Q. 1:The four sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, and 4) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Decide on the proper order for the sentences and key in this sequence of four numbers as your answer.
1. Self-management is thus defined as the ‘individual’s ability to manage the symptoms, treatment, physical and psychosocial consequences and lifestyle changes inherent in living with a chronic condition’.
2. Most people with progressive diseases like dementia prefer to have control over their own lives and health-care for as long as possible.
3. Having control means, among other things, that patients themselves perform self- management activities.
4. Supporting people in decisions and actions that promote self-management is called self- management support requiring a cooperative relationship between the patient, the family, and the professionals.
There is no doubt that statements 2 and 3 form a pair because they both speak of ‘having control’. Statement 2 says ‘most people … prefer to have control…’, while statement 3 says ‘having control means…’. Thus 2 and 3 form a pair. The idea of self-management is further elaborated on by ‘self-management support’, which has been introduced in statement 4. Now we come to the placement of statement 1. As we see, statement 1 is not about self-management support, but about self-management. Thus 1 must come before 4 because in 4 we have shifted our discussion from self-management to self-management support. Thus 2314 is the right sequence. Statement 1 is the intermediate conclusion for statements 2 and 3.
The paragraph speaks about the Japanese government’s recommendation. The recommendation is the key idea of the passage. The recommendation is about regulating only genetically modified organisms, and leaving the rest. The reactions are mixed, however the author cautions about the unforeseen risks. Option 3 is the best choice.
Option 1 goes out because the Japanese recommendation is about regulating only genetically modified organisms. This is the main idea, but option 1 does not cover this idea. The right word is exempting, not excepting. Also, the prematurity part of it is nowhere found in the passage.
Option 4 says “creating categories within genetically modified products…defies law”. The defying of the legal aspect of it is not there in the passage. Option 3 is the best choice.
Q. 3: The four sentences (labelled 1,2,3,4) given in this question, when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. Each sentence is labelled with a number. Decide on the proper sequence of order of the sentences and key in this sequence of four numbers as your answer:
1. In the era of smart world, however, ‘Universal Basic Income’ is an ineffective instrument which cannot address the potential breakdown of the social contract when large swathes of the population would effectively be unemployed.
2. In the era of industrial revolution, the abolition of child labour, poor laws and the growth of trade unions helped families cope with the pressures of mechanised work.
3. Growing inequality could be matched by a creeping authoritarianism that is bolstered by technology that is increasingly able to peer into the deepest vestiges of our lives.
4. New institutions emerge which recognise ways in which workers could contribute to and benefit by economic growth when, rather than if, their jobs are automated.
By reading the statements, we get to know that 213 form a pair. Statement 2 and statement 3 are the two contrasting ideas. 2 and 1 will form a pair. The idea of growing inequality in statement 3 is a consequence of ‘large swathes of population getting unemployed’, as indicated in statement
1. Thus we see that 2, 1 and 3 form a coherent paragraph. The difficult thing is the placement of statement 4. It could come at the start or at the end.
For this we have to understand the contents of statement 4. It says that ‘new institutions emerge…’. Both statements 2 and 1 have those new institutions. In statement 2 it is trade unions, while in statement 1 it is universal basic income. Thus the idea stated in 4 finds further substantiation in statements 2 and 1. 4 will come at the start. 4213 form a coherent paragraph.
Q. 4: Five sentences related to a topic are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a meaningful and coherent short paragraph. Identify the odd one out. Choose its number as your answer and key the number in:
1. Our smartphones can now track our diets, our biological cycles, even our digestive systems and sleep-patterns.
2. Researchers have even coined a new term, “orthosomnia”, to describe the insomnia brought on by paying too much attention to smartphones and sleep-tracking apps.
3. Sleep, nature’s soft nurse, is a blissful, untroubled state all too easily disturbed by earthly worries or a guilty conscience.
4. The existence of a market for such apps is unsurprising: shift work, a long-hours culture and blue light from screens have conspired to rob many of us of sufficient rest.
5. A new threat to a good night’s rest has emerged – smart-phones, with sleep-tracking apps.
This question is slightly dubious. Though the official answer is 3, it is statement 1 that should be the right answer. We can start with statement 3, and continue the idea with statement 5.
Statement 2 takes over from 5, with statement 4 coming at the end. Thus 3524 form a coherent paragraph, leaving 1 as the odd one out.
Statement 3 speaks of the things that are likely to disturb sleep. Statement 5 adds one more threat- smartphones. Statement 2 gives a name to that threat, while 4 adds some more information as to why such apps have found a market.
Statement 1 should be the odd one out. However, surprisingly, the official answer given by CAT is 3.
Q. 5: The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures the author’s position.
Should the moral obligation to rescue and aid persons in grave peril, felt by a few, be enforced by the criminal law? Should we follow the lead of a number of European countries and enact bad Samaritan laws? Proponents of bad Samaritan laws must overcome at least three different sorts of obstacles. First, they must show the laws are morally legitimate in principle, that is, that the duty to aid others is a proper candidate for legal enforcement. Second, they must show that this duty to aid can be defined in a way that can be fairly enforced by the courts. Third, they must show that the benefits of the laws are worth their problems, risks and costs.
1. A number of European countries that have successfully enacted bad Samaritan laws may serve as model statutes.
2. Everyone agrees that people ought to aid others, the only debate is whether to have a law on it.
3. If bad Samaritan laws are found to be legally sound and enforceable they must be enacted.
4. Bad Samaritan laws may be desirable but they need to be tested for legal soundness.
The passage starts with a few questions. The answer is nowhere given by the author. After the questions, the author says that proponents of bad Samaritan laws must overcome three obstacles, and further goes on to elaborate what those obstacles are. These obstacles are the test which must be overcome as per the author. Thus choice 4 is the best choice.
Option 3 goes out because nowhere has the author suggested or implied that the laws must be enacted. The idea of ‘everyone agrees’, in option 2, is again nowhere found in the message and nor is it the main idea of the passage. Though what is given in option 1 is correct in the context of the passage, it is not the key focus on the paragraph. In summary questions we must capture the key idea of the passage. Any option that ignores the key idea cannot be the right choice.