VARC 03 - 2023

Scorecard (ScoreCard.jsp?sid=aaa1Oe2EGVSo_aIieWOTyThu Oct 26 17:43:55 IST 2023&qsetId=

8ugeYmeNCo=&qsetName=VARC 03 - 2023)

Accuracy (AccSelectGraph.jsp?sid=aaa1Oe2EGVSo_aIieWOTyThu Oct 26 17:43:55 IST 2023&qsetId=

8ugeYmeNCo=&qsetName=VARC 03 - 2023)

Qs Analysis (QsAnalysis.jsp?sid=aaa1Oe2EGVSo_aIieWOTyThu Oct 26 17:43:55 IST 2023&qsetId=

8ugeYmeNCo=&qsetName=VARC 03 - 2023)

Solutions (Solution.jsp?sid=aaa1Oe2EGVSo_aIieWOTyThu Oct 26 17:43:55 IST 2023&qsetId=

8ugeYmeNCo=&qsetName=VARC 03 - 2023)

Bookmarks (Bookmarks.jsp?sid=aaa1Oe2EGVSo_aIieWOTyThu Oct 26 17:43:55 IST 2023&qsetId=

8ugeYmeNCo=&qsetName=VARC 03 - 2023)

Section-1
Sec 1
Directions for questions (1 to 4): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

The conflicts arising from diversity can be mitigated if teams are effectively led. This is hardly surprising: leadership is a
fundamental resource for groups and organizations. It is the psychological process that enables individuals to set aside their
selfish agendas to cooperate with others for the common benefit of the team, articulating the natural tension between our
desire to get ahead of others and our need to get along with others. All of this is particularly important when teams are
diverse, for it will be harder for team members to see things from other members’ perspectives, empathize with them, and
suppress their own conscious and unconscious biases.

Most studies assume that the relationship between diversity and creativity is linear, but recent evidence suggests that a
moderate degree of diversity is more beneficial than a higher dose. This finding is consistent with the too-much-of-a-good-
thing paradigm in management science, which provides compelling evidence for the idea that even the most desirable
qualities have a dark side if taken to the extreme. In other words, all things are good in moderation (except moderation).

Most discussions about diversity focus on demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and race). However, the most interesting
and influential aspects of diversity are psychological (e.g., personality, values, and abilities), also known as deep-level
diversity. Indeed, there are several advantages to focusing on deep-level variables as opposed to demographic factors. First,
whereas demographic variables perpetuate stereotypical and prejudiced characterizations, deep-level diversity focuses on
the individual, allowing a much more granular understanding of human diversity. Regardless of whether you focus on bright-
or dark-side personality characteristics, motives and values, or indeed creativity, group differences are trivial when compared
with differences between individuals, even when the individuals are part of the same group.

No matter how diverse the workforce is, and regardless of what type of diversity we examine, diversity will not enhance
creativity unless there is a culture of sharing knowledge. Studies mapping the social networks of organizations have found
higher levels of creativity in groups that are more interconnected, particularly when creative and intrapreneurial individuals
are a central node in those networks.

Unlike coaching, which tends to benefit those who need it the least (those who really need it are, alas, often uncoachable),
diversity training is most effective with individuals who are skeptical of it. This is encouraging, though the challenge, of
course, is to ensure that people who are cynical about diversity actually enroll in these training programs.

Other factors are much more salient. Although the question of whether diversity can foster creativity is both interesting and
important, it is important to note that there are many other more influential drivers of creativity. As a seminal meta-analysis
of 30 years of research showed, support for innovation, vision, task orientation, and external communication is the strongest
determinant of creativity and innovation; most input variables, including team composition and structure, have much weaker
effects. Likewise, developing expertise, assigning people to tasks that are meaningful and interesting, and improving creative
thinking skills will produce higher gains in both individual and team creativity than focusing on diversity will. It should also be
noted that a better way to promote both creativity and diversity is to select employees on the basis of their creativity, as
opposed to their cognitive ability or educational credentials, for that alone would enhance the typical diversity level of
organizations. In that sense, creativity may lead to diversity more than vice versa.

In short, there are probably much better reasons for creating a diverse team and organization than boosting creativity. And if
your actual goal is to enhance creativity, there are simpler, more effective solutions than boosting diversity.

Q.1 [11979272]
Which one of the following statements is not true about creativity, according to the passage?

1 Knowledge sharing is important for creativity to flourish.

2 Higher levels of creativity have been observed in groups that are more interconnected.
3 Diversity is not the only way to boost creativity.

4 Diversity is bound to be a hindrance to creativity.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (1 to 4): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

The conflicts arising from diversity can be mitigated if teams are effectively led. This is hardly surprising: leadership is a
fundamental resource for groups and organizations. It is the psychological process that enables individuals to set aside their
selfish agendas to cooperate with others for the common benefit of the team, articulating the natural tension between our
desire to get ahead of others and our need to get along with others. All of this is particularly important when teams are
diverse, for it will be harder for team members to see things from other members’ perspectives, empathize with them, and
suppress their own conscious and unconscious biases.

Most studies assume that the relationship between diversity and creativity is linear, but recent evidence suggests that a
moderate degree of diversity is more beneficial than a higher dose. This finding is consistent with the too-much-of-a-good-
thing paradigm in management science, which provides compelling evidence for the idea that even the most desirable
qualities have a dark side if taken to the extreme. In other words, all things are good in moderation (except moderation).

Most discussions about diversity focus on demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and race). However, the most interesting
and influential aspects of diversity are psychological (e.g., personality, values, and abilities), also known as deep-level
diversity. Indeed, there are several advantages to focusing on deep-level variables as opposed to demographic factors. First,
whereas demographic variables perpetuate stereotypical and prejudiced characterizations, deep-level diversity focuses on
the individual, allowing a much more granular understanding of human diversity. Regardless of whether you focus on bright-
or dark-side personality characteristics, motives and values, or indeed creativity, group differences are trivial when compared
with differences between individuals, even when the individuals are part of the same group.

No matter how diverse the workforce is, and regardless of what type of diversity we examine, diversity will not enhance
creativity unless there is a culture of sharing knowledge. Studies mapping the social networks of organizations have found
higher levels of creativity in groups that are more interconnected, particularly when creative and intrapreneurial individuals
are a central node in those networks.

Unlike coaching, which tends to benefit those who need it the least (those who really need it are, alas, often uncoachable),
diversity training is most effective with individuals who are skeptical of it. This is encouraging, though the challenge, of
course, is to ensure that people who are cynical about diversity actually enroll in these training programs.

Other factors are much more salient. Although the question of whether diversity can foster creativity is both interesting and
important, it is important to note that there are many other more influential drivers of creativity. As a seminal meta-analysis
of 30 years of research showed, support for innovation, vision, task orientation, and external communication is the strongest
determinant of creativity and innovation; most input variables, including team composition and structure, have much weaker
effects. Likewise, developing expertise, assigning people to tasks that are meaningful and interesting, and improving creative
thinking skills will produce higher gains in both individual and team creativity than focusing on diversity will. It should also be
noted that a better way to promote both creativity and diversity is to select employees on the basis of their creativity, as
opposed to their cognitive ability or educational credentials, for that alone would enhance the typical diversity level of
organizations. In that sense, creativity may lead to diversity more than vice versa.

In short, there are probably much better reasons for creating a diverse team and organization than boosting creativity. And if
your actual goal is to enhance creativity, there are simpler, more effective solutions than boosting diversity.

Q.2 [11979272]
The central idea of the passage is that:

1 creativity is heavily dependent on diversity.

2 relationship between diversity and creativity is linear.

3 too much moderation in emphasising on the relationship between diversity and creativity leads to an undesirable
consequence.

4 boosting creativity is just one of the reasons for creating diverse teams in organizations.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (1 to 4): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

The conflicts arising from diversity can be mitigated if teams are effectively led. This is hardly surprising: leadership is a
fundamental resource for groups and organizations. It is the psychological process that enables individuals to set aside their
selfish agendas to cooperate with others for the common benefit of the team, articulating the natural tension between our
desire to get ahead of others and our need to get along with others. All of this is particularly important when teams are
diverse, for it will be harder for team members to see things from other members’ perspectives, empathize with them, and
suppress their own conscious and unconscious biases.

Most studies assume that the relationship between diversity and creativity is linear, but recent evidence suggests that a
moderate degree of diversity is more beneficial than a higher dose. This finding is consistent with the too-much-of-a-good-
thing paradigm in management science, which provides compelling evidence for the idea that even the most desirable
qualities have a dark side if taken to the extreme. In other words, all things are good in moderation (except moderation).

Most discussions about diversity focus on demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and race). However, the most interesting
and influential aspects of diversity are psychological (e.g., personality, values, and abilities), also known as deep-level
diversity. Indeed, there are several advantages to focusing on deep-level variables as opposed to demographic factors. First,
whereas demographic variables perpetuate stereotypical and prejudiced characterizations, deep-level diversity focuses on
the individual, allowing a much more granular understanding of human diversity. Regardless of whether you focus on bright-
or dark-side personality characteristics, motives and values, or indeed creativity, group differences are trivial when compared
with differences between individuals, even when the individuals are part of the same group.

No matter how diverse the workforce is, and regardless of what type of diversity we examine, diversity will not enhance
creativity unless there is a culture of sharing knowledge. Studies mapping the social networks of organizations have found
higher levels of creativity in groups that are more interconnected, particularly when creative and intrapreneurial individuals
are a central node in those networks.

Unlike coaching, which tends to benefit those who need it the least (those who really need it are, alas, often uncoachable),
diversity training is most effective with individuals who are skeptical of it. This is encouraging, though the challenge, of
course, is to ensure that people who are cynical about diversity actually enroll in these training programs.

Other factors are much more salient. Although the question of whether diversity can foster creativity is both interesting and
important, it is important to note that there are many other more influential drivers of creativity. As a seminal meta-analysis
of 30 years of research showed, support for innovation, vision, task orientation, and external communication is the strongest
determinant of creativity and innovation; most input variables, including team composition and structure, have much weaker
effects. Likewise, developing expertise, assigning people to tasks that are meaningful and interesting, and improving creative
thinking skills will produce higher gains in both individual and team creativity than focusing on diversity will. It should also be
noted that a better way to promote both creativity and diversity is to select employees on the basis of their creativity, as
opposed to their cognitive ability or educational credentials, for that alone would enhance the typical diversity level of
organizations. In that sense, creativity may lead to diversity more than vice versa.

In short, there are probably much better reasons for creating a diverse team and organization than boosting creativity. And if
your actual goal is to enhance creativity, there are simpler, more effective solutions than boosting diversity.

Q.3 [11979272]
What does the author suggest about selecting employees?

1 Employees should be selected on the basis of diversity of backgrounds.

2 Employees should be selected on the basis of their creativity.

3 Employees should be selected on the basis of their educational qualifications.

4 Employees should be selected on the basis of their cognitive ability.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (1 to 4): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

The conflicts arising from diversity can be mitigated if teams are effectively led. This is hardly surprising: leadership is a
fundamental resource for groups and organizations. It is the psychological process that enables individuals to set aside their
selfish agendas to cooperate with others for the common benefit of the team, articulating the natural tension between our
desire to get ahead of others and our need to get along with others. All of this is particularly important when teams are
diverse, for it will be harder for team members to see things from other members’ perspectives, empathize with them, and
suppress their own conscious and unconscious biases.

Most studies assume that the relationship between diversity and creativity is linear, but recent evidence suggests that a
moderate degree of diversity is more beneficial than a higher dose. This finding is consistent with the too-much-of-a-good-
thing paradigm in management science, which provides compelling evidence for the idea that even the most desirable
qualities have a dark side if taken to the extreme. In other words, all things are good in moderation (except moderation).

Most discussions about diversity focus on demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, and race). However, the most interesting
and influential aspects of diversity are psychological (e.g., personality, values, and abilities), also known as deep-level
diversity. Indeed, there are several advantages to focusing on deep-level variables as opposed to demographic factors. First,
whereas demographic variables perpetuate stereotypical and prejudiced characterizations, deep-level diversity focuses on
the individual, allowing a much more granular understanding of human diversity. Regardless of whether you focus on bright-
or dark-side personality characteristics, motives and values, or indeed creativity, group differences are trivial when compared
with differences between individuals, even when the individuals are part of the same group.

No matter how diverse the workforce is, and regardless of what type of diversity we examine, diversity will not enhance
creativity unless there is a culture of sharing knowledge. Studies mapping the social networks of organizations have found
higher levels of creativity in groups that are more interconnected, particularly when creative and intrapreneurial individuals
are a central node in those networks.

Unlike coaching, which tends to benefit those who need it the least (those who really need it are, alas, often uncoachable),
diversity training is most effective with individuals who are skeptical of it. This is encouraging, though the challenge, of
course, is to ensure that people who are cynical about diversity actually enroll in these training programs.

Other factors are much more salient. Although the question of whether diversity can foster creativity is both interesting and
important, it is important to note that there are many other more influential drivers of creativity. As a seminal meta-analysis
of 30 years of research showed, support for innovation, vision, task orientation, and external communication is the strongest
determinant of creativity and innovation; most input variables, including team composition and structure, have much weaker
effects. Likewise, developing expertise, assigning people to tasks that are meaningful and interesting, and improving creative
thinking skills will produce higher gains in both individual and team creativity than focusing on diversity will. It should also be
noted that a better way to promote both creativity and diversity is to select employees on the basis of their creativity, as
opposed to their cognitive ability or educational credentials, for that alone would enhance the typical diversity level of
organizations. In that sense, creativity may lead to diversity more than vice versa.

In short, there are probably much better reasons for creating a diverse team and organization than boosting creativity. And if
your actual goal is to enhance creativity, there are simpler, more effective solutions than boosting diversity.

Q.4 [11979272]
Why does the author say “Those who really need it (coaching) are, alas, often uncoachable”?

1 To show that people at times think too highly of themselves

2 To show that people generally do not make an effort to learn new things

3 To show that coaching benefits those who already have a base to start with
4 To show that there are people who just can’t be coached because they are unskilled

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (5 to 8): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

Early forms of cartography were practiced on clay tablets and cave walls. As technology and exploration expanded maps
were drawn on paper and depicted the areas that various explorers travelled. Today maps can show a plethora of information
and the advent of technology such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allows maps to be made relatively easily with
computers.

Some of the earliest known maps date back to 16,500 B.C.E. and show the night sky instead of the Earth. In addition ancient
cave paintings and rock carvings depict landscape features like hills and mountains and archaeologists believe that these
paintings were used to navigate the areas they showed and to portray the areas that the people visited.

Maps were also created in ancient Babylonia (mostly on clay tablets) and it is believed that they were drawn with very
accurate surveying techniques. These maps showed topographical features like hills and valleys but also had labeled
features. The Babylonian World Map is considered the earliest map of the world but it is unique because it is a symbolic
representation of the Earth. It dates back to 600 B.C.E.

The earliest paper maps that were identified by cartographers as maps used for navigation and to depict certain areas of the
Earth were those created by the early Greeks. The maps they drew came from explorer observations and mathematical
calculations.

The Greek maps are important to cartography because they often showed Greece as being at the center of the world and
surrounded by an ocean. Other early Greek maps show the world being divided into two continents – Asia and Europe. Many
Greek philosophers considered the Earth to be spherical and this also influenced their cartography. Ptolemy for instance
created maps by using a coordinate system with parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude to accurately show areas of
the Earth as he knew it. This became the basis for today’s maps and his atlas Geographia is an early example of modern
cartography.

In addition to the ancient Greek maps, early examples of cartography also come out of China. These maps date to the 4th
century B.C.E and were drawn on wooden blocks. Other early Chinese maps were produced on silk. Early Chinese maps from
the Qin State show various territories with landscape features such as the Jialing River system as well as roads and are
considered some of the world’s oldest economic maps.

Like Greece and China (as well as other areas throughout the rest of the world) the development of cartography was
significant in Europe as well. Early medieval maps were mainly symbolic like those that came out of Greece. Beginning in the
13th century the Majorcan Cartographic School was developed and consisted of a Jewish collaboration of cartographers,
cosmographers and navigators/navigational instrument makers. The Majorcan Cartographic School invented the Normal
Portolan Chart – a nautical mile chart that used gridded compass lines for navigation.

Modern cartography began as various technological advancements were made. The invention of tools like the compass,
telescope, sextant, quadrant and printing press all allowed for maps to be made more easily and accurately. New
technologies also led to the development of different map projections that more precisely showed the world.
 Q.5 [11979272]
The unique feature exhibited by the earliest maps was:

1 showcasing a vivid artistic description of local areas.

2 the absence of topography.

3 its ability to depict Earth symbolically.

4 the use of complex mathematics to determine the geographical locations.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (5 to 8): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

Early forms of cartography were practiced on clay tablets and cave walls. As technology and exploration expanded maps
were drawn on paper and depicted the areas that various explorers travelled. Today maps can show a plethora of information
and the advent of technology such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allows maps to be made relatively easily with
computers.

Some of the earliest known maps date back to 16,500 B.C.E. and show the night sky instead of the Earth. In addition ancient
cave paintings and rock carvings depict landscape features like hills and mountains and archaeologists believe that these
paintings were used to navigate the areas they showed and to portray the areas that the people visited.

Maps were also created in ancient Babylonia (mostly on clay tablets) and it is believed that they were drawn with very
accurate surveying techniques. These maps showed topographical features like hills and valleys but also had labeled
features. The Babylonian World Map is considered the earliest map of the world but it is unique because it is a symbolic
representation of the Earth. It dates back to 600 B.C.E.

The earliest paper maps that were identified by cartographers as maps used for navigation and to depict certain areas of the
Earth were those created by the early Greeks. The maps they drew came from explorer observations and mathematical
calculations.

The Greek maps are important to cartography because they often showed Greece as being at the center of the world and
surrounded by an ocean. Other early Greek maps show the world being divided into two continents – Asia and Europe. Many
Greek philosophers considered the Earth to be spherical and this also influenced their cartography. Ptolemy for instance
created maps by using a coordinate system with parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude to accurately show areas of
the Earth as he knew it. This became the basis for today’s maps and his atlas Geographia is an early example of modern
cartography.

In addition to the ancient Greek maps, early examples of cartography also come out of China. These maps date to the 4th
century B.C.E and were drawn on wooden blocks. Other early Chinese maps were produced on silk. Early Chinese maps from
the Qin State show various territories with landscape features such as the Jialing River system as well as roads and are
considered some of the world’s oldest economic maps.

Like Greece and China (as well as other areas throughout the rest of the world) the development of cartography was
significant in Europe as well. Early medieval maps were mainly symbolic like those that came out of Greece. Beginning in the
13th century the Majorcan Cartographic School was developed and consisted of a Jewish collaboration of cartographers,
cosmographers and navigators/navigational instrument makers. The Majorcan Cartographic School invented the Normal
Portolan Chart – a nautical mile chart that used gridded compass lines for navigation.

Modern cartography began as various technological advancements were made. The invention of tools like the compass,
telescope, sextant, quadrant and printing press all allowed for maps to be made more easily and accurately. New
technologies also led to the development of different map projections that more precisely showed the world.

Q.6 [11979272]
The accuracy of a map at the most basic level depends on:

1 the proper use of the coordinate systems.

2 identifying a proper centre.

3 assigning a particular shape to the Earth.

4 the accuracy of the science in use.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (5 to 8): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

Early forms of cartography were practiced on clay tablets and cave walls. As technology and exploration expanded maps
were drawn on paper and depicted the areas that various explorers travelled. Today maps can show a plethora of information
and the advent of technology such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allows maps to be made relatively easily with
computers.

Some of the earliest known maps date back to 16,500 B.C.E. and show the night sky instead of the Earth. In addition ancient
cave paintings and rock carvings depict landscape features like hills and mountains and archaeologists believe that these
paintings were used to navigate the areas they showed and to portray the areas that the people visited.

Maps were also created in ancient Babylonia (mostly on clay tablets) and it is believed that they were drawn with very
accurate surveying techniques. These maps showed topographical features like hills and valleys but also had labeled
features. The Babylonian World Map is considered the earliest map of the world but it is unique because it is a symbolic
representation of the Earth. It dates back to 600 B.C.E.

The earliest paper maps that were identified by cartographers as maps used for navigation and to depict certain areas of the
Earth were those created by the early Greeks. The maps they drew came from explorer observations and mathematical
calculations.

The Greek maps are important to cartography because they often showed Greece as being at the center of the world and
surrounded by an ocean. Other early Greek maps show the world being divided into two continents – Asia and Europe. Many
Greek philosophers considered the Earth to be spherical and this also influenced their cartography. Ptolemy for instance
created maps by using a coordinate system with parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude to accurately show areas of
the Earth as he knew it. This became the basis for today’s maps and his atlas Geographia is an early example of modern
cartography.

In addition to the ancient Greek maps, early examples of cartography also come out of China. These maps date to the 4th
century B.C.E and were drawn on wooden blocks. Other early Chinese maps were produced on silk. Early Chinese maps from
the Qin State show various territories with landscape features such as the Jialing River system as well as roads and are
considered some of the world’s oldest economic maps.

Like Greece and China (as well as other areas throughout the rest of the world) the development of cartography was
significant in Europe as well. Early medieval maps were mainly symbolic like those that came out of Greece. Beginning in the
13th century the Majorcan Cartographic School was developed and consisted of a Jewish collaboration of cartographers,
cosmographers and navigators/navigational instrument makers. The Majorcan Cartographic School invented the Normal
Portolan Chart – a nautical mile chart that used gridded compass lines for navigation.

Modern cartography began as various technological advancements were made. The invention of tools like the compass,
telescope, sextant, quadrant and printing press all allowed for maps to be made more easily and accurately. New
technologies also led to the development of different map projections that more precisely showed the world.
 Q.7 [11979272]
Which of the following is true in the light of the given passage?

1 The evolution of map making is linked with human explorations.

2 China produced the oldest economic maps in the world.

3 In ancient times map making was considered an art form.

4 Grecian philosophers were the first to assign a shape to Earth.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (5 to 8): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

Early forms of cartography were practiced on clay tablets and cave walls. As technology and exploration expanded maps
were drawn on paper and depicted the areas that various explorers travelled. Today maps can show a plethora of information
and the advent of technology such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) allows maps to be made relatively easily with
computers.

Some of the earliest known maps date back to 16,500 B.C.E. and show the night sky instead of the Earth. In addition ancient
cave paintings and rock carvings depict landscape features like hills and mountains and archaeologists believe that these
paintings were used to navigate the areas they showed and to portray the areas that the people visited.

Maps were also created in ancient Babylonia (mostly on clay tablets) and it is believed that they were drawn with very
accurate surveying techniques. These maps showed topographical features like hills and valleys but also had labeled
features. The Babylonian World Map is considered the earliest map of the world but it is unique because it is a symbolic
representation of the Earth. It dates back to 600 B.C.E.

The earliest paper maps that were identified by cartographers as maps used for navigation and to depict certain areas of the
Earth were those created by the early Greeks. The maps they drew came from explorer observations and mathematical
calculations.

The Greek maps are important to cartography because they often showed Greece as being at the center of the world and
surrounded by an ocean. Other early Greek maps show the world being divided into two continents – Asia and Europe. Many
Greek philosophers considered the Earth to be spherical and this also influenced their cartography. Ptolemy for instance
created maps by using a coordinate system with parallels of latitude and meridians of longitude to accurately show areas of
the Earth as he knew it. This became the basis for today’s maps and his atlas Geographia is an early example of modern
cartography.

In addition to the ancient Greek maps, early examples of cartography also come out of China. These maps date to the 4th
century B.C.E and were drawn on wooden blocks. Other early Chinese maps were produced on silk. Early Chinese maps from
the Qin State show various territories with landscape features such as the Jialing River system as well as roads and are
considered some of the world’s oldest economic maps.

Like Greece and China (as well as other areas throughout the rest of the world) the development of cartography was
significant in Europe as well. Early medieval maps were mainly symbolic like those that came out of Greece. Beginning in the
13th century the Majorcan Cartographic School was developed and consisted of a Jewish collaboration of cartographers,
cosmographers and navigators/navigational instrument makers. The Majorcan Cartographic School invented the Normal
Portolan Chart – a nautical mile chart that used gridded compass lines for navigation.

Modern cartography began as various technological advancements were made. The invention of tools like the compass,
telescope, sextant, quadrant and printing press all allowed for maps to be made more easily and accurately. New
technologies also led to the development of different map projections that more precisely showed the world.

Q.8 [11979272]
From the passage it can be inferred that:

1 Greek philosophers changed how we looked at the world.

2 Ancient China had a proper transport system.

3 Ptolemy is the father of Geography.

4 Cave walls served as papers in pre-historic times.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (9 to 12): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

One thing that is not wrong is the Refugee Convention itself. Its definition (“a well founded fear of being persecuted” for
discriminatory reasons) has proved wonderfully flexible, identifying new groups of fundamentally disfranchised persons
unable to benefit from human rights protection in their own countries. At least as important, its catalogue of refugee-specific
rights remains as valuable today as ever. The underlying theory of the Refugee Convention is emphatically not the creation of
dependency by hand-outs. It guarantees the social and economic rights that refugees need to be able to get back on their
feet after being forced away from their own national community (e.g., to access education, to seek work, and to start
businesses).

It was patently obvious to the States that drafted the refugee treaty that refugees could not begin to look after themselves,
much less to contribute to the well-being of their host communities, if they were caged up. For this reason, as soon as a
refugee has submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the host country, satisfied authorities of her identity, and addressed any
security-related concerns, the Refugee Convention requires that she be afforded not only freedom of movement, but the right
to choose her place of residence – a right that continues until and unless the substance of her refugee claim is negatively
determined. Respecting this legal guarantee of refugee mobility can dramatically change the policy outcomes of admitting
refugees; indeed, a recent study shows that those countries that do facilitate refugee freedom of movement are often
economically advantaged by the presence of refugees.

Why, then, do States not routinely liberate the productive potential of refugees? Part of the reason is that setting up refugee
camps is an easy one size fits all answer that and many of its many humanitarian partners. When there is a political
imperative to act, the establishment of camps is a concrete and visible sign of engagement. Indeed, even as the regional
States receiving the overwhelming majority of Syrian refugees were largely ignored by the rest of the world, international
donors stepped forward to finance the building and operation of refugee camps.

Most fundamentally, though, the detention of refugees is a strategy that appeals to States that would prefer to avoid their
international duty to protect refugees. While not willing to accept the political cost of formally renouncing the treaty, States
with the economic and practical wherewithal have for many years sought to ensure that refugees never arrive at their
jurisdiction, at which point duties in here. The strategy of deterrence has, however, come under increasingly successful
challenge, including before the European Court of Human Rights. Poorer States, as well as those with especially porous
borders, have of course rarely been able to deter refugee arrivals at all. For States in either situation, restricting the mobility
of refugees by detention or similar practices (often accompanied by other harsh treatment post-arrival) is seen as a second-
best means for a State to send a signal that they are not open to the arrival of refugees.

Q.9 [11979272]
Which of the following rights to refugees has been cited as a potential economic benefit for the host country?

1 Right to seek education

2 Right to freedom of movement

3 Right to freedom of work

4 Right to reside

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (9 to 12): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

One thing that is not wrong is the Refugee Convention itself. Its definition (“a well founded fear of being persecuted” for
discriminatory reasons) has proved wonderfully flexible, identifying new groups of fundamentally disfranchised persons
unable to benefit from human rights protection in their own countries. At least as important, its catalogue of refugee-specific
rights remains as valuable today as ever. The underlying theory of the Refugee Convention is emphatically not the creation of
dependency by hand-outs. It guarantees the social and economic rights that refugees need to be able to get back on their
feet after being forced away from their own national community (e.g., to access education, to seek work, and to start
businesses).

It was patently obvious to the States that drafted the refugee treaty that refugees could not begin to look after themselves,
much less to contribute to the well-being of their host communities, if they were caged up. For this reason, as soon as a
refugee has submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the host country, satisfied authorities of her identity, and addressed any
security-related concerns, the Refugee Convention requires that she be afforded not only freedom of movement, but the right
to choose her place of residence – a right that continues until and unless the substance of her refugee claim is negatively
determined. Respecting this legal guarantee of refugee mobility can dramatically change the policy outcomes of admitting
refugees; indeed, a recent study shows that those countries that do facilitate refugee freedom of movement are often
economically advantaged by the presence of refugees.

Why, then, do States not routinely liberate the productive potential of refugees? Part of the reason is that setting up refugee
camps is an easy one size fits all answer that and many of its many humanitarian partners. When there is a political
imperative to act, the establishment of camps is a concrete and visible sign of engagement. Indeed, even as the regional
States receiving the overwhelming majority of Syrian refugees were largely ignored by the rest of the world, international
donors stepped forward to finance the building and operation of refugee camps.

Most fundamentally, though, the detention of refugees is a strategy that appeals to States that would prefer to avoid their
international duty to protect refugees. While not willing to accept the political cost of formally renouncing the treaty, States
with the economic and practical wherewithal have for many years sought to ensure that refugees never arrive at their
jurisdiction, at which point duties in here. The strategy of deterrence has, however, come under increasingly successful
challenge, including before the European Court of Human Rights. Poorer States, as well as those with especially porous
borders, have of course rarely been able to deter refugee arrivals at all. For States in either situation, restricting the mobility
of refugees by detention or similar practices (often accompanied by other harsh treatment post-arrival) is seen as a second-
best means for a State to send a signal that they are not open to the arrival of refugees.

Q.10 [11979272]
Which of the following have rarely been able to deter refugee arrivals?

1 Developed states

2 Developing states
3 States that are party to the Refugee Convention

4 States with porous borders

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (9 to 12): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

One thing that is not wrong is the Refugee Convention itself. Its definition (“a well founded fear of being persecuted” for
discriminatory reasons) has proved wonderfully flexible, identifying new groups of fundamentally disfranchised persons
unable to benefit from human rights protection in their own countries. At least as important, its catalogue of refugee-specific
rights remains as valuable today as ever. The underlying theory of the Refugee Convention is emphatically not the creation of
dependency by hand-outs. It guarantees the social and economic rights that refugees need to be able to get back on their
feet after being forced away from their own national community (e.g., to access education, to seek work, and to start
businesses).

It was patently obvious to the States that drafted the refugee treaty that refugees could not begin to look after themselves,
much less to contribute to the well-being of their host communities, if they were caged up. For this reason, as soon as a
refugee has submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the host country, satisfied authorities of her identity, and addressed any
security-related concerns, the Refugee Convention requires that she be afforded not only freedom of movement, but the right
to choose her place of residence – a right that continues until and unless the substance of her refugee claim is negatively
determined. Respecting this legal guarantee of refugee mobility can dramatically change the policy outcomes of admitting
refugees; indeed, a recent study shows that those countries that do facilitate refugee freedom of movement are often
economically advantaged by the presence of refugees.

Why, then, do States not routinely liberate the productive potential of refugees? Part of the reason is that setting up refugee
camps is an easy one size fits all answer that and many of its many humanitarian partners. When there is a political
imperative to act, the establishment of camps is a concrete and visible sign of engagement. Indeed, even as the regional
States receiving the overwhelming majority of Syrian refugees were largely ignored by the rest of the world, international
donors stepped forward to finance the building and operation of refugee camps.

Most fundamentally, though, the detention of refugees is a strategy that appeals to States that would prefer to avoid their
international duty to protect refugees. While not willing to accept the political cost of formally renouncing the treaty, States
with the economic and practical wherewithal have for many years sought to ensure that refugees never arrive at their
jurisdiction, at which point duties in here. The strategy of deterrence has, however, come under increasingly successful
challenge, including before the European Court of Human Rights. Poorer States, as well as those with especially porous
borders, have of course rarely been able to deter refugee arrivals at all. For States in either situation, restricting the mobility
of refugees by detention or similar practices (often accompanied by other harsh treatment post-arrival) is seen as a second-
best means for a State to send a signal that they are not open to the arrival of refugees.

Q.11 [11979272]
The writer intends to reveal which of the following from the answer to ‘Why, then, do States not routinely liberate the
productive potential of refugees?’
1 The inefficiency of the Refugee Convention to solve their problem

2 The intention of host nations to show the world that they are unwelcoming towards the refugees

3 The hidden agenda of states to portray themselves empathic to refugee crisis without taking any efficient step

4 The loopholes in the rights guaranteed to the refugees

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Directions for questions (9 to 12): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to
each question.

One thing that is not wrong is the Refugee Convention itself. Its definition (“a well founded fear of being persecuted” for
discriminatory reasons) has proved wonderfully flexible, identifying new groups of fundamentally disfranchised persons
unable to benefit from human rights protection in their own countries. At least as important, its catalogue of refugee-specific
rights remains as valuable today as ever. The underlying theory of the Refugee Convention is emphatically not the creation of
dependency by hand-outs. It guarantees the social and economic rights that refugees need to be able to get back on their
feet after being forced away from their own national community (e.g., to access education, to seek work, and to start
businesses).

It was patently obvious to the States that drafted the refugee treaty that refugees could not begin to look after themselves,
much less to contribute to the well-being of their host communities, if they were caged up. For this reason, as soon as a
refugee has submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the host country, satisfied authorities of her identity, and addressed any
security-related concerns, the Refugee Convention requires that she be afforded not only freedom of movement, but the right
to choose her place of residence – a right that continues until and unless the substance of her refugee claim is negatively
determined. Respecting this legal guarantee of refugee mobility can dramatically change the policy outcomes of admitting
refugees; indeed, a recent study shows that those countries that do facilitate refugee freedom of movement are often
economically advantaged by the presence of refugees.

Why, then, do States not routinely liberate the productive potential of refugees? Part of the reason is that setting up refugee
camps is an easy one size fits all answer that and many of its many humanitarian partners. When there is a political
imperative to act, the establishment of camps is a concrete and visible sign of engagement. Indeed, even as the regional
States receiving the overwhelming majority of Syrian refugees were largely ignored by the rest of the world, international
donors stepped forward to finance the building and operation of refugee camps.

Most fundamentally, though, the detention of refugees is a strategy that appeals to States that would prefer to avoid their
international duty to protect refugees. While not willing to accept the political cost of formally renouncing the treaty, States
with the economic and practical wherewithal have for many years sought to ensure that refugees never arrive at their
jurisdiction, at which point duties in here. The strategy of deterrence has, however, come under increasingly successful
challenge, including before the European Court of Human Rights. Poorer States, as well as those with especially porous
borders, have of course rarely been able to deter refugee arrivals at all. For States in either situation, restricting the mobility
of refugees by detention or similar practices (often accompanied by other harsh treatment post-arrival) is seen as a second-
best means for a State to send a signal that they are not open to the arrival of refugees.

Q.12 [11979272]
Which of the following will be the most suitable title to the passage?
1 Refugee Convention – A losing battle

2 Refugee crisis and the host nations

3 Rights and duties of refugees

4 The global refugee crisis

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (13 to 16): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer
to each question.
The timing was exquisitely ironic: equity markets peaked – and a week later began crashing – just as pundits left this year’s
World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, where they concluded that the global economy was on a steady upswing. In the
weeks since, experts have divided into two camps.

Some, including new US Federal Reserve Board chairman Jerome Powell, believe that economic fundamentals are strong,
and that what stock markets experienced in early February was only a temporary hiccup.

Then there are those who believe that fundamentals are in fact weak, that the current upswing will prove unsustainable, and
that investors should regard stock-market gyrations as a necessary wakeup call.

Both schools of thought share a focus on fundamentals, unlike a third – and, in my opinion, highly plausible – view: that the
asset-price volatility we have been seeing has little or nothing to do with changes in fundamentals.

Fundamentalists claim that faster year-on-year growth in US average hourly earnings was the immediate trigger for the
crash. But the claim that such a slight change – from 2.7% in December to 2.9% in January (which observers view as an
aberration, caused by seasonal factors) – could trigger a stock-market correction is in itself a strike against the
fundamentalist view.

Moreover, whereas the wage growth in question was supposed to be a harbinger of inflation, ten-year break-even inflation
moved down. Also, the ten-year Treasury yields did not break the 3% ceiling, while exchange rates hardly moved, all
suggesting that rumours of inflation have been greatly exaggerated.

The human brain is wired to structure knowledge around narratives in which we can tell if and how A (and B and C) causes X.
We tend to be uncomfortable with the notion that an economy’s fundamentals do not determine its asset prices, so we look
for causal links between the two. But wanting those links does not make them valid.

The idea that asset-price movements can be unrelated to fundamentals is a part of economic theory. There are two reasons
to hold an equity claim: dividend earning and expected price increase. Price movements (the expected capital gain) can drive
buying and selling decisions even in the absence of changes to expected dividends (the fundamentals). Therefore, it is
perfectly rational to pursue a “keep buying because the price will keep rising” strategy – until it is not.

But when will such a bubble burst? Economic theory is silent here. Bubbles can persist for decades (real-estate prices in
fashionable cities) or just minutes (hard-to-justify intraday fluctuations). The only sure thing, Keynes has claimed, is that the
market can remain misaligned much longer than you or I can remain solvent.

It is not just nerdy professors who are skeptical on the importance of fundamentals. There is a rise of a new breed of oil
trader who trades “based on moves in currencies, interest rates, or the price of oil itself.” rather than focusing on oil’s
demand-supply aspects. Ready for an oil price bubble, anyone?

There might already be a huge one in the US stock market, with its being the priciest stock market before the Jan 23 crash.
Commenting on this, Robert Shiller said that, “it is impossible to pin down the full cause of the high price of the US stock
market.”

The questions which then arise are ‘Where should the line be drawn? When does a little “good” volatility turn into excessive
“bad” volatility?’ These are difficult questions, and the answers can only be time- and context-specific.

A final disclaimer: believing that fundamentals do not always pin down asset prices is not the same as believing they are
irrelevant, much less that current US fundamentals are in good shape. An additional fiscal stimulus at a time of near-full
employment and large public debt is exactly what the doctor did not order. Precisely because of all the offsetting factors, the
US Congress Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the recent tax cuts will add just 0.08 percentage points to the
average annual growth rate over the next decade, and the long-run output effects could be smaller or even negative.
Yet the US business community remains gung-ho on the reform. So it is possible that conservative American business
executives will invest more not because the tax cut will improve the fundamentals of the US economy and increase demand
for their products, but just because they believe it will.

That, too, would be an exquisite irony.

Q.13 [11979272]
Based on the passage, it could be said that:

1 the US stock market is overpriced, being the priciest of all before the Jan 23 crash.

2 asset prices have little or nothing to do with the perception towards changes in fundamentals.

3 the threshold between good and bad volatility is dynamic.

4 businessmen have increasingly stopped looking at fundamentals while making business decisions.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (13 to 16): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer
to each question.
The timing was exquisitely ironic: equity markets peaked – and a week later began crashing – just as pundits left this year’s
World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, where they concluded that the global economy was on a steady upswing. In the
weeks since, experts have divided into two camps.

Some, including new US Federal Reserve Board chairman Jerome Powell, believe that economic fundamentals are strong,
and that what stock markets experienced in early February was only a temporary hiccup.

Then there are those who believe that fundamentals are in fact weak, that the current upswing will prove unsustainable, and
that investors should regard stock-market gyrations as a necessary wakeup call.

Both schools of thought share a focus on fundamentals, unlike a third – and, in my opinion, highly plausible – view: that the
asset-price volatility we have been seeing has little or nothing to do with changes in fundamentals.

Fundamentalists claim that faster year-on-year growth in US average hourly earnings was the immediate trigger for the
crash. But the claim that such a slight change – from 2.7% in December to 2.9% in January (which observers view as an
aberration, caused by seasonal factors) – could trigger a stock-market correction is in itself a strike against the
fundamentalist view.

Moreover, whereas the wage growth in question was supposed to be a harbinger of inflation, ten-year break-even inflation
moved down. Also, the ten-year Treasury yields did not break the 3% ceiling, while exchange rates hardly moved, all
suggesting that rumours of inflation have been greatly exaggerated.

The human brain is wired to structure knowledge around narratives in which we can tell if and how A (and B and C) causes X.
We tend to be uncomfortable with the notion that an economy’s fundamentals do not determine its asset prices, so we look
for causal links between the two. But wanting those links does not make them valid.

The idea that asset-price movements can be unrelated to fundamentals is a part of economic theory. There are two reasons
to hold an equity claim: dividend earning and expected price increase. Price movements (the expected capital gain) can drive
buying and selling decisions even in the absence of changes to expected dividends (the fundamentals). Therefore, it is
perfectly rational to pursue a “keep buying because the price will keep rising” strategy – until it is not.

But when will such a bubble burst? Economic theory is silent here. Bubbles can persist for decades (real-estate prices in
fashionable cities) or just minutes (hard-to-justify intraday fluctuations). The only sure thing, Keynes has claimed, is that the
market can remain misaligned much longer than you or I can remain solvent.

It is not just nerdy professors who are skeptical on the importance of fundamentals. There is a rise of a new breed of oil
trader who trades “based on moves in currencies, interest rates, or the price of oil itself.” rather than focusing on oil’s
demand-supply aspects. Ready for an oil price bubble, anyone?

There might already be a huge one in the US stock market, with its being the priciest stock market before the Jan 23 crash.
Commenting on this, Robert Shiller said that, “it is impossible to pin down the full cause of the high price of the US stock
market.”

The questions which then arise are ‘Where should the line be drawn? When does a little “good” volatility turn into excessive
“bad” volatility?’ These are difficult questions, and the answers can only be time- and context-specific.

A final disclaimer: believing that fundamentals do not always pin down asset prices is not the same as believing they are
irrelevant, much less that current US fundamentals are in good shape. An additional fiscal stimulus at a time of near-full
employment and large public debt is exactly what the doctor did not order. Precisely because of all the offsetting factors, the
US Congress Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the recent tax cuts will add just 0.08 percentage points to the
average annual growth rate over the next decade, and the long-run output effects could be smaller or even negative.
Yet the US business community remains gung-ho on the reform. So it is possible that conservative American business
executives will invest more not because the tax cut will improve the fundamentals of the US economy and increase demand
for their products, but just because they believe it will.

That, too, would be an exquisite irony.

Q.14 [11979272]
The author makes the argument regarding inflation to:

1 indicate that the rumours of inflation were exaggerated.

2 substantiate the human tendency to look for cause-effect relationships even where there may be none.

3 further the argument that the change in wage growth did not cause the crash in equity markets.

4 point out that the asset prices would have risen if inflation had happened.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (13 to 16): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer
to each question.
The timing was exquisitely ironic: equity markets peaked – and a week later began crashing – just as pundits left this year’s
World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, where they concluded that the global economy was on a steady upswing. In the
weeks since, experts have divided into two camps.

Some, including new US Federal Reserve Board chairman Jerome Powell, believe that economic fundamentals are strong,
and that what stock markets experienced in early February was only a temporary hiccup.

Then there are those who believe that fundamentals are in fact weak, that the current upswing will prove unsustainable, and
that investors should regard stock-market gyrations as a necessary wakeup call.

Both schools of thought share a focus on fundamentals, unlike a third – and, in my opinion, highly plausible – view: that the
asset-price volatility we have been seeing has little or nothing to do with changes in fundamentals.

Fundamentalists claim that faster year-on-year growth in US average hourly earnings was the immediate trigger for the
crash. But the claim that such a slight change – from 2.7% in December to 2.9% in January (which observers view as an
aberration, caused by seasonal factors) – could trigger a stock-market correction is in itself a strike against the
fundamentalist view.

Moreover, whereas the wage growth in question was supposed to be a harbinger of inflation, ten-year break-even inflation
moved down. Also, the ten-year Treasury yields did not break the 3% ceiling, while exchange rates hardly moved, all
suggesting that rumours of inflation have been greatly exaggerated.

The human brain is wired to structure knowledge around narratives in which we can tell if and how A (and B and C) causes X.
We tend to be uncomfortable with the notion that an economy’s fundamentals do not determine its asset prices, so we look
for causal links between the two. But wanting those links does not make them valid.

The idea that asset-price movements can be unrelated to fundamentals is a part of economic theory. There are two reasons
to hold an equity claim: dividend earning and expected price increase. Price movements (the expected capital gain) can drive
buying and selling decisions even in the absence of changes to expected dividends (the fundamentals). Therefore, it is
perfectly rational to pursue a “keep buying because the price will keep rising” strategy – until it is not.

But when will such a bubble burst? Economic theory is silent here. Bubbles can persist for decades (real-estate prices in
fashionable cities) or just minutes (hard-to-justify intraday fluctuations). The only sure thing, Keynes has claimed, is that the
market can remain misaligned much longer than you or I can remain solvent.

It is not just nerdy professors who are skeptical on the importance of fundamentals. There is a rise of a new breed of oil
trader who trades “based on moves in currencies, interest rates, or the price of oil itself.” rather than focusing on oil’s
demand-supply aspects. Ready for an oil price bubble, anyone?

There might already be a huge one in the US stock market, with its being the priciest stock market before the Jan 23 crash.
Commenting on this, Robert Shiller said that, “it is impossible to pin down the full cause of the high price of the US stock
market.”

The questions which then arise are ‘Where should the line be drawn? When does a little “good” volatility turn into excessive
“bad” volatility?’ These are difficult questions, and the answers can only be time- and context-specific.

A final disclaimer: believing that fundamentals do not always pin down asset prices is not the same as believing they are
irrelevant, much less that current US fundamentals are in good shape. An additional fiscal stimulus at a time of near-full
employment and large public debt is exactly what the doctor did not order. Precisely because of all the offsetting factors, the
US Congress Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the recent tax cuts will add just 0.08 percentage points to the
average annual growth rate over the next decade, and the long-run output effects could be smaller or even negative.
Yet the US business community remains gung-ho on the reform. So it is possible that conservative American business
executives will invest more not because the tax cut will improve the fundamentals of the US economy and increase demand
for their products, but just because they believe it will.

That, too, would be an exquisite irony.

Q.15 [11979272]
What is the central argument of the author of the passage?

1 Financial asset price movements can be unrelated to economic fundamentals.

2 Economic fundamentals are not as important as they are made out to be.

3 Economic fundamentals do not impact the financial asset market.

4 People’s belief in a cause-effect relation between economic fundamentals and asset prices is self-prophesying.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
Directions for questions (13 to 16): The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer
to each question.
The timing was exquisitely ironic: equity markets peaked – and a week later began crashing – just as pundits left this year’s
World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, where they concluded that the global economy was on a steady upswing. In the
weeks since, experts have divided into two camps.

Some, including new US Federal Reserve Board chairman Jerome Powell, believe that economic fundamentals are strong,
and that what stock markets experienced in early February was only a temporary hiccup.

Then there are those who believe that fundamentals are in fact weak, that the current upswing will prove unsustainable, and
that investors should regard stock-market gyrations as a necessary wakeup call.

Both schools of thought share a focus on fundamentals, unlike a third – and, in my opinion, highly plausible – view: that the
asset-price volatility we have been seeing has little or nothing to do with changes in fundamentals.

Fundamentalists claim that faster year-on-year growth in US average hourly earnings was the immediate trigger for the
crash. But the claim that such a slight change – from 2.7% in December to 2.9% in January (which observers view as an
aberration, caused by seasonal factors) – could trigger a stock-market correction is in itself a strike against the
fundamentalist view.

Moreover, whereas the wage growth in question was supposed to be a harbinger of inflation, ten-year break-even inflation
moved down. Also, the ten-year Treasury yields did not break the 3% ceiling, while exchange rates hardly moved, all
suggesting that rumours of inflation have been greatly exaggerated.

The human brain is wired to structure knowledge around narratives in which we can tell if and how A (and B and C) causes X.
We tend to be uncomfortable with the notion that an economy’s fundamentals do not determine its asset prices, so we look
for causal links between the two. But wanting those links does not make them valid.

The idea that asset-price movements can be unrelated to fundamentals is a part of economic theory. There are two reasons
to hold an equity claim: dividend earning and expected price increase. Price movements (the expected capital gain) can drive
buying and selling decisions even in the absence of changes to expected dividends (the fundamentals). Therefore, it is
perfectly rational to pursue a “keep buying because the price will keep rising” strategy – until it is not.

But when will such a bubble burst? Economic theory is silent here. Bubbles can persist for decades (real-estate prices in
fashionable cities) or just minutes (hard-to-justify intraday fluctuations). The only sure thing, Keynes has claimed, is that the
market can remain misaligned much longer than you or I can remain solvent.

It is not just nerdy professors who are skeptical on the importance of fundamentals. There is a rise of a new breed of oil
trader who trades “based on moves in currencies, interest rates, or the price of oil itself.” rather than focusing on oil’s
demand-supply aspects. Ready for an oil price bubble, anyone?

There might already be a huge one in the US stock market, with its being the priciest stock market before the Jan 23 crash.
Commenting on this, Robert Shiller said that, “it is impossible to pin down the full cause of the high price of the US stock
market.”

The questions which then arise are ‘Where should the line be drawn? When does a little “good” volatility turn into excessive
“bad” volatility?’ These are difficult questions, and the answers can only be time- and context-specific.

A final disclaimer: believing that fundamentals do not always pin down asset prices is not the same as believing they are
irrelevant, much less that current US fundamentals are in good shape. An additional fiscal stimulus at a time of near-full
employment and large public debt is exactly what the doctor did not order. Precisely because of all the offsetting factors, the
US Congress Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the recent tax cuts will add just 0.08 percentage points to the
average annual growth rate over the next decade, and the long-run output effects could be smaller or even negative.
Yet the US business community remains gung-ho on the reform. So it is possible that conservative American business
executives will invest more not because the tax cut will improve the fundamentals of the US economy and increase demand
for their products, but just because they believe it will.

That, too, would be an exquisite irony.

Q.16 [11979272]
It can be inferred from the line ‘Ready for an oil price bubble, anyone?’ that the author:

1 doesn’t buy the fact that the current oil trading practices would lead to an oil price bubble.

2 believes that the oil price market is misaligned with a bubble gradually building up.

3 is cautioning the reader against an oil price bubble similar to that of the US stock market.

4 is speculating about the formation of a bubble in the oil price market.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.17 [11979272]
Directions for question (17): 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. This week, when the matter of Rohingya refugees now in India came up for hearing in the Supreme Court, government
counsel refused to guarantee they would not be deported.
2. New Delhi has traditionally been wary of internationalizing the internal affairs of its neighbors; on Myanmar, it has
concerns about keeping the country from spinning back into the Chinese orbit.
3. But India must adopt a humane position when dealing with a refugee population that is stateless and has no place to call
home.
4. This was in line with the government’s indication to Parliament last month that all illegal immigrants, including the
Rohingya, who number around 40,000, will be deported.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
 Q.18 [11979272]
Directions for question 18: The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures
the author’s position.

Sometimes the narrator's unreliability is made immediately evident. For instance, a story may open with the narrator making
a plainly false or delusional claim or admitting to being severely mentally ill, or the story itself may have a frame in which the
narrator appears as a character, with clues to the character's unreliability. A more dramatic use of the device delays the
revelation until near the story's end. In some cases, the reader discovers that in the foregoing narrative, the narrator had
concealed or greatly misrepresented vital pieces of information. Such a twist ending forces readers to reconsider their point
of view and experience of the story.

1 The unreliability of the narrator of a story is used by the author of the story to shock the readers.

2 The authors, who practice the use of unreliable narrators in their stories, use it in order to force readers not to take
anything for granted.

3 The different times of revelation of the unreliability of the narrator of a story can evoke different feelings in the reader.

4 Dramatic narration is often unreliable in nature.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.19 [11979272]
Directions for question (19): There is a sentence that is missing in the paragraph below. Look at the paragraph and decide in
which blank (option 1, 2, 3, or 4) the following sentence would best fit.

Sentence: The financial districts of New York, London, and Tokyo, linked by thousands of wires, are much closer to each
other than, say, the Bronx is to Manhattan.

Paragraph: Information moves, or we move to it. Moving to it has rarely been popular and is growing unfashionable;
nowadays we demand that the information come to us. This can be accomplished in three basic ways: moving physical
media around, broadcasting radiation through space, and sending signals through wires. _____(1)______This article is about
what will, for a short time anyway, be the biggest and best wire ever made. _________(2)________Wires warp cyberspace in the
same way wormholes warp physical space: the two points at opposite ends of a wire are, for informational purposes, the
same point, even if they are on opposite sides of the planet. ________(3)________The cyberspace-warping power of wires,
therefore, changes the geometry of the world of commerce and politics and ideas that we live in. _________(4)___________

1 Option 1

2 Option 2

3 Option 3
4 Option 4

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.20 [11979272]
Directions for question (20): 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. But even now the question of who constitutes “the people” remains.
2. The answer may determine whether Donald Trump remains president after 2020.
3. Democracy is, by definition, people power.
4. Democracy in America faces many perils, from dark money to foreign interference, but one goes directly to its central
promise of one person, one vote.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.21 [11979272]
Directions for question 21: The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures
the author’s position.

Spivak developed and applied Foucault's term epistemic violence to describe the destruction of non–Western ways of
perceiving the world and the resultant dominance of the Western ways of perceiving the world. Conceptually, epistemic
violence specifically relates to women, whereby the "Subaltern [woman] must always be caught in translation, never [allowed
to be] truly expressing herself", because the colonial power's destruction of her culture pushed to the social margins her
non–Western ways of perceiving, understanding, and knowing the world.

1 Spivak applied the term epistemic violence to showcase the marginalization and destruction of a woman’s ability to
express her non-Western perception.

2 Spivak improved Foucault’s theory of epistemic violence by applying it to the non-Western ways of perceiving the world.

3 Spivak developed and applied Foucault’s term epistemic violence which describes the dominance of the non-Western
viewpoint.

4 Spivak used the term epistemic violence to highlight the atrocities committed by the colonial forces on the subaltern
woman of the non-Western world.
  Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.22 [11979272]
Directions for question 22: The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures
the author’s position.

In 1968, ecologist Garrett Hardin explored this social dilemma in his article "The Tragedy of the Commons", published in the
journal Science. Hardin discussed problems that cannot be solved by technical means, as distinct from those with solutions
that require "a change only in the techniques of the natural sciences, demanding little or nothing in the way of change in
human values or ideas of morality". Hardin focused on human population growth, the use of the Earth's natural resources,
and the welfare state. Hardin argued that if individuals relied on themselves alone, and not on the relationship of society and
man, then the number of children had by each family would not be of public concern. Hardin said that if the children of
improvident parents starved to death, if overbreeding was its own punishment, then there would be no public interest in
controlling the breeding of families.

1 According to Hardin, some problems can only be solved when human beings realise their relationship with nature.

2 According to Hardin, some societal problems cannot be solved through technology but by reshaping human values.

3 According to Hardin, some problems depend on the way we perceive our roles in a society and not on the way science
has developed a society.

4 According to Hardin, some problems can only be tackled if poverty was a crime in itself.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack
 Q.23 [11979272]
Directions for question (23): There is a sentence that is missing in the paragraph below. Look at the paragraph and decide in
which blank (option 1, 2, 3, or 4) the following sentence would best fit.

Sentence: As he saw in the camps, those who found meaning even in the most horrendous circumstances were far more
resilient to suffering than those who did not.

Paragraph: In September 1942, Viktor Frankl, a prominent Jewish psychiatrist and neurologist in Vienna, was arrested and
transported to a Nazi concentration camp with his wife and parents. Three years later, when his camp was liberated, most of
his family, including his pregnant wife, had perished -- but he, prisoner number 119104, had lived. ________(1)_________In his
bestselling 1946 book, Man's Search for Meaning, which he wrote in nine days about his experiences in the camps, Frankl
concluded that the difference between those who had lived and those who had died came down to one thing: Meaning, an
insight he came to early in life. ___________(2)________When he was a high school student, one of his science teachers
declared to the class, "Life is nothing more than a combustion process, a process of oxidation." Frankl jumped out of his
chair and responded, "Sir, if this is so, then what can be the meaning of life?" _________(3)________ "Everything can be taken
from a man but one thing," Frankl wrote in Man's Search for Meaning, ________(4)________"the last of the human freedoms -- to
choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one's own way."

1 Option 1

2 Option 2

3 Option 3

4 Option 4

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack

Q.24 [11979272]
Directions for question (24): 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. A fellow of the Royal Society, which had been founded in 1660, Mather began his letter by explaining that, until recently, he
considered mermaids and tritons no more real than ‘centaurs or sphynxes’.
2. He had found many historical accounts of merpeople, ranging from the ancient Greek, Demostratus, who claimed to have
witnessed a ‘Dried Triton … at ye Town of Tanagra’, to Pliny the Elder’s assertions of the existence of mermaids and tritons.
3. Yet the letter’s subject was somewhat curious. Titled ‘A Triton’, the seemingly simple note revealed a complicated
admission: Cotton Mather’s sincere belief in the existence of merpeople.
4. Because ‘Plinyisums are of no great Reputation in our Dayes’, Mather deemed these ancient accounts to be false.

 Answer key/Solution

Bookmark FeedBack