mental images, making option A the best choice.
Option B: While communication involves exchange, the passage emphasizes shared understanding rather than just the act of exchange.
Option C: Affect or Emotions can be part of communication, but they are not the necessary condition.
Option D: The charades analogy is used to explain communication but does not mean that enacting a drama is a necessary condition.
Option E: Responses are part of communication, but the passage stresses that communication is only effective when shared mental images overlap.
The two inherent LIMITATIONS of Ping - Pong as a metaphor for communication are:
Solution
The passage describes the Ping-Pong model of communication as interactive, where roles continuously switch between the speaker (server) and the listener (receiver). However, it also has limitations that make it an imperfect metaphor for real-life communication. The limitations are a "limited number of players" and "rules fixed by regulators," as mentioned in option C.
Option A: "possibility for appeal" is not mentioned in the passage; hence, this option is rejected.
Option B: The author says that the spin is deceptive, which means that it is not always predictable. Hence, this option is rejected.
Option D: The author does not say that ping-pong is as passive as bowling. Thus, this option is rejected.
Option E: This option is not about ping-pong and is hence, rejected.
Action, interaction and transaction is CLOSEST to:
Solution
"Action" refers to one-way contact, "Interaction" to a two-way, and "Transaction" refers to a two-way interaction with cooperation from both sides.
Taking these points into account, among the options, A is the answer.
Advertising: the advertiser displays his content without expecting a direct response.
Buyer negotiating with a seller: It is a two-way contact as both parties have to communicate with each other.
Bidding for a player in the Indian Premier League: This involves a transaction as there are multiple bidders and players involved who interact with each other.
Hence, the answer is option A.
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:
Advances in economic theory in the 1970s and 1980s illuminated the limits of markets; they showed that unfettered markets do not lead to economic efficiency whenever information is imperfect or markets are missing (for instance, good insurance markets to cover the key risks confronting individuals). And information is always imperfect and markets are always incomplete. Nor do markets, by themselves, necessarily lead to economic efficiency when the task of a country is to absorb new technology, to close the “knowledge gap”: a central feature of development. Today, most academic economists agree that markets, by themselves, do not lead to efficiency; the question is whether government can improve matters.
While it is difficult for economics to perform experiments to test their theories, as a chemist or a physicist might, the world provides a vast array of natural experiments as dozens of countries try different strategies. Unfortunately, because each country differs in its history and circumstances and in the myriad of details in the policies - and details do matter - it is often difficult to get a clear interpretation. What is clear, however, is that there have been marked differences in performance, that the most successful countries have been those in Asia, and that in most of the Asian countries, government played a very active role. As we look more carefully at the effects of particular policies, these conclusions are reinforced: there is a remarkable congruence between what economic theory says government should do and what the East Asian governments actually did. By the same token, the economic theories based on imperfect information and incomplete risk markets that predicted that the free flow of short-term capital - a key feature of market fundamentalist policies - would produce not growth but instability have also been borne out.
“… whether government can improve matters”. Here ‘matters’ indicates
Solution
The phrase "whether government can improve matters" follows a discussion on how unfettered markets do not always result in economic efficiency due to imperfect information and incomplete markets. The passage emphasizes that while markets alone fail to achieve efficiency, the question remains whether government intervention can enhance economic outcomes. Therefore, "matters" here refers to economic efficiency, as stated in Option A.
Which of the following options CANNOT be inferred from the above passage?
Solution
Option A: It can be inferred from the last statement: "free flow of short-term capital - a key feature of market fundamentalist policies - would produce not growth but instability have also been borne out."
Option B: It can be inferred from the first line of the paragraph where the example is given.
Option C: It can be inferred from the last paragraph where the author says that the economic progress of Asian countries is difficult to understand as they did not follow the principles of the economic theory mentioned in the passage.
Option D: It can be inferred from the first paragraph: "Nor do markets, by themselves, necessarily lead to economic efficiency when the task of a country is to absorb new technology"
Option E: It cannot be inferred from the passage as the example of Asia in the last paragraph contradicts it.
Hence, the answer is option E.
Which of the following statements BEST captures the ESSENCE of the two paragraphs in the above passage?
Solution
Paragraph (I) talks about the various factors that could lead to the failure of a market.
Paragraph (II) states how the market theories fail to explain the success of some Asian economies where the governments play a significant role in regulating the market.
Hence, option C is the best choice for the answer.
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:
The base of Objectivism according to Ayan Rand is explicit: “Existence exists - and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists processing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.”
Existence and consciousness are facts implicit in every perception. They are the base of all knowledge (and the precondition of proof): knowledge presupposes something to know and someone to know it. They are absolutes which cannot be questioned or escaped: every human utterance, including the denial of these axioms, implies their use and acceptance. The third axiom at the base of knowledge - an axioms true, in Aristotle’s words, of “being qua
being” - is the Law of Identity. This law defines the essence of existence: to be is to be something, a thing is what it is; and leads to the fundamental principle of all action, the law of causality. The law of causality states that a thing’s actions are determined not by chance, but by its nature, i.e. by what it is. It is important to observe the interrelation of these three axioms. Existence is the first axiom. The universe exists independent of consciousness. Man is able to adapt his background to his own requirements, but “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” (Francis Bacon). There is no mental process that can change the laws of nature or erase facts. The function of consciousness is not to create reality, but to apprehend it. “Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.”
Which of the following is DEFINITELY CORRECT according to the passage:
Solution
Option D is definitely correct according to the passage, as it aligns with the statement that consciousness is the faculty of perceiving what exists. Without consciousness, perception would not be possible.
Option A: The passage states that existence is independent of perception, meaning that even if something is not perceived, it still exists.
Option B: Not everything that exists is necessarily perceived. The passage states that consciousness does not create reality, it only apprehends it.
Option C: The passage does not claim that nothing that exists has consciousness. Instead, it states that existence is primary, and some entities possess consciousness.
Option E: This suggests that for something to exist, there must be both an object to be known and a conscious being to perceive it. However, this contradicts the central idea of Objectivism, which asserts that existence is independent of consciousness.
Which of the following is the ESSENCE of ‘The law of Causality’?
Solution
The Law of Causality, as described in the passage, is derived from the Law of Identity, which states that "to be is to be something." This means that everything has a specific nature, and its actions are determined by what it is. Regarding The Law of Causality, the author states, "The law of causality states that a thing’s actions are determined not by chance, but by its nature, i.e., by what it is." This aligns with option E, which captures the essence of causality—an entity acts according to its inherent characteristics.
Option A: This refers to the Law of Identity, from which the Law of Causality is derived, but it does not capture the exact essence of the Law of Causality
Option B: The Law of Causality states that an entity’s actions are determined by its nature, not merely that it cannot change by wishing. While Objectivism rejects the idea of altering reality through desire, this option does not directly capture causality, making it incorrect.
Option C: The two are related but distinct. The Law of Identity states that "a thing is itself," while the Law of Causality states that "a thing acts according to its nature."
Option D:The Law of Causality is about how things behave based on their nature, not merely the essence of existence itself.
Which of the following can be best captured as ‘Identity’ and ‘Identification,?
Solution
In the last line of the passage, the author says, “Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.”
Thus, the existence of something is identity, and the knowledge of the existence of that thing is identification. This analogy is best captured in option B.
The author would interpret Francis Bacon’s “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” as:
Solution
The author says that "There is no mental process that can change the laws of nature or erase facts" and that man should adapt to it and not try to change it.
Thus, among the options, E is the best choice for the answer.
Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:
Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected. The principal of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific “truth.” But what is the source of
knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations - to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess.
We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the “wrong” ones, and then we find the “right” ones. Now, how can an experiment be “wrong”? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a “law” was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That “law” is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found is to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light. A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the wrong we are. Finally, and most interesting, philosophically we are completely wrong with the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws. Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.
Which of the following options is DEFINITLY NOT an approximation to the complete truth?
Solution
Among the options, A, B, C, and E are approximations of the complete truth. Option D, on the other hand, is not. It presents an impossible scenario of "knowing what we don't know".
Hence, the answer is option D.
Consider the two statements from the passage:
Statement I: The mass of an object never seems to change.
Statement II: Mass is found to increase with velocity.
Which of the following options CANNOT be concluded from the above passage?
Solution
The author never mentions that theoretical physicists can pinpoint the shortcomings of experimental physicists. Thus, option E is the answer.
Options A, B, C and D can be concluded from the passage.
‘Big Bang’ is a popular theory related to the origin of the universe. It states that the universe was the outcome of a big bang that released enormous energy.
Which of the following is the MOST PROBABLE inference about the big bang theory?
Solution
The passage describes how scientific knowledge is developed through both theoretical and experimental approaches. It states that theoretical physicists "imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws", while experimental physicists test these ideas through experiments. Since the Big Bang Theory involves a proposed explanation for the universe’s origin, it is most likely to have been first formulated by theoretical physicists, based on reasoning and imagination, before being tested or supported by experimental findings. Therefore, Option B is the most probable inference.
Options A and C can be rejected as experimental physicists could not have been able to perform an experiment like the Big Bang.
Option D is rejected as it talks about philosophers.
Option E is invalidated by the first line of the passage.
