How to prepare for verbal ability and reading comprehension - Sharma Arun, Upadhyay Meenakshi 2014

CAT Paper 2006
Section 1: CAT papers
Part 4: CAT papers (Real and sample)

SECTION A (ENGLISH)

This section contains 25 questions.

Directions for Questions 1 to 5: Each question has a set of four sequentially ordered statements. Each statement can be classified as one of the following:

Facts, which deal with pieces of information that one has heard, seen or read, and which are open to discovery or verification (the answer option indicates such a statement with an ’F’).

Inferences, which are conclusions drawn about the unknown, on the basis of the known (the answer option indicates such a statement with an ’I’).

Judgments, which are opinions that imply approval or disapproval of persons, objects, situations and occurrences in the past, the present or the future (the answer option indicates such a statement with a ’J’).

Select the answer option that best describes the set of four statements.

Directions for Questions 6 to 10: Each of the following questions has a paragraph from which the last sentence has been deleted. From the given options, choose the one that completes the paragraph in the most appropriate way.

6.I am sometimes attacked for imposing ’rules’. Nothing could be further from the truth: I hate rules. All I do is report on how consumers react to different stimuli. I may say to a copywriter, “Research shows that commercials with celebrities are below average in persuading people to buy products. Are you sure you want to use a celebrity?” Call that a rule? Or I may say to an art director, “Research suggests that if you set the copy in black type on a white background, more people will read it than if you set it in white type on a black background.”

(1)Guidance based on applied research can hardly qualify as ’rules’.

(2)Thus, all my so-called ’rules’ are rooted in applied research.

(3)A suggestion perhaps, but scarcely a rule.

(4)Such principles are unavoidable if one wants to be systematic about consumer behaviour.

(5)Fundamentally, it is about consumer behaviour—not about celebrities or type settings.

7.Relations between the factory and the dealer are distant and usually strained as the factory tries to force cars on the dealers to smooth out production. Relations between the dealer and the customer are equally strained because dealers continuously adjust prices—make deals—to adjust demand with supply while maximising profits. This becomes a system marked by ’a lack of long-term commitment on either side, which maximises feelings of mistrust. In order to maximise their bargaining positions, everyone holds back information—the dealer about the product and the consumer about his true desires.

(1)As a result, ’deal making’ becomes rampant, without concern for customer satisfaction.

(2)As a result, inefficiencies creep into the supply chain.

(3)As a result, everyone treats the other as an adversary, rather than as an ally.

(4)As a result, fundamental innovations are becoming scarce in the automobile industry.

(5)As a result, everyone loses in the long run.

8.In the evolving world order, the comparative advantage of the United States lies in its military force: Diplomacy and international law have always been regarded as annoying encumbrances, unless they can be used to advantage against an enemy. Every active player in world affairs professes to seek only peace and to prefer negotiation to violence and coercion.

(1)However, diplomacy has often been used as a mask by nations which intended to use force.

(2)However, when the veil is lifted, we commonly see that diplomacy is used as a disguise for the rule of force.

(3)However, history has shown that many of these nations do not practice what they profess.

(4)However, history tells us that peace is professed by those who intend to use violence.

(5)However, when unmasked, such nations reveal a penchant for the use of force.

9.Age has a curvilinear relationship with the exploitation of opportunity. Initially, age will increase the likelihood that a person will exploit an entrepreneurial opportunity because people gather much of the knowledge necessary to exploit opportunities over the course of their lives, and because age provides credibility in transmitting that information to others. However, as people become older, their willingness to bear risks declines, their opportunity costs rise, and they become less receptive to new information.

(1)As a result, people transmit more information rather than experiment with new ideas as they reach an advanced age.

(2)As a result, people are reluctant to experiment with new ideas as they reach an advanced age.

(3)As a result, only people with lower opportunity costs exploit opportunity when they reach an advanced age.

(4)As a result, people become reluctant to exploit entrepreneurial opportunities when they reach an advanced age.

(5)As a result, people depend on credibility rather than on novelty as they reach an advanced age.

10.We can usefully think of theoretical models as maps, which help us navigate unfamiliar territory. The most accurate map that it is possible to construct would be of no practical use whatsoever, for it would be an exact replica, on exactly the same scale, of the place where we were. Good maps pull out the most important features and throw away a huge amount of much less valuable information. Of course, maps can be bad as well as good—witness the attempts by medieval Europe to produce a map of the world. In the same way, a bad theory, no matter how impressive it may seem in principle, does little or nothing to help us understand a problem.

(1)But good theories, just like good maps, are invaluable, even if they are simplified.

(2)But good theories, just like good maps, will never represent unfamiliar concepts in detail.

(3)But good theories, just like good maps, need to balance detail and feasibility of representation.

(4)But good theories, just like good maps, are accurate only at a certain level of abstraction.

(5)But good theories, just like good maps, are useful in the hands of a user who knows their limitations.

Directions for Questions 11 to 15: The passage given below is followed by a set of five questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

Fifteen years after communism was officially pronounced dead, its spectre seems once again to be haunting Europe. Last month, the Council of Europe’s parliamentary assembly voted to condemn the “crimes of totalitarian communist regimes,” linking them with Nazism and complaining that communist parties are still “legal and active in some countries.” Now Goran Lindblad, the conservative Swedish MP behind the resolution, wants to go further. Demands that European Ministers launch a continent-wide anti-communist campaign—including school textbook revisions, official memorial days, and museums—only narrowly missed the necessary two-thirds majority. Mr. Lindblad pledged to bring the wider plans back to the Council of Europe in the coming months.

He has chosen a good year for his ideological offensive: this is the 50th anniversary of Nikita Khrushchev’s denunciation of Josef Stalin and the subsequent Hungarian uprising, which will doubtless be the cue for further excoriation of the communist record. Paradoxically, given that there is no communist government left in Europe outside Moldova, the attacks have if anything, become more extreme as time has gone on. A clue as to why that might be can be found in the rambling report by Mr. Lindblad that led to the Council of Europe declaration. Blaming class struggle and public ownership, he explained “different elements of communist ideology such as equality or social justice still seduce many” and “a sort of nostalgia for communism is still alive.” Perhaps the real problem for Mr. Lindblad and his right-wing allies in Eastern Europe is that communism is not dead enough—and they will only be content when they have driven a stake through its heart.

The fashionable attempt to equate communism and Nazism is in reality a moral and historical nonsense. Despite the cruelties of the Stalin terror, there was no Soviet Treblinka or Sorbibor, no extermination camps built to murder millions. Nor did the Soviet Union launch the most devastating war in history at a cost of more than 50 million lives—in fact it played the decisive role in the defeat of the German war machine. Mr. Lindblad and the Council of Europe adopt as fact the wildest estimates of those “killed by communist regimes” (mostly in famines) from the fiercely contested Black Book of Communism, which also underplays the number of deaths attributable to Hitler. But, in any case, none of this explains why anyone might be nostalgic in former communist states, now enjoying the delights of capitalist restoration.

The dominant account gives no sense of how communist regimes renewed themselves after 1956 or why Western leaders feared they might overtake the capitalist world well into the 1960s. For all its brutalities and failures, communism in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security, and huge advances in social and gender equality. Its existence helped to drive up welfare standards in the west, and provided a powerful counterweight to western global domination.

It would be easier to take the Council of Europe’s condemnation of communist state crimes seriously if it had also seen fit to denounce the far bloodier record of European colonialism—which only finally came to an end in the 1970s. This was a system of racist despotism, which dominated the globe in Stalin’s time. And while there is precious little connection between the ideas of fascism and communism, there is an intimate link between colonialism and Nazism. The terms lebensraum and konzentrationslager were both first used by the German colonial regime in Southwest Africa (now Namibia), which committed genocide against the Herero and Nama peoples and bequeathed its ideas and personnel directly to the Nazi parry.

Around 10 million Congolese died as a result of Belgian forced labor and mass murder in the early twentieth century; tens of millions perished in avoidable or enforced famines in British-ruled India; up to a million Algerians died in their war for independence, while controversy now rages in France about a new law requiring teachers to put a positive spin on colonial history. Comparable atrocities were carried out by all European colonialists, but not a word of condemnation from the Council of Europe. Presumably, European lives count for more.

No major twentieth century political tradition is without blood on its hands, but battles over history are more about the future than the past. Part of the current enthusiasm in official Western circles for dancing on the grave of communism is no doubt about relations with today’s Russia and China. But it also reflects a determination to prove there is no alternative to the new global capitalist order—and that any attempt to find one is bound to lead to suffering. With the new imperialism now being resisted in the Muslim world and Latin America, growing international demands for social justice and ever greater doubts about whether the environmental crisis can be solved within the existing economic system, the pressure for alternatives will increase.

11.Among all the apprehensions that Mr. Goran Lindblad expresses against communism, which one gets admitted, although indirectly, by the author?

(1)There is nostalgia for communist ideology even if communism has been abandoned by most European nations.

(2)Notions of social justice inherent in communist ideology appeal to critics of existing systems.

(3)Communist regimes were totalitarian and marked by brutalities and large scale violence.

(4)The existing economic order is wrongly viewed as imperialistic by proponents of communism.

(5)Communist ideology is faulted because communist regimes resulted in economic failures.

12.What, according to the author, is the real reason for a renewed attack against communism?

(1)Disguising the unintended consequences of the current economic order such as social injustice and environmental crisis.

(2)Idealising the existing ideology of global capitalism.

(3)Making communism a generic representative of all historical atrocities, especially those perpetrated by the European imperialists.

(4)Communism still survives, in bits and pieces, in the minds and hearts of people.

(5)Renewal of some communist regimes has led to the apprehension that communist nations might overtake the capitalists.

13.The author cites examples of atrocities perpetrated by European colonial regimes in order to

(1)compare the atrocities committed by colonial regimes with those of communist regimes.

(2)prove that the atrocities committed by colonial regimes were more than those of communist regimes.

(3)prove that, ideologically, communism was much better than colonialism and Nazism.

(4)neutralise the arguments of Mr. Lindblad and to point out that the atrocities committed by colonial regimes were more than those of communist regimes.

(5)neutralise the arguments of Mr. Lindblad and to argue that one needs to go beyond and look at the motives of these regimes.

14.Why, according to the author, is Nazism closer to colonialism than it is to communism?

(1)Both colonialism and Nazism were examples of tyranny of one race over another.

(2)The genocides committed by the colonial and the Nazi regimes were of similar magnitude.

(3)Several ideas of the Nazi regime were directly imported from colonial regimes.

(4)Both colonialism and Nazism are based on the principles of imperialism.

(5)While communism was never limited to Europe, both the Nazis and the colonialists originated in Europe.

15.Which of the following cannot be inferred as a compelling reason for the silence of the Council of Europe on colonial atrocities?

(1)The Council of Europe being dominated by erstwhile colonialists.

(2)Generating support for condemning communist ideology.

(3)Unwillingness to antagonise allies by raking up an embarrassing past.

(4)Greater value seemingly placed on European lives.

(5)Portraying both communism and Nazism as ideologies to be condemned.

Directions for Questions 16 to 20: The passage given below is followed by a set of five questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

My aim is to present a conception of justice which generalises and carries to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract. In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular form of government. Rather, the idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are to regulate all further agreements; they specify the kinds of social co-operation that can be entered into and the forms of government that can be established. This way of regarding the principles of justice, I shall call justice as fairness. Thus, we are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Just as each person must decide by rational reflection what constitutes his good, that is, the system of ends which it is rational for him to pursue, so a group of persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust. The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty determines the principles of justice.

In ’justice as fairness,’ the original position is not an actual historical state of affairs. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterised so as to lead to a certain conception of justice. Among the essential features of this situation is that no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain.

Justice as fairness begins with one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely, with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover, assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles, it will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles, those engaged in them can say to one another that they are co-operating on terms to which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this fact would provide the basis for a public acceptance of the corresponding principles of justice. No society can, of course, be a scheme of co-operation which men enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person finds himself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of this position materially affects his life prospects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comes as close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets the principles which free and equal persons would assent to under circumstances that are fair.

16.A just society, as conceptualised in the passage, can be best described as:

(1)A Utopia in which everyone is equal and no one enjoys any privilege based on their existing positions and powers.

(2)A hypothetical society in which people agree upon principles of justice which are fair.

(3)A society in which principles of justice are not based on the existing positions and powers of the individuals.

(4)A society in which principles of justice are fair to all.

(5)A hypothetical society in which principles of justice are not based on the existing positions and powers of the individuals.

17.The original agreement or original position in the passage has been used by the author as:

(1)A hypothetical situation conceived to derive principles of justice which are not influenced by position, status and condition of individuals in the society.

(2)A hypothetical situation in which every individual is equal and no individual enjoys any privilege based on the existing positions and powers.

(3)A hypothetical situation to ensure fairness of agreements among individuals in society.

(4)An imagined situation in which principles of justice would have to be fair.

(5)An imagined situation in which fairness is the objective of the principles of justice to ensure that no individual enjoys any privilege based on the existing positions and powers.

18.Which of the following best illustrates the situation that is equivalent to choosing ’the principles of justice’ behind a ’veil of ignorance’?

(1)The principles of justice are chosen by businessmen, who are marooned on an uninhabited island after a shipwreck, but have some possibility of returning.

(2)The principles of justice are chosen by a group of school children whose capabilities are yet to develop.

(3)The principles of justice are chosen by businessmen, who are marooned on an uninhabited island after a shipwreck and have no possibility of returning.

(4)The principles of justice are chosen assuming that such principles will govern the lives of the rule makers only in their next birth if the rule makers agree that they will be born again.

(5)The principles of justice are chosen by potential immigrants who are unaware of the resources necessary to succeed in a foreign country.

19.Why, according to the passage, do principles of justice need to be based on an original agreement?

(1)Social institutions and laws can be considered fair only if they conform to principles of justice.

(2)Social institutions and laws can be fair only if they are consistent with the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.

(3)Social institutions and laws need to be fair in order to be just.

(4)Social institutions and laws evolve fairly only if they are consistent with the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.

(5)Social institutions and laws conform to the principles of justice as initially agreed upon.

20.Which of the following situations best represents the idea of justice as fairness, as argued in the passage?

(1)All individuals are paid equally for the work they do.

(2)Everyone is assigned some work for his or her livelihood.

(3)All acts of theft are penalised equally.

(4)All children are provided free education in similar schools.

(5)All individuals are provided a fixed sum of money to take care of their health.

Directions for Questions 21 to 25: The passage given below is followed by a set of five questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

Our propensity to look out for regularities, and to impose laws upon nature, leads to the psychological phenomenon of dogmatic thinking or, more generally, dogmatic behaviour: we expect regularities everywhere and attempt to find them even where there are none; events which do not yield to these attempts we are inclined to treat as a kind of ’background noise’; and we stick to our expectations even when they are inadequate and we ought to accept defeat: This dogmatism is to some extent necessary. It is demanded by a situation which can only be dealt with by forcing our conjectures upon the world. Moreover, this dogmatism allows us to approach a good theory in stages, by way of approximations: if we accept defeat too easily, we may prevent ourselves from finding that we were very nearly right.

It is clear that this dogmatic attitude; which makes us stick to our first impressions, is indicative of a strong belief; while a critical attitude, which is ready to modify its tenets, which admits doubt and demands tests, is indicative of a weaker belief. Now according to Hume’s theory, and to the popular theory, the strength of a belief should be a product of repetition; thus it should always grow with experience, and always be greater in less primitive persons. But dogmatic thinking, an uncontrolled wish to impose regularities, a manifest pleasure in rites and in repetition as such, is characteristic of primitives and children; and increasing experience and maturity sometimes create an attitude of caution and criticism rather than of dogmatism.

My logical criticism of Hume’s psychological theory, and the considerations connected with it, may seem a little removed from the field of the philosophy of science. But the distinction between dogmatic and critical thinking, or the dogmatic and the critical attitude, brings us right back to our central problem. For the dogmatic attitude is clearly related to the tendency to verify our laws and schemata by seeking to apply them—and to confirm them, even to the point of neglecting refutations, whereas the critical attitude is one of readiness to change them—to test them; to refute them; to falsify them, if possible. This suggests that we may identify the critical attitude with the scientific attitude, and the dogmatic attitude with the one which we have described as pseudo-scientific. It further suggests that genetically speaking the pseudo-scientific attitude is more primitive than, and prior to, the scientific attitude: that it is a pre-scientific attitude. And this primitivity or priority also has its logical aspect. For the critical attitude is not so much opposed to the dogmatic attitude as super-imposed upon it: criticism must be directed against existing and influential beliefs in need of critical revision—in other words, dogmatic beliefs. A critical attitude needs for its raw material, as it were, theories or beliefs which are held more or less dogmatically.

Thus, science must begin with myths, and with the criticism of myths; neither with the collection of observations, nor with the invention of experiments, but with the critical discussion of myths, and of magical techniques and practices. The scientific tradition is distinguished from the pre-scientific tradition in having two layers. Like the latter, it passes on its theories; but it also passes on a critical attitude towards them. The theories are passed on, not as dogmas, but rather with the challenge to discuss them and improve upon them.

The critical attitude, the tradition of free discussion of theories with the aim of discovering their weak spots so that they may be improved upon, is the attitude of reasonableness, of rationality. From the point of view here developed, all laws, all theories, remain essentially tentative, or conjectural, or hypothetical, even when we feel unable to doubt them any longer. Before a theory has been refuted we can never know in what way it may have to be modified.

21.In the context of science, according to the passage, the interaction of dogmatic beliefs and critical attitude can be best described as:

(1)A duel between two warriors in which one has to die.

(2)The effect of a chisel on a marble stone while making a sculpture.

(3)The feedstock (natural gas) in fertilizer industry being transformed into fertilizers.

(4)A predator killing its prey.

(5)The effect of fertilizers on a sapling.

22.According to the passage, the role of a dogmatic attitude and of dogmatic behaviour in the development of science is

(1)critical and important, as, without it, initial hypotheses or conjectures can never be made.

(2)positive, as conjectures arising out of our dogmatic attitude become science.

(3)negative, as it leads to pseudo-science.

(4)neutral, as the development of science is essentially because of our critical attitude.

(5)inferior to critical attitude, as a critical attitude leads to the attitude of reasonableness and rationality.

23.Dogmatic behaviour, in this passage, has been associated with primitives and children. Which of the following best describes the reason why the author compares primitives with children?

(1)Primitives are people who are not educated, and hence can be compared with children, who have not yet been through school.

(2)Primitives are people who, though not modern, are as innocent as children.

(3)Primitives are people without a critical attitude, just as children are.

(4)Primitives are people in the early stages of human evolution; similarly, children are in the early stages of their lives.

(5)Primitives are people who are not civilised enough, just as children are not.

24.Which of the following statements best supports the argument in the passage that a critical attitude leads to a weaker belief than a dogmatic attitude does?

(1)A critical attitude implies endless questioning, and, therefore, it cannot lead to strong beliefs.

(2)A critical attitude, by definition, is centered on an analysis of anomalies and “noise”.

(3)A critical attitude leads to questioning everything, and in the process generates “noise” without any conviction.

(4)A critical attitude is antithetical to conviction, which is required for strong beliefs.

(5)A critical attitude leads to questioning and to tentative hypotheses.

25.According to the passage, which of the following statements best describes the difference between science and pseudo-science?

(l)Scientific theories or hypothesis are tentatively true whereas pseudo-sciences are always true.

(2)Scientific laws and theories are permanent and immutable whereas pseudo-sciences are contingent on the prevalent mode of thinking in a society.

(3)Science always allows the possibility of rejecting a theory or hypothesis, whereas pseudo-sciences seek to validate their ideas or theories.

(4)Science focuses on anomalies and exceptions so that fundamental truths can be uncovered, whereas pseudo-sciences focus mainly on general truths.

(5)Science progresses by collection of observations or by experimentation, whereas pseudo-sciences do not worry about observations and experiments.

◊ Answer Key

Explanations

1.The first statement disapproves about the focus in today’s life—on getting things done. The second also expresses disapproval about things that we do—at the cost of what we do not. The third statement clearly talks positively about the need to “identify your calling and committing yourself wholeheartedly to it” and so does the last statement. Since all sentences are opinions and value statements having emotion showing words, hence all are judgments. Option (4) is the correct answer.

2.(1) and (4) are opinions. (2) is providing verifiable data so a fact. (3) is an objective conclusion hence an inference. Option (1) is the correct answer.

3.(1) is an objective conclusion drawn on the basis of statistics. (2) and (4) are subjective statements and (3) is a fact showing data. Option (3) is the correct answer.

4.(1), (3) are subjective conclusions with value words. (2) is a fact with data. (4) is an inference based on deductive reasoning. Option (5) is the correct answer.

5.(1), (3) are subjective conclusions with negative and positive connotations with adjective value words. Option (2) is an inference drawn on past experience. Option (4) is a fact with data. Option (2) is the correct answer.

6.The concluding sentence should have a punch to conclude the argument. One of the keys to discover a concluding sentence is that—there either has to be a strong conclusion of the current argument or there should be a strong refutation of the argument. In this case, option (3) is the most succinct closing of the argument. Option (3) is the correct answer.

7.The fifth statement is the most concise conclusion. Option (5) is the correct answer.

8.Paragraph clearly shows that military power is the guiding force behind diplomacy. Option (2) is the correct answer.

9.Option (4) is the most logical conclusion as it concludes the argument which the author is making—that as people become older they become reluctant to exploit entrepreneurial opportunities. So option (4) is its logical conclusion. Option (4) is the correct answer.

10.The author is talking about why maps are necessary and uses a flip-flop-flip kind of argumentation method. Option (1) closes the argument in the best possible way. Option (1) is the correct answer.

11.The example of Stalin’s terror clearly shows that the writer indirectly agrees to this option. Also, the other options can be eliminated logically. Option (3) is the correct answer.

12.The author is clearly denouncing capitalism only to glorify capitalism. Option (2) is the correct answer.

13.The author is clearly using the example of European colonial regimes in order to neutralise Mr. Lindblad’s arguments and arguing that we need to go to the motives of the regimes. Option (5) is the correct answer.

14.It can be easily understood that the reason colonialism is closer to communism is that both were examples of racial tyranny. Option (1) is the correct answer.

15.Many Europeans also died due to colonial atrocities. So, option (4) cannot be inferred as a reason for the silence of the council of Europe. Option (4) is the correct answer.

16.Option (3) clearly follows.

17.In the opening paragraph, the author clearly talks about the original position being one in which the principles of justice are derived by people who are all equal and thinking rationally—hence they are not influenced by position, status and individual condition in society. Hence, option (1) is the correct answer.

18.One should not know what rules are going to favor him and what are going to be one’s special attributes and skills. One should only consider the fact that one needs to be fair to all concerned. Option (4) satisfies this condition best. Option (4) is the correct answer.

19.Sixth line of the passage clearly shows that these principles are to regulate all the further agreements. So logically, option (2) qualifies as the answer.

20.Justice as fairness does not mean same pay for all kinds of work, neither does it mean that everyone is assigned some work or penalised equally for theft. Option (4) is the best representation of justice as fairness. Option (4) is the correct answer.

21.Clearly, option (2) is the correct answer.

22.Last statement of the first para says that dogmatism allows us to approach a good theory in stages. So, option (1) is the correct answer.

23.Primitive and children both imply an early stage of evolution. So, option (4) is the correct answer.

24.The ideas expressed in para three which define critical attitude as scientific attitude support option (5), where hypothesis show a weaker belief. Option (1) is close but is rejected on the basis that it is too drastic to say ’cannot lead to strong beliefs’. Option (5) is the correct answer.

25.Science has a critical attitude which always allows the possibility of rejecting a theory or hypothesis while pseudo science has strong beliefs and is bent upon proving theories and ideas as correct, even in the face of contrary evidence. Option (3) is the correct answer.