Reading Comprehension

The author attributes all of the following to Marxism: I. It is instigative in nature. II. It is useful beyond its advocacy of egalitarianism. III. It has merit in its demands from equitable distribution of wealth.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
All radical revolutions which are advocated in the interests of the people are commended to the people, and the people are invited to accomplish them, on the ground that majorities are capable of molding society in any manner they please. As applied to matters of legislation and government, this theory is sufficiently familiar to everybody. It has been elaborated in endless detail, and has expressed itself in the constitutions of all modern democracies. What Karl Marx did, and did for the first time, was to invest this theory of the all-efficiency of the majority with definiteness, in respect of distribution of wealth, similar to that with which it had been invested already in respect of the making of laws and the dictation of national policies.
The practical outcome of the scientific reasoning of Marx is summed up in the formula which has figured as the premise and conclusion of every congress of his followers, of every book or manifesto published by them, and of every propagandist oration uttered by them at street-corners, namely, “All wealth is produced by labor, therefore to the laborers all wealth is due” — a doctrine in itself not novel if taken as a pious generality, but presented by Marx as the outcome of an elaborate system of economics.
The efficiency of this doctrine as an instrument of agitation is obvious. It appeals at once to two universal instincts: the instinct of cupidity and the instinct of universal justice. It stimulates the laborers to demand more than they receive already, and it stimulates to demand the more on the ground that they themselves have produced it. It teaches them that the wealth of every man who is not a manual laborer is something stolen from themselves which ought to be and which can be restored to them.

What, most likely, is the political orientation of the author?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
All radical revolutions which are advocated in the interests of the people are commended to the people, and the people are invited to accomplish them, on the ground that majorities are capable of molding society in any manner they please. As applied to matters of legislation and government, this theory is sufficiently familiar to everybody. It has been elaborated in endless detail, and has expressed itself in the constitutions of all modern democracies. What Karl Marx did, and did for the first time, was to invest this theory of the all-efficiency of the majority with definiteness, in respect of distribution of wealth, similar to that with which it had been invested already in respect of the making of laws and the dictation of national policies.
The practical outcome of the scientific reasoning of Marx is summed up in the formula which has figured as the premise and conclusion of every congress of his followers, of every book or manifesto published by them, and of every propagandist oration uttered by them at street-corners, namely, “All wealth is produced by labor, therefore to the laborers all wealth is due” — a doctrine in itself not novel if taken as a pious generality, but presented by Marx as the outcome of an elaborate system of economics.
The efficiency of this doctrine as an instrument of agitation is obvious. It appeals at once to two universal instincts: the instinct of cupidity and the instinct of universal justice. It stimulates the laborers to demand more than they receive already, and it stimulates to demand the more on the ground that they themselves have produced it. It teaches them that the wealth of every man who is not a manual laborer is something stolen from themselves which ought to be and which can be restored to them.

Which of the following is/are true as per the passage?I. According to Spencer, individual greatness is a sham. II. Webb says that the cartel of brilliance is the most secure one. III. Providing inducement to gifted individuals is the hardest task.

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
When socialism, says Mr. Sidney Webb, shall have abolished all other monopolies, there will still remain to be dealt with the most formidable monopoly of all — namely, “the natural monopoly of business ability,” or “the special ability and energy with which some persons are born.” The specific problem at this time is how to provide the natural monopolists of business ability with all adequate motives to develop and exercise their talents. We shall find that the arguments brought forward by them in this connection divide themselves broadly into two classes, one of which deals with the problem of motive directly, while the other class aims at preparing the way to its solution by showing in advance that its difficulties are far less formidable than they appear to be.
These arguments possess a peculiar interest owing to the fact that they have not originated with socialistic thinkers at all, but have been drawn by them from the evolutionary philosophy of the nineteenth century. The dominant idea which distinguished this school of thought was the insignificance of the individual as compared with society past and present. Thus Herbert Spencer opens his work on the Study of Sociology with an elaborate attack on what he calls “The Great Man Theory,” according to which the explanation of the main events of history is to be sought in the influence of exceptional or great men. Such an explanation, said Spencer, is no explanation at all. Great men, however great, are not isolated phenomena. Whatever they may do as the “proximate initiators” of change, they themselves “have their chief cause in the generations they have descended from,” and depend for the influence which is commonly attributed to their actions, on “the multitudinous conditions” of the generation to which they belong.

Which of the following best describes the relationship between the two paragraphs?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
When socialism, says Mr. Sidney Webb, shall have abolished all other monopolies, there will still remain to be dealt with the most formidable monopoly of all — namely, “the natural monopoly of business ability,” or “the special ability and energy with which some persons are born.” The specific problem at this time is how to provide the natural monopolists of business ability with all adequate motives to develop and exercise their talents. We shall find that the arguments brought forward by them in this connection divide themselves broadly into two classes, one of which deals with the problem of motive directly, while the other class aims at preparing the way to its solution by showing in advance that its difficulties are far less formidable than they appear to be.
These arguments possess a peculiar interest owing to the fact that they have not originated with socialistic thinkers at all, but have been drawn by them from the evolutionary philosophy of the nineteenth century. The dominant idea which distinguished this school of thought was the insignificance of the individual as compared with society past and present. Thus Herbert Spencer opens his work on the Study of Sociology with an elaborate attack on what he calls “The Great Man Theory,” according to which the explanation of the main events of history is to be sought in the influence of exceptional or great men. Such an explanation, said Spencer, is no explanation at all. Great men, however great, are not isolated phenomena. Whatever they may do as the “proximate initiators” of change, they themselves “have their chief cause in the generations they have descended from,” and depend for the influence which is commonly attributed to their actions, on “the multitudinous conditions” of the generation to which they belong.

What point is the author trying to make?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
Self-Analysis, apart from its scientific uses, has seldom rewarded those who have practiced it. To probe into the inner world of motive and desire has proved of small benefit to any one, whether hermit, monk or nun; indeed it has been altogether mischievous in result, unless the mind that probed, was especially healthy. Bitter has been the dissatisfaction, both with the process, and with what came of it, for being miserably superficial it could lead to no real knowledge of self, but simply centered self on self, producing instead of self-knowledge, self-consciousness, and often the beginnings of mental disease.
For fruitful self analysis it is apparently necessary then to have a clear, definite aim outside self -- such as achieving the gain of some special piece of knowledge, and we find such definite aims in psychology, and certain systems of philosophy – Greek, English, and German, in Plato, Locke, Kant, and in the meditations of Descartes, and many others. Self-analysis is the basis of psychological knowledge, but the science has been chiefly used to explain the methods by which we obtain knowledge of the outer world in relation to ourselves.
When a philosopher centers self on self, in order to know self as a result of introspection, the results have been disastrous, and have contributed nothing to knowledge, properly so-called. If religious self-examination has its dangers, so also has philosophical self-analysis for its own sake. It is a fascinating study for those who care for thought for thought's sake – the so-called Hamlets of the world, who are for ever revolving round the axes of their own ideas and dreams, and who never progress towards any clear issue.

What is the relationship between the second and the third paragraphs?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
Self-Analysis, apart from its scientific uses, has seldom rewarded those who have practiced it. To probe into the inner world of motive and desire has proved of small benefit to any one, whether hermit, monk or nun; indeed it has been altogether mischievous in result, unless the mind that probed, was especially healthy. Bitter has been the dissatisfaction, both with the process, and with what came of it, for being miserably superficial it could lead to no real knowledge of self, but simply centered self on self, producing instead of self-knowledge, self-consciousness, and often the beginnings of mental disease.
For fruitful self analysis it is apparently necessary then to have a clear, definite aim outside self -- such as achieving the gain of some special piece of knowledge, and we find such definite aims in psychology, and certain systems of philosophy – Greek, English, and German, in Plato, Locke, Kant, and in the meditations of Descartes, and many others. Self-analysis is the basis of psychological knowledge, but the science has been chiefly used to explain the methods by which we obtain knowledge of the outer world in relation to ourselves.
When a philosopher centers self on self, in order to know self as a result of introspection, the results have been disastrous, and have contributed nothing to knowledge, properly so-called. If religious self-examination has its dangers, so also has philosophical self-analysis for its own sake. It is a fascinating study for those who care for thought for thought's sake – the so-called Hamlets of the world, who are for ever revolving round the axes of their own ideas and dreams, and who never progress towards any clear issue.

The author would most likely sum up his opinion by saying that

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
Neither do we conceive it as sufficiently expressing or explaining the whole facts of the case, to say that the currency has been deranged. There has been unquestionably a great derangement of the currency; but this may have been an effect rather than a cause of the more general disturbance; or, again, it may have been only one cause out of many causes. Adopting the prevalent theory, that the universal use of specie in the regulation of the international trade of the world determines for each nation the amount of its metallic treasure, it was there argued that any redundant local circulation of paper must raise the level of local prices above the legitimate specie over exports; which imports can be paid for only in specie, the very basis of the inordinate local circulation. Of course, then, there is a rapid contraction in the issue of notes, and an inevitable and wide-spread rupture of the usual relations of trade. But although this view is true in principle, and particularly true in its application to the United States, where trade floats almost exclusively upon a paper ocean, it is yet an elementary and local view; local, as not comprising the state of facts in England and France; and elementary, in as much as it omits all reference to the possibility of a great fluctuation of prices being produced by other means than an excess or deficiency of money. In France, as we know, the currency is almost entirely metallic, while in England it is metallic so far as the lesser exchanges of commerce are concerned; there is an obvious impropriety, therefore, in extending to the financial difficulties of those nations a theory founded upon a peculiarity in the position of our own.

The author of the passage will agree with which of the following statements?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
Neither do we conceive it as sufficiently expressing or explaining the whole facts of the case, to say that the currency has been deranged. There has been unquestionably a great derangement of the currency; but this may have been an effect rather than a cause of the more general disturbance; or, again, it may have been only one cause out of many causes. Adopting the prevalent theory, that the universal use of specie in the regulation of the international trade of the world determines for each nation the amount of its metallic treasure, it was there argued that any redundant local circulation of paper must raise the level of local prices above the legitimate specie over exports; which imports can be paid for only in specie, the very basis of the inordinate local circulation. Of course, then, there is a rapid contraction in the issue of notes, and an inevitable and wide-spread rupture of the usual relations of trade. But although this view is true in principle, and particularly true in its application to the United States, where trade floats almost exclusively upon a paper ocean, it is yet an elementary and local view; local, as not comprising the state of facts in England and France; and elementary, in as much as it omits all reference to the possibility of a great fluctuation of prices being produced by other means than an excess or deficiency of money. In France, as we know, the currency is almost entirely metallic, while in England it is metallic so far as the lesser exchanges of commerce are concerned; there is an obvious impropriety, therefore, in extending to the financial difficulties of those nations a theory founded upon a peculiarity in the position of our own.

What is the tone of the author of the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
It is admitted that at a hasty glance, there may certainly seem some danger of our faith in life's value collapsing, together with our belief in God. It is admitted that this is not in the least irrational. But it is contended that a scientific study of the past will show us that these fears are groundless, and will reassure us as to the future. We are referred to a new branch of knowledge, the philosophy of history, and we are assured that this will set all our doubts to rest. This philosophy of history resembles the practical wisdom learnt by the man of the world. As long as a man is inexperienced and new to life, each calamity as it comes to him seems something unique and overwhelming, but as he lives on, suffers more of them, and yet finds that he is not overwhelmed, he learns to reduce them to their right dimensions, and is able, with sufficient self- possession, to let each of them teach some useful lesson to him.
Thus, if we were not better instructed, we might naturally take the present decline of faith to be an unprecedented calamity that was ushering in an eve of darkness and utter ruin. But the philosophy of history puts the whole matter in a different light. It teaches us that the condition of the world in our day, though not normal, is yet by no means peculiar. It points to numerous parallels in former ages, and treats the rise and fall of creeds as regular phenomena in human history, whose causes and recurrence we can distinctly trace. Other nations and races have had creeds, and have lost them; they have thought, as some of us think, that the loss would ruin them: and yet they have not been ruined. Creeds, it is contended, were imaginative, provisional, and mistaken expressions of the underlying and indestructible sense of the nobility of human life. They were artistic, not scientific. A statue of Apollo, for instance, or a picture of the Madonna, were just representations of what men aimed at producing on earth, not of what actually existed in heaven, and if we look back at the greatest civilizations of antiquity, we shall find, it is said, that what gave them vigor and intensity were purely human interests: and though religion may certainly have had some reflex action on life, this action was either merely political or was else injurious.
It is thus that intense Greek life is presented to us, the influence of which is still felt in the world. Its main stimulus we are told was frankly human. It would have lost none of its keenness if its theology had been taken from it. The same holds true now. And there, we see the positive worth of life; we see already realized what we are now growing to realize once more. Christianity, with its supernatural aims and objects, is an ‘episode of disease and delirium;’ it is a confusing dream, from which we are at last awaking.

What is the most suitable title for the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
It is admitted that at a hasty glance, there may certainly seem some danger of our faith in life's value collapsing, together with our belief in God. It is admitted that this is not in the least irrational. But it is contended that a scientific study of the past will show us that these fears are groundless, and will reassure us as to the future. We are referred to a new branch of knowledge, the philosophy of history, and we are assured that this will set all our doubts to rest. This philosophy of history resembles the practical wisdom learnt by the man of the world. As long as a man is inexperienced and new to life, each calamity as it comes to him seems something unique and overwhelming, but as he lives on, suffers more of them, and yet finds that he is not overwhelmed, he learns to reduce them to their right dimensions, and is able, with sufficient self- possession, to let each of them teach some useful lesson to him.
Thus, if we were not better instructed, we might naturally take the present decline of faith to be an unprecedented calamity that was ushering in an eve of darkness and utter ruin. But the philosophy of history puts the whole matter in a different light. It teaches us that the condition of the world in our day, though not normal, is yet by no means peculiar. It points to numerous parallels in former ages, and treats the rise and fall of creeds as regular phenomena in human history, whose causes and recurrence we can distinctly trace. Other nations and races have had creeds, and have lost them; they have thought, as some of us think, that the loss would ruin them: and yet they have not been ruined. Creeds, it is contended, were imaginative, provisional, and mistaken expressions of the underlying and indestructible sense of the nobility of human life. They were artistic, not scientific. A statue of Apollo, for instance, or a picture of the Madonna, were just representations of what men aimed at producing on earth, not of what actually existed in heaven, and if we look back at the greatest civilizations of antiquity, we shall find, it is said, that what gave them vigor and intensity were purely human interests: and though religion may certainly have had some reflex action on life, this action was either merely political or was else injurious.
It is thus that intense Greek life is presented to us, the influence of which is still felt in the world. Its main stimulus we are told was frankly human. It would have lost none of its keenness if its theology had been taken from it. The same holds true now. And there, we see the positive worth of life; we see already realized what we are now growing to realize once more. Christianity, with its supernatural aims and objects, is an ‘episode of disease and delirium;’ it is a confusing dream, from which we are at last awaking.

What does the author mainly try to convey in the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
It is admitted that at a hasty glance, there may certainly seem some danger of our faith in life's value collapsing, together with our belief in God. It is admitted that this is not in the least irrational. But it is contended that a scientific study of the past will show us that these fears are groundless, and will reassure us as to the future. We are referred to a new branch of knowledge, the philosophy of history, and we are assured that this will set all our doubts to rest. This philosophy of history resembles the practical wisdom learnt by the man of the world. As long as a man is inexperienced and new to life, each calamity as it comes to him seems something unique and overwhelming, but as he lives on, suffers more of them, and yet finds that he is not overwhelmed, he learns to reduce them to their right dimensions, and is able, with sufficient self- possession, to let each of them teach some useful lesson to him.
Thus, if we were not better instructed, we might naturally take the present decline of faith to be an unprecedented calamity that was ushering in an eve of darkness and utter ruin. But the philosophy of history puts the whole matter in a different light. It teaches us that the condition of the world in our day, though not normal, is yet by no means peculiar. It points to numerous parallels in former ages, and treats the rise and fall of creeds as regular phenomena in human history, whose causes and recurrence we can distinctly trace. Other nations and races have had creeds, and have lost them; they have thought, as some of us think, that the loss would ruin them: and yet they have not been ruined. Creeds, it is contended, were imaginative, provisional, and mistaken expressions of the underlying and indestructible sense of the nobility of human life. They were artistic, not scientific. A statue of Apollo, for instance, or a picture of the Madonna, were just representations of what men aimed at producing on earth, not of what actually existed in heaven, and if we look back at the greatest civilizations of antiquity, we shall find, it is said, that what gave them vigor and intensity were purely human interests: and though religion may certainly have had some reflex action on life, this action was either merely political or was else injurious.
It is thus that intense Greek life is presented to us, the influence of which is still felt in the world. Its main stimulus we are told was frankly human. It would have lost none of its keenness if its theology had been taken from it. The same holds true now. And there, we see the positive worth of life; we see already realized what we are now growing to realize once more. Christianity, with its supernatural aims and objects, is an ‘episode of disease and delirium;’ it is a confusing dream, from which we are at last awaking.

In trying to create an impression of cognitive growth in non-humans, the author makes use of

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
We have been taught that we are Homo sapiens, the sapient humans. We have also been told that we are the thinking animals, the only ones; the obvious implication being that other animals do not think. We also dare to believe that we are perhaps the finest product of evolution. Such baptism has given rise to a bloated feeling of ascendancy among us. This intellect or cognition enables us to draw inferences from information and come to a conclusion.
Jean Piaget, the Swiss philosopher and child psychologist, went so far as to call children “tiny thinking sacks”. He suggested that children’s cognitive development occurs in four stages. There is the sensory motor stage up to the age of two, when a child experiences the world around him. Then there is the pre-operational stage between the age of 2 and 7 years, when he masters motor skills. It is followed by the third stage the concrete operational one, between the age of 7 and 11. By the age of 11 he develops abstract thinking. In the operational stages, sapience takes hold and develops swiftly. This is also referred to as transitive inference.
There is, however, evidence to suggest that the domain of sapience is definitely not occupied by humans alone, and we might be just a little better off than some other creatures.
Macmillan's Magazine reminisces about a debate about evolution in 1860 between Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford and the naturalist Thomas Huxley. The Bishop, in a mocking tone, asked, “Is it through your grandfather or your grandmother that you claim descent from a monkey?” On this Mr. Huxley, slowly and deliberately replied, “I would not be ashamed to have a monkey for my ancestor; but I would be ashamed to be connected with a man who uses his great gifts to obscure the truth”.
A whole series of facts are now known which reduce the gap between humans and animals. The resemblance between humans and chimpanzees is not only external. In a study, forty years ago, Dr Jane Goodall showed that chimpanzees have traces of cognition which are comparable, at least to our children. Dr. Goodall went on to record their tool making abilities. She noticed that wild chimpanzees hunted, ate meat, resorted to warfare to extend their territory and were even capable of cannibalism. In another instance, Dr. Marc Hauser of Harvard and Thomas Geissman of University of Hanover have found out that, apes can make music – Solo and Coral, with rhythm added. Some researchers have also been able to teach chimpanzees a large number of symbols in the form of hand gestures. Behaviorally, between humans and apes, there are some startling similarities, almost too human to be true. If we look straight into a chimpanzee’s eyes, an intelligent, self-assured personality looks back at us. If they aren’t sapient, how can we be?

The essential peculiarities of Numidia, in turn, are reflected in

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
To the east and west, there are wide stretches of woodland, rounded hill-summits, streams and torrents which pour through the valleys and glens. But towards the south the verdure grows sparse; arid mountain-tops appear, crushed down as blunted cones; the sterility of the desert becomes perceptible amid the wealth of vegetation. This full-foliaged land has its harsh and stern localities. The African light, however, softens all that. The deep green of the oaks and pines runs into waves of warm and ever-altering tints which are a caress and a delight for the eye. A man has it thoroughly brought home to him that he is in a land of the sun.
To say the least, it is a country of strongly marked features which affords the strangest contrast with the surrounding districts. This wooded Numidia, with its flowing brooks, its fields where the cattle graze, differs in the highest degree from the Numidia towards Setif – a wide, desolate plain, where the stubble of the wheat-fields, the sandy steppes, roll away in monotonous undulations to the cloudy barrier of Mount Atlas which closes the horizon. And this rough and melancholy plain in its turn offers a striking contrast with the coast region of Boujeiah and Hippo, which is not unlike the Italian Campania in its mellowness and gaiety. Such clear-cut differences between the various parts of the same province doubtlessly explain the essential peculiarities of the Numidian character. The bishop Augustine, who carried his pastoral cross from one end to the other of this country, and was its acting and thinking soul, may perhaps have owed to it the contrasts and many-sidedness of his own rich nature.

The author uses the phrase “transitive inference” to convey which of the following?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
We have been taught that we are Homo sapiens, the sapient humans. We have also been told that we are the thinking animals, the only ones; the obvious implication being that other animals do not think. We also dare to believe that we are perhaps the finest product of evolution. Such baptism has given rise to a bloated feeling of ascendancy among us. This intellect or cognition enables us to draw inferences from information and come to a conclusion.
Jean Piaget, the Swiss philosopher and child psychologist, went so far as to call children “tiny thinking sacks”. He suggested that children’s cognitive development occurs in four stages. There is the sensory motor stage up to the age of two, when a child experiences the world around him. Then there is the pre-operational stage between the age of 2 and 7 years, when he masters motor skills. It is followed by the third stage the concrete operational one, between the age of 7 and 11. By the age of 11 he develops abstract thinking. In the operational stages, sapience takes hold and develops swiftly. This is also referred to as transitive inference.
There is, however, evidence to suggest that the domain of sapience is definitely not occupied by humans alone, and we might be just a little better off than some other creatures.
Macmillan's Magazine reminisces about a debate about evolution in 1860 between Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford and the naturalist Thomas Huxley. The Bishop, in a mocking tone, asked, “Is it through your grandfather or your grandmother that you claim descent from a monkey?” On this Mr. Huxley, slowly and deliberately replied, “I would not be ashamed to have a monkey for my ancestor; but I would be ashamed to be connected with a man who uses his great gifts to obscure the truth”.
A whole series of facts are now known which reduce the gap between humans and animals. The resemblance between humans and chimpanzees is not only external. In a study, forty years ago, Dr Jane Goodall showed that chimpanzees have traces of cognition which are comparable, at least to our children. Dr. Goodall went on to record their tool making abilities. She noticed that wild chimpanzees hunted, ate meat, resorted to warfare to extend their territory and were even capable of cannibalism. In another instance, Dr. Marc Hauser of Harvard and Thomas Geissman of University of Hanover have found out that, apes can make music – Solo and Coral, with rhythm added. Some researchers have also been able to teach chimpanzees a large number of symbols in the form of hand gestures. Behaviorally, between humans and apes, there are some startling similarities, almost too human to be true. If we look straight into a chimpanzee’s eyes, an intelligent, self-assured personality looks back at us. If they aren’t sapient, how can we be?

What can be said about the choice of Thomas Huxley’s words in the retort that he made in the debate mentioned in the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
We have been taught that we are Homo sapiens, the sapient humans. We have also been told that we are the thinking animals, the only ones; the obvious implication being that other animals do not think. We also dare to believe that we are perhaps the finest product of evolution. Such baptism has given rise to a bloated feeling of ascendancy among us. This intellect or cognition enables us to draw inferences from information and come to a conclusion.
Jean Piaget, the Swiss philosopher and child psychologist, went so far as to call children “tiny thinking sacks”. He suggested that children’s cognitive development occurs in four stages. There is the sensory motor stage up to the age of two, when a child experiences the world around him. Then there is the pre-operational stage between the age of 2 and 7 years, when he masters motor skills. It is followed by the third stage the concrete operational one, between the age of 7 and 11. By the age of 11 he develops abstract thinking. In the operational stages, sapience takes hold and develops swiftly. This is also referred to as transitive inference.
There is, however, evidence to suggest that the domain of sapience is definitely not occupied by humans alone, and we might be just a little better off than some other creatures.
Macmillan's Magazine reminisces about a debate about evolution in 1860 between Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford and the naturalist Thomas Huxley. The Bishop, in a mocking tone, asked, “Is it through your grandfather or your grandmother that you claim descent from a monkey?” On this Mr. Huxley, slowly and deliberately replied, “I would not be ashamed to have a monkey for my ancestor; but I would be ashamed to be connected with a man who uses his great gifts to obscure the truth”.
A whole series of facts are now known which reduce the gap between humans and animals. The resemblance between humans and chimpanzees is not only external. In a study, forty years ago, Dr Jane Goodall showed that chimpanzees have traces of cognition which are comparable, at least to our children. Dr. Goodall went on to record their tool making abilities. She noticed that wild chimpanzees hunted, ate meat, resorted to warfare to extend their territory and were even capable of cannibalism. In another instance, Dr. Marc Hauser of Harvard and Thomas Geissman of University of Hanover have found out that, apes can make music – Solo and Coral, with rhythm added. Some researchers have also been able to teach chimpanzees a large number of symbols in the form of hand gestures. Behaviorally, between humans and apes, there are some startling similarities, almost too human to be true. If we look straight into a chimpanzee’s eyes, an intelligent, self-assured personality looks back at us. If they aren’t sapient, how can we be?