RC Discussion for CAT 2013

[highway66 (Rolling Stone)]

Baap RC

RC 229

In general, the impossible must be justified by reference to artistic requirements, or to the higher reality, or to received opinion. With respect to the requirements of art, a probable impossibility is to be preferred to a thing improbable and yet possible. And by extrapolation, it goes without saying that the improbable impossibility makes for a not too enticing option while the probable possibility will not even be discussed here as it, by its very nature, tends towards the mundane.

The poet being an imitator, like a painter or any other artist, must of necessity imitate one of three objects – things as they were or are, in the past – be it ancient or near – and in the present – as he observes those things around him or those things that are observed by others contemporary to him; things as they are said or thought to be, be they products of philosophical discourse, a study in divinity, or the mythos of a people; or things as they ought to be as often expressed in laments for the state of affairs in a society. The vehicle of expression is language – either current terms or, it may be, rare words or metaphors. There are also many modifications of language which we concede to the poets. Add to this that the standard of correctness is not the same in poetry and politics, any more than in poetry and any other art.

Within the art of poetry itself there are two kinds of faults – those which touch its essence, and those which are of the cause of a lack of advertence. If a poet has chosen to imitate something, but has fallen short through want of capacity, the error is inherent in the poetry. But if the failure is due to a wrong choice – if he has represented a horse as throwing out both his off legs at once, or introduces technical inaccuracies in medicine, for example, or in any other art – the error is not essential to the poetry. These are the points of view from which we should consider and answer the objections raised by the critics. As to matters which concern the poet's own art. If he describes the impossible, he is guilty of an error; but the error may be justified, if the end of the art be thereby attained – if, that is, the effect of this or any other part of the poem is thus rendered more striking. If, however, the end might have been as well, or better, attained without violating the special rules of the poetic art, the error is not justified, for every kind of error should, if possible, be avoided. Again, does the error touch the essentials of the poetic art, or some accident of it? For example, not to know that a hind has no horns is a less serious matter than to paint it inartistically.

Further, if it be objected that the description is not true to fact, the poet may perhaps reply – ―But the objects are as they ought to be‖: just as Sophocles said that he drew men as they ought to be; Euripides, as they are. In this way the objection may be met. If, however, the representation is of neither kind, the poet may answer – "This is how men say the thing is." This applies to tales about the gods. It may well be that these stories are not higher than fact nor yet true to fact. But anyhow, ―"this is what is said." Again, a description may be no better than the fact.

1. Assuming that the poet's artistic goals are achieved, the passage implies that which of the following would NOT be an example of a justifiable error?

A. Describing a lioness as a hunter in a metaphor for the behaviour of predatory government officials

B. Using awkward language to create an analogy between a ruler's hand as a symbol of authority and a city's capitol as a symbol of power

C. Creating anachronistic errors by mentioning inappropriate historical or contemporary events

D. Representing human characters as improbably courageous or strong

E. Comparing soldiers with ancient Greek warriors who could not be killed

2. The author brings up the ancient Greek poets Sophocles and Euripides to make a point within the passage. According to the information cited in the passage, they differ from each other in that:

A. Euripides' characters provide ideal models of human behaviour.

B. Sophocles portrays people as common public opinion supposed them to be.

C. the characters in Sophocles' work are meant to inspire improved human behaviour and actions.

D. humans are unfavourably described by Euripides in order to show detrimental behaviour to avoid.

E. one of them makes a much greater use of metaphors than the other

3. The author's argument that the poet is ―"an imitator, like a painter or any other artist" suggests that the author would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements?A. Different types of creative or aesthetic talent have different means of representation.

B. Creating text and chiselling marble are similar forms of representation.

C. The visual arts are superior to the rhetorical arts.

D. The forms of imitation found in poetry are inefficient.

E. painting is easier than writing poems

[karanmehta_nsit (Manan Mehta)]

do we have all question on one page only or one ques per page??

[highway66 (Rolling Stone)]

Why is dis thread so dead. If ur reading this, try put an rc here.

P.S. Sorry for Spam

[highway66 (Rolling Stone)]

This brings us to the central philosophical issue of quantum mechanics, namely, What is it that quantum mechanics describes? Put another way, quantum mechanics statistically describes the overall behavior and/or predicts the probabilities of the individual behavior of what?

In the autumn of 1927, physicists working with the new physics met in Brussels, Belgium, to ask themselves this question, among others. What they decided there became known as the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Other interpretations developed later, but the Copenhagen Interpretation marks the emergence of the new physics as a consistent way of viewing the world. It is still the most prevalent interpretation of the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics. The upheaval in physics following the discovery of the inadequacies of Newtonian physics was all but complete. The question among the physicists at Brussels was not whether Newtonian mechanics could be adapted to subatomic phenomena ( it was clear that it could not be ), but rather, what was to replace it.

The Copenhagen Interpretation was the first consistent formulation of quantum mechanics. Einstein opposed it in 1927 and he argued against it until his death, although he, like all physicists, was forced to acknowledge its advantages in explaining subatomic phenomena.

The Copenhagen Interpretation says, in effect, that it does not matter what quantum mechanics is about. The important thing is that it works in all possible experimental situations. This is one of the most important statements in the history of science. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics began a monumental reunion which was all but unnoticed at the time. The rational part of our psyche, typified by science, began to merge again with that other part of us which we had ignored since the 1700s, our irrational side.

The scientific idea of truth traditionally had been anchored in an absolute truth somewhereout therethat is, an absolute truth with an independent existence. The closer that we came in our approximations to the absolute truth, the truer our theories were said to be. Although we might never be able to perceive the absolute truth directlyor to open the watch, as Einstein put itstill we tried to construct theories such that for every facet of absolute truth, there was a corresponding element in our theories.

The Copenhagen Interpretation does away with this idea of a one-to-one correspondence between reality and theory. This is another way of saying what we have said before. Quantum mechanics discards the laws governing individual events and states directly the laws governing aggregations. It is very pragmatic.

The philosophy of pragmatism goes something like this. The mind is such that it deals only with ideas. It is not possible for the mind to relate to anything other than ideas. Therefore, it is not correct to think that the mind actually can ponder reality. All that the mind can ponder is its ideas about reality. (Whether or not that is the way reality actually is, is a metaphysical issue). Therefore, whether or not something is true is not a matter of how closely it corresponds to the absolute truth, but of how consistent it is with our experience.

The extraordinary importance of the Copenhagen Interpretation lies in the fact that for the first time, scientists attempting to formulate a consistent physics were forced by their own findings to acknowledge that a complete understanding of reality lies beyond the capabilities of rational thought. It was this that Einstein could not accept. The most incomprehensible thing about the world, he wrote, is that it is comprehensible. But the deed was done. The new physics was based not upon absolute truth, but upon us.

Henry Pierce Stapp, a physicist at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, expressed this eloquently:was essentially a rejection of the presumption that nature could be understood in terms of elementary space-time realities. According to the new view, the complete description of nature at the atomic level was given by probability functions that referred, not to underlying microscopic space-time realities, but rather to the macroscopic objects of sense experience. The theoretical structure did not extend down and anchor itself on fundamental microscopic space-time realities. Instead it turned back and anchored itself in the concrete sense realities that form the basis of social life. This pragmatic description is to be contrasted with descriptions that attempt to peer behind the scenes and tell us what is really happening.

According to the Copenhagen Interpretation
1] Newtonian principles of physics were adequate to explain concepts in subatomic phenomenon.
2] absolute truth could only be achieved with a combination of rational and irrational psyche.
3] there is a correlation between reality and theory.
4] rationality alone was incapable of a complete evaluation of reality.

The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible. By thisEinstein
1] mocked the attempt of quantum physicists to explain the functioning of the universe
.2] accepted defeat on the argument that new physics was based not upon absolute truth but upon us.
3] demonstrated his opposition to the view that complete understanding of reality lay beyond the capability of a rational mind.
4] won over the critics of Newtonian physics and rejected the theories of quantum mechanics.

According to the author,
1] Elementary space-time realities was insufficient to understand the complexities of nature.
2] The Copenhagen Interpretation is an epoch making annul in the history of science.
3] the Copenhagen Interpretation was a starting point of a series of interpretations that lead to the formulation of definitions of quantum mechanics.
4] Einstein disapproved of the usage of quantum mechanics to explain subatomic phenomena.

[highway66 (Rolling Stone)]

In the hope of settling this dispute, I ask you to consider the history of literary women. It turns out, oddly, to be also a prolific history of “men,” among whom the most celebrated are Currer, Acton and Ellis Bell (Charlotte, Anne and Emily Brontë), George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans), George Sand (Amandine Aurore Lucie Dupin), Isak Dinesen (Karen Blixen), Vernon Lee (Violet Paget).

The motive behind these necessary masquerades is hardly an urge to hide. Instead, it is a cry for recognition and a means of evading belittlement, or worse yet, the curse of not being noticed at all. The most pointed symptom and symbol of this pervasive fear is the poignant exchange between the 20-year-old Charlotte Brontë and Robert Southey, England's poet laureate. Humbly and diffidently, she had sent him a sampling

of her poems, trusting that he might acknowledge the worth of what she knew to be her “single, absorbing, exquisite gratification.”

His notorious reply, while conceding her “faculty of verse,” is nearly all that remains of his once powerful fame. “Literature,” he chided, “cannot be the business of a woman's life, and it ought not to be. The more she is engaged in her proper duties, the less leisure she will have for it, even as an accomplishment and a recreation.” If such condescending sentiments leave a contemporary writer feeling sick at heart, Brontë thought the letter “kind and admirable; a little stringent, but it did me good.” The Orange Prize, then, was not born into an innocent republic of letters. Nor need we thumb through past

centuries to discover the laureate's enduring principle. After gaining a modicum of notice following an eclipse lasting years, I was once praised, as a kind of apology, by a prominent editor with these surprising words: “I used to think of you as a lady writer” — an inborn condition understood to be frivolous and slight, and from which recovery is almost always anomalous. So much for the defense of a reparative award dedicated solely to writers who are women. Advocacy of this sort, vigorously grounded as it is in a darker chamber of the literary continuum, is not the Orange's only defense. We are reminded that there are, abundantly, prizes for regional writers, for black writers, for

Christian writers, for Jewish writers, for prison writers, for teenage writers, for science writers, and on and on. Why must a prize for women's writing be the single object of contention? Yet this argument will not hold water. Each such category signals a particular affinity, or call it, more precisely, a culture (and in the case of Jews and Christians, a deeper and broader civilization), and women are integral to all of them. To argue for femaleness-as-culture is to condemn imaginative and intellectual freedom and to revert to the despised old anatomy-is-destiny.

35. The author is likely to agree with which of the following?

(a) Women writers look for recognition from their male counterparts and this has led to their subservience in the field of literature.

(b) Orange prize is another form of the old condescending attitudes of the literary establishment towards women.

(c) The prizes given exclusively to cultural groups are justified but the same cannot be said for prizes exclusive to women.

(d) Women writers have had to face much derision in the past and the Orange Prize has come as a form of reprieve

36. Why does the author bring up the instance where she was called a 'lady writer' in passage?

(a) The author wishes to demonstrate the prejudiced views of an important individual.

(b) The author wants to prove that women writers are inherently different.

(c) The author wants to argue that there is a genuine case for the Orange prize being a reparative measure.

(d) The author wants to demonstrate that opinions regarding women writers have not changed since the time of Robert Southey.

37. Why does the author ultimately concede 'this argument will not hold water'?

1. There are no awards that women writers are barred from competing for.

2. The award categorises women writers as a separate culture.

3. The award works against the principles of intellectual freedom.

(a) 1 and 3 (b) 1 and 2 (c) 2 and 3 (d) Only 3

[comman_man]

Puys what is your average score in Aristotles RC 99 passages? I am getting 2 out of 3 in almost all passages. Is it good or need some more practice?

[jaiswalicsi (ramesh jaiswal)]

1794hereat last was a year which I felt was going to compensate me by some diverting activities, some inspiration, pleasure, for much that I had missed and suffered in the preceding years; and goodness knows I was badly in need of it.' This is how Goethe, in his Annals,begins his report on the year 1794. The modern reader can hardly fail to respond to Goethe's catalogue of grievances: the agitated restlessness of Europe; rumours of the approach of the enemy and of fussy aunts evacuated from more directly disturbed areas; the hasty selling of houses, the loss of friends through political partisanship; the clandestine distribution of French revolutionary manifestoes'they even found their way to me,' Goethe exclaims, 'and this through people whom one would never have suspected'; and above all the rule of Robespierre, 'the terrors of which had so deprived the world of any sense of joy that nobody felt like rejoicing even at the downfall of the tyrant. And in addition, the distressing chaos, the obstreperous hollowness of the German literary scene! Goethe had returned from Italy with that vision of serenity and equipoise with which he hoped he would conquer the national imagination which he had previously done so much to fill with unruly enthusiasm for suicidal lovers and rebellious knights with fists of iron. But, alas, while the Master recuperated sun ofthe South, the infection, the cold and the fever, were spread by his disciples in the unregenerate nordic climate. There was, for instance, that man Schiller, this 'vigorous but immature talent', as Goethe calls him, whose drama Die Räuber, 'disgusted me in the extreme', because he poured out over the country, in a gushing, irresistible torrent, precisely those moral and theatrical paradoxes which I had striven to eradicate from my own work'. And there were more such offenders: Heinse, for instance, whose Ardinghello was hateful to Goethe because its author used his art for the purpose of 'giving affected glamour to crass sensuality and abstruse modes of thought. 'I was terrified,' Goethe continues, 'by the hubbub they caused in the country, and by the applause with which the monstrous creations of their fancy were received by wild undergraduates and genteel ladies of the court alike.' 'Imagine the state I was in! I had hoped to cultivate and to communicate the purest ideas; and now I found myself squeezed tight between Ardinghello and Franz Moor.' 'It seemed as though all mylabours would be lost, all the things towards which, and all the ways in which, I had educated myself would be abolished and frustrated.' Goethe's intense dissatisfaction, his conviction off utility, culminates in the wish to abandon 'the contemplation of the arts and the practice of poetry altogether'andwe know that this was more than the fleeting whim of a disgruntled Olympian'for there appeared to be no chance whatsoever to compete with those wild productions of disorganized genius'.Yet Goethe's desolation was caused not merely by the unseemly behaviour of the world around him; there was an inner uncertainty too an uncertainty which, in one form or another,was to provide the rest of his life with a deep dilemma, a source of inspiration as well asconfusion, now raising his poetry and thought to those heights to which only the force oftension could carry them, now again trapping his genius in a tangle of insoluble contradictions.His doubts about the worthwhileness,indeed the possibility, of continuing his work as a poetwill recur, and the blame will not always fall on the Robespierres of this world and other poets'successful Robbers. Now, in the year 1794, the dilemma took this form: 'The conflict which myscientific efforts had brought into my life was as yet by no means resolved; for my dealingswith nature began to make claims on all my inner faculties'.

What were the reasons for Goethe's desolation?

(1) The unfailing attempts of the German literary amateurs at that time to faze out Goethe's achievements.

(2) The quandary of his times that caught him in its fullest viz. the political turmoil and the uneasiness spread throughout the land.

(3) The desperation that was caused due to his inability to change the literary scene which at one time he had so magnificently ruled.

(4) The hopeless situation of being trapped in a literary scenario that he was totally uncomfortable with and also his own qualms about the importance of his poetry.

(5) The internal rifts that were causing him to doubt his success after returning from a faroffland.

2. What were the objections that Goethe had against Schiller and Heinse?

(1) The works created by them were a disgrace to the development of the society as they overdid the play on emotions.

(2) They were spreading ideas that weren't of the purest nature and this was something that Goethe didn't esteem highly.

(3) He was astounded by the popularity achieved in all sections of the society by these poets.

(4) The use of literary styles of exemplifying sensuality, abstruse modes of thinking was something that he couldn't keep pace with.

(5) He didn't value their works because of the amoral conduct of the protagonists that was liked by all parts of the society.

3. 'for there appeared to be … of disorganized genius'. What does the author mean here?

(1) In no way could Goethe counter the works of the people who were unmindful of their own actions.

(2) Goethe's thoughts about discontinuing his work had a strong reason that he couldn't have countered the unruly works with his lofty ideals.

(3) The manner in which the poets created verse was an unorganized one and had the failings of a sinister nature.

(4) Goethe was hard put against the different styles of his contemporaries and seemed to be fighting a lost case.

(5) The poets like Schiller were unaware that what they produced created competition of such an immense magnitude

I dont have OA , lets discuss this. @missionCAT13 @scrabbler @Pradeep.Mdas @Papasappies @placiddisciple @vijay_chandola

[shwetabh89 (Shwetabh Chandra)]

A recent generation of historians of science, far from portraying accepted scientific views as objectively accurate reflections of a natural world, explain the acceptance of such views in terms of the ideological biases of certain influential scientists or the institutional and rhetorical power such scientists wield. As an example of ideological bias, it has been argued that Pasteur rejected the theory of spontaneous generation not because of experimental evidence but because he rejected the materialist ideology implicit in that doctrine. These historians seem to find allies in certain philosophers of science who argue that scientific views are not imposed by reality but are free inventions of creative minds, and that scientific claims are never more than brave conjectures, always subject to inevitable future falsification. While these philosophers of science themselves would not be likely to have much truck with the recent historians, it is an easy step from their views to the extremism of the historians.

While this rejection of the traditional belief that scientific views are objective reflections of the world may be fashionable, it is deeply implausible. We now know, for example, that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen and that parents each contribute one-half of their children's complement of genes. I do not believe any serious-minded and informed person can claim that these statements are not factual descriptions of the world or that they will inevitably be falsified.

However, science's accumulation of lasting truths about the world is not by any means a straightforward matter. We certainly need to get beyond the naive view that the truth will automatically reveal itself to any scientist who looks in the right direction; most often, in fact, a whole series of prior discoveries is needed to tease reality's truths from experiment arid observation. And the philosophers of science mentioned above are quite right to argue that new scientific ideas often correct old ones by indicating errors and imprecision (as. say. Newton's ideas did to Kepler's). Nor would I deny that there are interesting questions to be answered about the social processes in which scientific activity is embedded. The persuasive processes by which particular scientific groups establish their experimental results as authoritative are themselves social activities and can be rewardingly studied as such. Indeed, much of the new work in the history of science has been extremely revealing about the institutional interactions and rhetorical devices that help determine whose results achieve prominence.

But one can accept all this without accepting the thesis that natural reality never plays any part at all in determining what scientists believe. What the new historians ought to be showing us is how those doctrines that do in fact fit reality work their way 60) through the complex social processes of scientific activity to eventually receive general scientific acceptance.

8. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following characterizations of scientific truth?

(A) It is often implausible. (B) It is subject to inevitable falsification. (C) It is rarely obvious and transparent. (D) It is rarely discovered by creative processes. (E) It is less often established by experimentation than by the rhetorical power of scientists.

9. According to the passage. Kepler's ideas provide an example of scientific ideas that were

(A) corrected by subsequent inquiries (B) dependent on a series of prior observations (C) originally thought to be imprecise and then later confirmed (D) established primarily by the force of an individuals rhetorical power (E) specifically taken up for the purpose of falsification by later scientists

10. In the third paragraph of the passage. the author is primarily concerned with

(A) presenting conflicting explanations for a phenomenon (B) suggesting a field for possible future research (C) qualifying a previously expressed point of view (D) providing an answer to a theoretical question (E) attacking the assumptions that underlie a set of beliefs

11. The use of the words any serious-minded and informed person' (lines 28-29) serves which one of the following functions in the context of the passage?

(A) to satirize chronologically earlier notions about the composition of water (B) to reinforce a previously stated opinion about certain philosophers of science (C) to suggest the author's reservations about the "traditional belief" mentioned in line 22 D) to anticipate objections from someone who would argue for an objectively accurate description of the world (E) to discredit someone who would argue that certain scientific assertions do not factually describe reality

12. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely agree with which one of the following statements about the relationship between the views of "certain philosophers of science" (lines l2~13) and those of the recent historians?

(A) These two views are difficult to differentiate. (B) These two views share some similarities. (C) The views of the philosophers ought to be seen as the source of the historians' views. (D) Both views emphasize the rhetorical power of scientists. (E) The historians explicitly acknowledge that their views are indebted to those of the philosophers.

13. Which one of the blowing best characterizes the author's assessment of the opinions of the new historians of science, as these opinions are presented in the passage?

(A) They lack any credibility. (B) They themselves can be rewardingly studied as social phenomena. (C) They are least convincing when they concern the actions of scientific groups. (D) Although they are gross overstatements, they lead to some valuable insights. (E) Although they are now popular, they are likely to be refused soon.

14. In concluding the passage. the author does which one of the following?

(A) offers a prescription (B) presents a paradox (C) makes a prediction (D) concedes an argument (E) anticipates objections

15. The authors attitude toward the “thesis” mentioned in line 56 is revealed in which one of the following pairs of words?

(A) “biases” (line 5) and “rhetorical” (line 6) (B) “wield” (line 7) and “falsification” (line 17) (C) “conjectures” (line l6) and “truck with” (line 19) (D) “extremism” (line 20) and “implausible” (line 24) (E) “naive” (line 35) and “errors' (line 42)

[revenous (VIVEK KUMAR)]

set-10

The tsetse fly, belonging to any of approximately twenty species composing the genus Glossina, is indigenous to Africa and is found primarily in forests and savannahs south of the Tropic of Cancer. Dependent on vertebrate blood for nourishment, the tsetse fly is equipped with a long proboscis which is sharp enough to penetrate most animal skins and powerful enough to enable the tsetse to drink quantities of blood up to three times its own body weight.

At the same time that the tsetse drains blood, it can also transmit a variety of dangerous diseases. A bite from a tsetse fly can induce African sleeping sickness in human beings and nagana, a similar ailment, in domestic livestock. The agent of these diseases is the trypanosome, a unicellular, flagellated parasite which feeds primarily on the blood of vertebrates and is generally transmitted by an intermediary leech or insect host, such as the tsetse fly. In humans the trypanosome causes damage to the brain and spinal cord, leading to extreme lethargy and, ultimately, death; in livestock, trypanosomes destroy red blood cells, causing fatal anaemia.

The immune system is ill-equipped to counter trypanosomes. As the immune system attempts to counter disease, antibodies are produced to attack microbes whose antigens, surface proteins, are foreign to the body. However, the trypanosome is capable of disguising itself by altering its genetic code, thereby changing its antigen coating in resistance to each new antibody that evolves. This ―quick change‖ has confounded pathologists and made the development of effective vaccines elusive.

A controversy has been sparked between proponents of the elimination of the tsetse fly and African environmentalists. Those in favour of eradication feel that in addition to reducing disease, the removal of the tsetse fly will open immense tracts of land to cattle breeding. This, however, is precisely what the opposition fears. Environmentalists and conservationists dread the day when cattle and livestock, permitted to roam and graze freely, will uncontrollably devour plush African grasslands, converting them into barren desert. They argue that the tsetse fly must remain for the sake of the land.

With efforts to eradicate the tsetse fly largely unsuccessful, control may offer the only available option for the interests of both health and environment. Since the protozoan cannot be conquered through antibodies or vaccines, scientists have begun efforts to prevent the transmission of the trypanosome parasite by eliminating the tsetse. Attempts to eradicate the tsetse fly, however, have met with little success. Rhodesia used to combat tsetse by extensive brush cleaning, game shooting, and chemical attack, yet the fly persisted. Aerial pesticide treatments have produced inconclusive results.

The reproductive cycle of the tsetse fly is such that a larva pupates underground for several weeks before it emerges as an adult fly. This makes repetitive chemical sweeping at intermittent periods an inconvenient necessity. All of these methods, however, share the weakness of dependence on harmful chemicals, such as DDT, which threaten both the health of the humans who handle them and the environment in which their toxic residues amass.

1. All of the following statements correctly describe the relationship between the tsetse fly, the trypanosome, and vertebrates EXCEPT:

A. vertebrate blood provides the nourishment for the transport of trypanosomes.

B. the ―bite‖ of a tsetse fly can kill vertebrates since it often injects a deadly chemical.

C. both the tsetse fly and the trypanosome utilize vertebrate blood for nourishment.

D. vertebrates may die after trypanosome contamination via a tsetse proboscis.

E. the tse tse fly transfers the trypanosome into the vertebrates' bodies

2. In the passage, the author does NOT identify which of the following as a characteristic of the tsetse fly?

A. dependence upon vertebrate blood

B. ability to transmit a fatal parasite to livestock and humans

C. ability to alter its genetic code

D. ability to influence the African cattle population

E. its larva pupates for several weeks beneath the ground

3. According to African environmentalists, which of the following accurately describes the effect the tsetse fly has on the African grasslands?

A. If the tsetse fly population continues to exist, the African grasslands will turn into barren wasteland.

B. If the tsetse fly population continues to exist, the African grasslands will not be able to provide sufficient food supply for African cattle and livestock.

C. Destruction of the tsetse fly population will lead to the conversion of grasslands into desert.

D. Destruction of the tsetse fly population will cause overgrowth of the African grasslands.

E. Tse tse fly has no impact on grasslands, it only impacts vertebrates

4. What is the primary purpose of the fourth paragraph in the passage

A. to decsribe the harmful effects of the tse tse fly

B. to argue that the proliferation of tse tse flies can lead to large scale deforestation of African grasslands

C. to discuss a beneficial impact of tse tse flies

D. to state that efforts to eradicate the tse tse flies have generally proved to be ineffective

E. to discuss the reproductive cycle of a tse tse fly.

[noor11 (Gurnoor Bagga)]

What is the difference between critical and ironical attitude?

[pawankadam (pavan kadam)]

Most moviegoers tend to sum up all of a film's features – acting, directing, special effects, and script – into a blanket ―I loved it‖ or ―hated it‖. But movie industry workers, and even film connoisseurs, can attest to the contribution of the movie's ‗cinematics', or technical features, towards creating any movie's atmosphere.

Artistic movies are composed of a multitude of ‗shots' or discrete scenes usually lasting only 6 to 20 seconds; together the hundreds of individual scenes combine to make up the movie. For each shot the director has many options on how to film the same. For example, imagine that the movie's script calls for two actors to speak a fixed dialogue in a specified location. Even while the director stays true to the script, he has considerable leeway in how to film the scene. He may film an ‗extreme long shot', with the camera far away. This tends to show the setting in a panorama, emphasizing the background while underplaying the actors, and is used primarily in outdoor scenes where the backdrop is particularly impressive. Or, he may employ the ‗long shot', which brings the camera close enough to capture the actor's entire bodies, together with some of the setting. And finally there is the ‗close-up', where the camera is brought in close enough to focus on the actors' heads and faces and has the effect of spotlighting a particular actor while hiding the setting and other actors.Camera ‗angling' refers to the camera's height from the ground and thus the vertical angle from which the audience views the action.Camera ‗angling' refers to the camera's height from the ground and thus the vertical angle from which the audience views the action. The most common angle is filmed at adult eye level, though some artistic films for or about children can capture a child's-eye view of the world by filming from a child's eye level, looking up at most things. Similarly, even ordinary films can switch to ‗low angle view' by occasionally lowering the camera to look upwards at a character or building. The low-angle format suggests that the object or character is somehow larger, grander and more dominant or intimidating. In contrast the ‗high angle shot' positions the camera to look 30 down on a character which often suggest that he is inferior, powerless, or in trouble. A ‗side by side' shot of two characters suggest that they are equal in importance, while filming one character as seen over the shoulder of another emphasises that character, while reminding the audiences that he is being observed or heard.

1. The passage discussion most clearly suggests that the most important aspect of filmmaking is

A. figuring out what moviegoers are going to love

B. deciding how to make a movie artistic

C. using a good director

D. signing a top actor for the lead role

E. having excellent music

2. According to the passage, a scene from a horror movie showing two lovers embracing, unaware of the huge monster closing in on them, would be filmed using

A. an ‗eye-level', ‗close up'

B. a ‗high-angle', ‗long shot'

C. a ‗low angle', ‗long shot'

D. a ‗child's eye level', ‗close up

3. According to the passage, a children's film with three alternative shots showing a mother scolding her small daughter, the daughter, and the father who is secretly listening, would most likely be filmed using which sequence of camera angles?

A. ‗low angle', ‗high angle' and ‗over the shoulder'

B. ‗low angle', ‗low angle', and ‗high angle'

C. ‗high angle', ‗high angle', and ‗over the shoulder'

D. ‗over the shoulder,' high angle', and ‗low angle'

E. ‗high angle', ‗low angle' and ‗low angle'

[gaurav.ddubey01 (Gaurav Dubey)]

Hello Puys...earnest request to all...
If you are attempting any RC given here plzz also do mention the TIME(approx) taken by you to answer the qustions...
This is because I feel if the RC is moderate or easy time factor alongwith accuracy seperates the students..
Thnks dosto..

[aryank (aryan)]

Hi puys.. can ny1 pls tell me how to identify if writer's tone is confrontational or aggressive or argumentative?

[kanchan_rawat]

When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. First, in his studies of people's attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes. Single experiences influence postexperience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and postexperience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience. Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization's or institution's authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer. Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution, under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavourably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. Two studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits. At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals' reactions may vary as a function of (1) their prior level of commitment and (2) the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations, changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. Second, the assimilation prediction is that individuals' prior attitudes predispose them to react in a way that is consistent with their prior attitudes. The third prediction, derived from the group-value model of justice, pertains to how people with high prior commitment will react when they feel that they have been treated unfavorably or unfairly during some encounter with the organization or institution.


Fair treatment by the other party symbolizes to people that they are being dealt with in a dignified and respectful way, thereby bolstering their sense of self-identity and self-worth. However, people will become quite distressed and react quite negatively if they feel that they have been treated unfairly by the other party to the relationship. The group-value model suggests that people value the information they receive that helps them to define themselves and to view themselves favorably. According to the instrumental viewpoint, people are primarily concerned with the more material or tangible resources received from the relationship. Empirical support for the group-value model has implications for a variety of important issues, including the determinants of commitment, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and rule following.



Determinants of procedural fairness include structural or interpersonal factors. For example, structural determinants refer to such things as whether decisions were made by neutral, fact-finding authorities who used legitimate decision-making criteria. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the interactive effect of individuals (1) commitment to an organization or institution prior to some encounter and (2) perceptions of how fairly they were treated during the encounter, on the change in their level of commitment. A basic assumption of the group-value model is that people generally value their relationships with people, groups, organizations, and institutions and therefore value fair treatment from the other party to the relationship. Specifically, highly committed members should have especially negative reactions to feeling that they were treated unfairly, more so than (1) lesscommitted group members or (2) highly committed members who felt that they were fairly treated. The prediction that people will react especially negatively when they previously felt highly committed but felt that they were treated unfairly also is consistent with the literature on psychological contracts. Rousseau suggested that, over time, the members of work organizations develop feelings of entitlement, i.e., perceived obligations that their employers have toward them. Those who are highly committed to the organization believe that they are fulfilling their contract obligations. However, if the organization acted unfairly, then highly committed individuals are likely to believe that the organization did not live up to its end of the bargain.

1. The hypothesis mentioned in the passage tests at least one of the following ideas.
(A) People continue to show loyalty only if they were initially committed to the organization.
(B) Our experiences influence post-experience loyalty but certainly underwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and post-experience loyalty.
(C)Pre-experience commitment always has inverse relationship with the post-experience commitment.
(D) None of these ideas are being tested by the hypothesis.

2. For summarizing the passage, which of the following is most appropriate:
(A) The study explored how citizens' commitment to legal authorities changed as a function of their initial level of commitment and their perceptions of how fairly they were treated in their recent encounters with legal authorities.
(B) The influence of individuals' prior commitment to an institution on their reactions to the perceived fairness of decisions rendered by the institution was examined.
(C)Given the generally positive consequences to organizations of having committed employees, it may be that unfair managerial practices would begin to alienate the very employees that the organization would least wish to alienate.
(D) The passage aims at understanding how people define happiness and these definitions include instrumental view-points.

if such a para comes in exams,should we even try to attempt?

[shrey343 (Rahul Sharma)]

those who understood the last RC that I posted and got the answers correct, please post the summary of the passage.. will be really helpful.. thanks..

[shrey343 (Rahul Sharma)]

Perceiving, for all its nicety of functioning in the dark room under strict instructions for accuracy, comprises a highly complex series of little understood psychological processes. For under all conditions, perceiving represents a resultant of two complex sets of specifications. One set describes the conditions of stimulation. This is done either in terms of physical measures such as wave length, or in terms of psychological norms such as in the description of a picture as that picture is seen by “normal” observers under optimal conditions and with a set for accuracy. This first set of specifications we are used to calling “stimulus” factors. Stimuli, however, do not act upon an indifferent organism. There is never, in the old-fashioned language of G. F. Stout, anoetic sentience. The organism in perception is in one way or another in a state of expectancy about the environment. It is a truism worth repeating that the perceptual effect of a stimulus is necessarily dependent upon the set or expectancy of the organism. There have been very few systematic efforts to analyze the dimensions of set and to formulate laws regarding the effectiveness of set in perception such as those which describe stimulus-perception relationships. That students of nonsensory or “directive” factors in perception have thus far refrained from any large-scale statement of principles, while it is a mark of admirable modesty in the face of a very confusing array of experimental data, is highly regrettable. For it has prevented the emergence of new hypotheses which, flowing even from premature principles, might serve to test the utility of theories of perception. The present study, though empirical in nature, is essentially an essay in the theory of perception — or at least that part of the theory of perception which deals with directive factors in the perceiving process. Our basic axiom has already been stated — that perceiving is a process which results from the stimulation of a prepared or eingestellt organism. A second axiom concerns the operation of such directive factors: given a stimulus input of certain characteristics, directive processes in the organism operate to organize the perceptual field in such a way as to maximize percepts relevant to current needs and expectations and to minimize percepts inimical to such needs and expectations. This “minimax” axiom we have referred to elsewhere as the construction-defense balance in perceiving. All of which is not to say that perception is always wishful or “autistic.” Indeed, that is not the point. “Wishfulness” has to do with the nature of the expectations which are at work and is not a term relevant to the perceiving process as such. By “wishful” we mean an expectation with a low probability of being confirmed by events. The construction-defense process operates where expectations are “realistic” or where they are “wishful.” In the former case, it is simply a matter of “constructing” a percept which is relevant, say, to the exigencies of locomotion, “defending” against percepts which, though potentially wish-fulfilling, are disruptive to the task of locomotion. A concern of this paper is also with the perceptual events which occur when perceptual expectancies fail of confirmation — the problem of incongruity.

Based on your understanding of the above passage, please explain what you understood and lets have some discussion on the above topic.. please also post any links that discusses the above theme, like theory of perception, directive processes etc.. thanks..

[realslimshady (Tushant Juneja)]

Anyone has previous year CAT RC's compiled at one place?
I would really appreciate if you could share it. Desperate times in terms of RC preparation.

[shubhba]

Gramsci saw the role of the intellectual as a crucial one in the context of creating a counter hegemony. He was clear that the transformation from capitalism to socialism required mass participation. There was no question that socialism could be brought about by an elite group of dedicated revolutionaries acting for the working class. It had to be the work of the majority of the population conscious of what they were doing and not an organised party leadership.
The revolution led by Lenin and the Bolsheviks in Russia in 1917 was not the model suitable for Western Europe or indeed any advanced industrialised country. The Leninist model took place in a backward country with a huge peasantry and a tiny working class. The result was that the mass of the population were not involved. For Gramsci, mass consciousness was essential and the role of the intellectual was crucial.
It is important at this juncture to note that when Gramsci wrote about intellectuals, he was not referring solely to the boffins and academics that sat in ivory towers or wrote erudite pieces for academic journals only read by others of the same ilk. His definition went much further and he spread his net much wider.
Gramsci's notebooks are quite clear on the matter. He writes that “all men are intellectuals” [and presumably women] “but not all men have in society the function of intellectuals”. What he meant by that was that everyone has an intellect and uses it but not all are intellectuals by social function. He explains this by stating that “everyone at some time fries a couple of eggs or sews up a tear in a jacket, we do not necessarily say that everyone is a cook or a tailor”. Each social group that comes into existence creates within itself one or more strata of intellectuals that gives it meaning, that helps to bind it together and helps it function. They can take the form of managers, civil servants, the clergy, professors and teachers, technicians and scientists, lawyers, doctors etc. Essentially, they have developed organically alongside the ruling class and function for the benefit of the ruling class. Gramsci maintained that the notion of intellectuals as being a distinct social category independent of class was a myth.
He identified two types of intellectuals - traditional and organic. Traditional intellectuals are those who do regard themselves as autonomous and independent of the dominant social group and are regarded as such by the population at large. They seem autonomous and independent. They give themselves an aura of historical continuity despite all the social upheavals that they might go through. The clergy are an example of that as are the men of letters, the philosophers and professors. These are what we tend to think of when we think of intellectuals. Although they like to think of themselves as independent of ruling groups, this is usually a myth and an illusion. They are essentially conservative allied to and assisting the ruling group in society.
The second type is the organic intellectual. This is the group mentioned earlier that grows organically with the dominant social group, the ruling class, and is their thinking and organising element. For Gramsci it was important to see them for what they were. They were produced by the educational system to perform a function for the dominant social group in society. It is through this group that the ruling class maintains its hegemony over the rest of society.

Q.1 What is the thematic highlight of the passage?

aIntellectuals are defined by their erudite pieces for academic journals.

bThe changeover from capitalism to socialism for the working class.

cUnderstanding the critical role of the intellectual in society.

dThe transformation from socialism to capitalism by the working class.

eThe different types of intellectuals and the models.

Q.2 According to the passage, Gramsci's definition of the intellectual refers to:

aThe erudite academicians.

bAll men and women.

cIntellectual is as an intellectual does.

dThe conservatives assisting a ruling group

eThe boffins engaged in research.

Q.3 The term 'organic intellectuals” alludes to:

aA distinct social category working for the benefit of the ruling class.

bAutonomous and independent groups of intellectuals.

cIntellectuals crusading for social causes independently.

dHomegrown intellectuals functioning for the dominant social groups.

eConservative groups allied to the ruling class.

[c.anjali.09 (Anjali Sneha)]

i was wondering if nyone has got

RC -official guide to gmat

[harsha471 (Sriharsha Ramachandra)]

Guys,

Need some help , Can anyone tell me whether RC's in 'Aristotleprep RC99' are similar to what we usually find in CAT?