CLATUG

LOGICAL
REASONING
SAMPLEPAPERS
LOGICAL REASONING QUESTIONS – SAMPLE SET FOR MAY 24, 2020

Each set of questions in this section is based on a single passage. Please answer each question on the basis of
what is stated or implied in the corresponding passage. In some instances, more than one option may be the
answer to the question; in such a case, please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively
answers the question.

1.

People have always wanted answers to the big questions. Where did we come from? How did the universe
begin? What is the meaning and design behind it all? Is there anyone out there? The creation accounts of the
past now seem less relevant and credible. They have been replaced by a variety of what can only be called
superstitions, ranging from science fiction books to futuristic television series. But real science can be far
stranger than science fiction, and much more satisfying.

I am a scientist. And a scientist with a deep fascination with physics, cosmology, the universe and the future of
humanity. I was brought up by my parents to have an unwavering curiosity and, like my father, to research and
try to answer the many questions that science asks us. I have spent my life travelling across the universe,
inside my mind. Through theoretical physics, I have sought to answer some of the great questions. At one
point, I thought I would see the end of physics as we know it, but now I think the wonder of discovery will
continue long after I am gone. We are close to some of these answers, but we are not there yet.

The problem is, most people believe that real science is too difficult and complicated for them to understand.
But I don’t think this is the case. To do research on the fundamental laws that govern the universe would
require a commitment of time that most people don’t have; the world would soon grind to a halt if we all tried
to do theoretical physics. But most people can understand and appreciate the basic ideas if they are presented
in a clear way without equations, which I believe is possible and which is something I have enjoyed trying to do
throughout my life.

It has been a glorious time to be alive and doing research in theoretical physics. Our picture of the universe has
changed a great deal in the last fifty years, and I’m happy if I have made a contribution. One of the great
revelations of the space age has been the perspective it has given humanity on ourselves. When we see the
Earth from space, we see ourselves as a whole. We see the unity, and not the divisions. It is such a simple
image with a compelling message; one planet, one human race.

[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Brief Answers to the Big Questions, by Stephen Hawking, John
Murray, 2018]

1.1 Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

(a) The world would run more efficiently if all us tried to do theoretical physics.
(b) If some scientific theories were presented in a simpler manner, more people would understand them.
(c) Most people are not interested in knowing answers to big questions.
(d) Most scientists do not understand physics.

1.2 Which among the following most accurately reflects the author’s views on science fiction books and
futuristic television series, as set out in the passage above?

(a) They are extremely entertaining, and all of us should read such books and watch such television
series.
(b) They are very educational, and can act as a substitute for serious scientific research.
(c) They are based on irrational or supernatural ideas, and have replaced old myths about how the world
came to be.
(d) They are often expensive, and the government should make efforts to subsidise them and make them
more widely available.
1.3 A scientist has just made a breakthrough discovery in theoretical physics, and thinks that everyone should
know about it. She has prepared a technical essay, which explains the theory using complicated
mathematical equations and difficult scientific terms. Which among the following would the author be
most likely to suggest to her in order to get more people to understand her discovery?

(a) She should simplify the language in the essay, and avoid using equations.
(b) She should present the paper as it is, and let people try and figure it out for themselves.
(c) She should add some illustrations to the essay.
(d) She should remove some key pieces of information from the essay, so that people have to try and
figure out the answers for themselves.

1.4 Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author’s argument in the passage above about
whether most people would be interested in understanding scientific ideas?

(a) Most people are only interested in things of immediate concern to them; they do not care about
larger issues.
(b) Most people would be willing to try and understand scientific ideas if they were presented in a
manner that is easier to understand.
(c) Both, (a) and (b).
(d) Neither (a) nor (b).

1.5 The author says that “One of the great revelations of the space age has been the perspective it has given
humanity on ourselves.” Which of the following, if true, would most strongly support this statement?

(a) Humanity has always regarded ourselves as a whole.

(b) Before we saw the Earth from space, humanity had never seen itself as a whole.
(c) Historically, people have never noticed the differences between themselves, but these became
apparent once we saw the Earth from space.
(d) Humans cannot comprehend the meaning behind the image of the Earth seen from space.

*****
ANSWERS AND RATIONALE: LOGICAL REASONING QUESTIONS – SAMPLE SET FOR MAY 24, 2020

1.1 Answer: (b)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (b) – if some scientific theories were presented in a simpler manner, more people
would understand them. The author says “most people believe that real science is too difficult and
complicated for them to understand”, and that “most people can understand and appreciate the basic
ideas if they are presented in a clear way without equations”; both these statements are addressed in
option (b). Option (a) directly contradicts the author’s statement that “the world would soon grind to a
halt if we all tried to do theoretical physics”, and so, it cannot be the correct answer. Option (c)
contradicts the author’s statements at the beginning of the passage, and so, it cannot be the correct
answer. There is nothing in the passage to support option (d), and so, it cannot be the correct answer.

1.2 Answer: (c)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (c) – they are based on irrational or supernatural ideas, and have replaced old myths
about how the world came to be. The author talks about how old ‘creation accounts’ seem less relevant
and credible nowadays, and how science fiction books and futuristic television series, which the author
thinks are “superstitions”, have replaced them. There is nothing in the passage to support either option
(a) or option (d), and so, neither can be the correct answer. Option (b) contradicts the author’s opinion
that such books and television series are “superstitions”, and so, it cannot be the correct answer.

1.3 Answer: (a)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (a) - she should simplify the language in the essay, and avoid using equations. In the
third paragraph of the passage, the author says that most people would understand scientific ideas if
“they are presented in a clear way without equations”. Since option (b) directly contradicts this statement,
it cannot be the correct answer. While adding illustrations may make the essay “clearer”, option (c) does
not address the author’s point about removing equations from the presentation of scientific ideas, and so,
option (c) cannot be the correct answer. There is nothing in the passage to support option (d), and so, it
cannot be the correct answer.

1.4 Answer: (a)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (a) – most people are only interested in things of immediate concern to them; they
do not care about larger issues. The author says that most people are interested in the answers to big
questions; that he has, as a scientist, tried to answer such questions; and that most people would be able
to understand and appreciate such ideas if they were presented in a simple manner. If the statement in
option (a) were true, it would contradict the author’s premise that most people are interested in answers
to the big questions, and so, it is the correct answer. Since option (b) supports the author’s ideas about
how scientific ideas should be presented, it cannot be the correct answer. Given this, neither option (c)
nor option (d) can be the correct answer.

1.5 Answer: (b)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (b) – before we saw the Earth from space, humanity had never seen itself as a
whole. If this statement were true, it would provide strong support to the author’s statements on the
effect that seeing the Earth from space had on humanity, and which he describes in the last three
sentences of the passage. If option (a) were true, it would mean that seeing the Earth from space did not
alter how humanity saw ourselves, and so, would not support the author’s description of the perspective
the space age has given humanity of ourselves; therefore, option (a) cannot be the correct answer. Option
(c) contradicts the author’s description of the effect that seeing the Earth from space had on humanity,
and so, it cannot be the correct answer. The author says that the image of the Earth seen from space had
a ‘compelling’ message, and humanity sees the ‘unity’ among ourselves in that image; given this, option
(d) cannot be the correct answer, since it contradicts the author’s statements.

*****
LOGICAL REASONING QUESTIONS – SAMPLE SET FOR MAY 30, 2020

Each set of questions in this section is based on a single passage. Please answer each question on the basis of
what is stated or implied in the corresponding passage. In some instances, more than one option may be the
answer to the question; in such a case, please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively
answers the question.

1.

Employers can get into legal trouble if they ask interviewees about their religion, sexual preference, or political
affiliation. Yet they can use social media to filter out job applicants based on their beliefs, looks, and habits.
Laws forbid lenders from discriminating on the basis of race, gender, and sexuality. Yet they can refuse to give
a loan to people whose Facebook friends have bad payment histories, if their work histories on LinkedIn don’t
match their bios on Facebook, or if a computer algorithm judges them to be socially undesirable.

These regulatory gaps exist because laws have not kept up with advances in technology. The gaps are getting
wider as technology advances ever more rapidly. And it’s not just in employment and lending—the same is
happening in every domain that technology touches.

“That is how it must be, because law is, at its best and most legitimate—in the words of Gandhi—‘codified
ethics,’ ” says Preeta Bansal, a former general counsel in the White House. She explains that effective laws and
standards of ethics are guidelines accepted by members of a society, and that these require the development
of a social consensus.

Take the development of copyright laws, which followed the creation of the printing press. When first
introduced in the 1400s, the printing press was disruptive to political and religious elites because it allowed
knowledge to spread and experiments to be shared. It helped spur the decline of the Holy Roman Empire,
through the spread of Protestant writings; the rise of nationalism and nation-states, due to rising cultural self-
awareness; and eventually the Renaissance. Debates about the ownership of ideas raged for about 300 years
before the first copyright laws were enacted by Great Britain.

Our laws and ethical practices have evolved over centuries. Today, technology is on an exponential curve and
is touching practically everyone—everywhere. Changes of a magnitude that once took centuries now happen
in decades, sometimes in years. We haven’t come to grips with what is ethical, let alone with what the laws
should be, in relation to technologies such as social media.

Thomas Jefferson said in 1816, “Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human
mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths
disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also,
and keep pace with the times.”

The problem is that the human mind itself can’t keep pace with the advances that computers are enabling.

[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from "Laws and Ethics Can’t Keep Pace with Technology", by Vivek
Wadhwa, MIT Technology Review, https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/04/15/172377/laws-and-ethics-
cant-keep-pace-with-technology/]

1.1 Which of the following changes to the law, if brought into effect, would be most likely to solve the
problem the author describes in relation to how employers filter out job applicants?

(a) A law that forces employers to meet in person with job applicants before deciding whether or not to
hire them.
(b) A law that forbids employers from checking job applicants’ details on social media.
(c) A law that forbids job applicants from checking the employers’ details on social media.
(d) A law that requires employers to check job applicants’ details on social media.
1.2 Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Preeta Bansal’s argument for why laws have not kept
up with advances in technology?

(a) Social consensus leads to effective laws, since people are already in general agreement with laws
developed on the basis of such a consensus.
(b) Laws can only be effective if people in society are generally in agreement with them.
(c) Effective laws are developed only when people accept the principles and ethics behind them.
(d) Social consensus and guidelines that are accepted by members of a society are brought about by
effective laws, not the other way around.

1.3 Based on the author’s description of how the development of copyright laws followed the creation of the
printing press, which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

(a) The development of the printing press was a direct consequence of the emergence of strong
copyright laws in the 1400s.
(b) The decline of the Holy Roman Empire would have been avoided if strong copyright laws had been in
place at the time the printing press was developed.
(c) The ownership of ideas was not considered important enough to spur debate and the development of
copyright laws – the dramatic changes brought about by the printing press spurred this.
(d) The ownership of ideas had been a matter of much debate in societies for many centuries before the
development of the printing press, but people lost interest in the topic after the dramatic changes
brought about by the printing press.

1.4 Which of the following best describes why the author thinks the development of laws lags behind the
pace of development of technology?

(a) Laws and ethical practices evolve over a long time, and the human mind cannot keep pace with the
advances enabled by computers.
(b) Technological progress takes a long time, and laws are developed very quickly by human institutions.
(c) Computers cannot keep pace with social developments and the rate at which humanity is evolving.
(d) It takes a long time to communicate what the law says to people.

1.5 The author says: (i) that laws and ethical practices take centuries to evolve, and (ii) that today, technology
is on an ‘exponential curve’, and ‘changes of a magnitude that once took centuries how happen in
decades, sometimes in years’. What role do these statements (i) and (ii) play in relation to the conclusion
the author draws about how laws cannot possibly keep up with technological change?

(a) They contradict the author’s conclusion.

(b) They offer alternative conclusions, which the author rejects.
(c) They demonstrate that the author’s conclusion is a mere assumption, and is not backed by any
evidence.
(d) They act as premises in support of the author’s conclusion.

*****
ANSWERS AND RATIONALE: LOGICAL REASONING QUESTIONS – SAMPLE SET FOR MAY 30, 2020

1.1 Answer: (b)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (b) – a law that forbids employers from checking job applicants’ details on social
media. The author describes how employers may avoid legal troubles they might encounter if they “ask
interviewees about their religion, sexual preference, or political affiliation” by using social media to filter
job applicants based on beliefs, looks, and habits. If the change described in option (b) were brought into
effect, employers would no longer be able to do this, thereby avoiding the problem the author describes.
Option (d) describes the opposite of this, and may in fact make the problem worse; therefore, it cannot be
the correct answer. Option (a) may not help solve the problem, since employers would be able to check
job applicants’ social media details even if they have met them in person, and so, it cannot be the correct
answer. Option (c) would have no effect on the practice of employers checking job applicants’ social
media details, and so, it cannot be the correct answer.

1.2 Answer: (d)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (d) - social consensus and guidelines that are accepted by members of a society are
brought about by effective laws, not the other way around. The author describes how Preeta Bansal
argues that “effective laws and standards of ethics are guidelines accepted by members of a society, and
that these require the development of a social consensus”. If option (d) were true, it would be directly
contrary to Preeta Bansal’s arguments, and therefore, weaken it. Each of the other options restates Preeta
Bansal’s argument in one form or the other, and thus, none of them would weaken her argument. Given
this, none of the other options can be the correct answer.

1.3 Answer: (c)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (c) - the ownership of ideas was not considered important enough to spur debate
and the development of copyright laws – the dramatic changes brought about by the printing press
spurred this. The author describes how debates about the ownership of ideas raged for about 300 years
after the creation of the printing press, and how this led to the emergence of copyright laws. Based on
this, it is possible to infer that the question of the ownership of ideas was not debated much before the
emergence of the printing press, since it was not considered very important, and that it was the dramatic
changes brought about by the printing press that led to debate on this topic and the passage of copyright
laws. Options (a) and (d) contradict the author’s arguments, and so, neither can be the correct answer.
While the author says that the printing press “helped spur” the decline of the Holy Roman Empire, there is
nothing in the passage to suggest that such a decline would have been avoided altogether had strong
copyright laws been in place at the time the printing press was developed, and so, option (b) cannot be
the correct answer.

1.4 Answer: (a)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (a) - laws and ethical practices evolve over a long time, and the human mind cannot
keep pace with the advances enabled by computers. The author’s statements at the beginning of the fifth
paragraph of the passage, and the last sentence of the passage, both support this statement. Options (b)
and (c) state the opposite of this, and thus, neither can be the correct answer. There is nothing in the
passage to support option (d), and so, it cannot be the correct answer.
1.5 Answer: (d)

Rationale:
The correct answer is (d) - they act as premises in support of the author’s conclusion. Generally speaking,
a ‘premise’ is the part of an argument that offers evidence in support of a conclusion. Since the author’s
conclusion rests on the difference between the pace of development of laws and ethical practices on the
one hand, and technology on the other, statements (i) and (ii) act as premises for the conclusion. Given
these statements support the author’s conclusion, option (a) cannot be the correct answer. Similarly,
since they merely provide support to the conclusion, and are not conclusions in themselves, option (b)
cannot be the correct answer. And since these statements provide support for the author’s conclusion, it
would be wrong to say that the conclusion is a mere assumption, and therefore, option (c) cannot be the
correct answer either.

*****