Reading Comprehension

There is an allusion to ''better times'' in the passage. The reference is to

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Passage 5       
Imagination can scarcely compass the vastness of modern London whose population exceeds that of the whole of Scotland, or the kingdom of Holland, whose traffic and trade are almost fabulous, and whose wealth as displayed in the miles and miles of the richest shops in every direction, and in every part of the town, are almost beyond the dreams of Aladdin!
And yet there is a shady side to this picture. The cry of depression in trade has gone on increasing year after year, and the “better times” so hopefully prophesied and wished for have not come. There is capital in the country which can find no investment, there are goods produced year after year which find no market, there are millions of English labourers in the towns, and in the country willing to work for their bread, but who can find no work and are on the brink of starvation. Clear-sighted if somewhat pessimist thinkers and writers offer an explanation which is sufficiently intelligible, though one is loath to accept it as correct. They say that the insular position of England, her comparative freedom from revolutions and foreign invasions, and the wonderful enterprise of her sons gave them a start in the commerce of the world which cannot for ever be maintained. For a time Englishmen monopolised the carrying trade of the world, they manufactured goods for the great marts of the world, and they alone reaped the profits of this wonderful monopoly. Population multiplied accordingly in England more rapidly than anywhere else in Europe, and far exceeded what the produce of the little island could support. But this monopoly could not last forever. Other nations have waked to a consciousness of the benefits of trade—steady hard-working nations like the Germans, who deserve to succeed, are competing with Englishmen all over the world, are cutting out the English abroad, and even in England. London traders complain with a bitterness which one can understand, that in London itself there are many thousand Germans who have ousted so many Englishmen from work, who are daily ousting more because they can live on so much less than Englishmen of the same class. Frugal, abstemious, almost stingy in their habits, the Germans work hard and spend little—which even the London shopboy has not yet learnt to save, but must needs enjoy his holiday, and spend his little saving with his chums or his sweetheart in the Crystal Palace. Abroad, there is the same competition, continental labour is cheaper, continental goods compete with English goods even in English colonies and sell cheaper! At the same time all over Europe—the French, the Germans, and other nations are protecting their home industries against English products by heavy protective import duties, and England vainly asks them to be free traders, and to repeal these duties. The United States does just the same thing, and even the English Colonies, Canada, Cape Colony, and the Australian States protect their own goods and keep out English products by heavy duties, and England cannot ask them to repeal such duties as she had made India do. Thus the circle of foreign markets is gradually shrinking, the competition of other nations in the old markets is increasing, and even in England labourers are cutting out Englishmen…

The writer does not seem to be entirely dismissive of all sermons. They could be useful if

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

One of the easiest things to do in the world, one may be forgiven to say, is to sermonize. Also, one of the commonest things to do is to sermonize. It costs nothing to the one who sermonizes and gives some food for thought to the ones who are at the receiving end of these sermons, although there have been some victims of sermons as well. This might sound queer, but the fact of the matter is—there are quite a few victims in our own midst. What, imagine for a while, must be passing through the minds of those who harangue others with their sermons and what must be passing through the minds of those subjected to these unsolicited dose of words that sound more like hyperbole than anything else? And why people take to sermonizing? Well, those speaking from the pulpit have this uncanny tendency of believing that they only know what is right or wrong for the people below and that the ignoramus ones who gather there to listen to their sermons need to be told again and again that this and not that is the right thing for them to do. Hence sermons become essential. By constantly lending them ears, we only help embolden them to get away with this impression.
Sermons are not always innocuous these days. In fact, more often they are not. They could be inflammatory. Religious and political sermons could be deadly if they are taken to heart. This usually happens with the fanatics, and there is no dearth of these. They tend to take the sermons in letter and not in spirit. This creates situations that have wide ramifications. In the recent past some of these religious sermons have caused many conflagrations than have brought amity which is what a religion is supposed to aim at. Obviously, because of the excessive dose of religious sermons, there have been more fragmentations in our society than there had ever been before.
But it is the political sermons, of all the sermons, that are amusing. Political sermons are so only in the sense that politicians make them, and not because they are political in character. But the occasions they choose to make these sermons are quite sombre and there is nothing ludicrous about them. While celebrating Martyr’s Day, we are told by our leaders to inculcate the qualities of the Father of the nation. Fine indeed! But the very next day when we are celebrating the birth day of Netaji (not exactly the next day), we are asked to emulate his qualities. On another day we are asked to follow in the footsteps of Shivaji and so on and so forth. There is obviously nothing wrong with these sermons. The trouble would begin when someone decides to take these sermons seriously and sets out on inculcating the qualities of those personages who are no longer on the scene. Not all of them had similar qualities. For instance, the only agenda on which both Gandhiji and Netaji agreed was India’s freedom. Imagine the condition of the man who inculcates the qualities of all these great persons. What then will remain of him?

The writer seems to imply that

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

One of the easiest things to do in the world, one may be forgiven to say, is to sermonize. Also, one of the commonest things to do is to sermonize. It costs nothing to the one who sermonizes and gives some food for thought to the ones who are at the receiving end of these sermons, although there have been some victims of sermons as well. This might sound queer, but the fact of the matter is—there are quite a few victims in our own midst. What, imagine for a while, must be passing through the minds of those who harangue others with their sermons and what must be passing through the minds of those subjected to these unsolicited dose of words that sound more like hyperbole than anything else? And why people take to sermonizing? Well, those speaking from the pulpit have this uncanny tendency of believing that they only know what is right or wrong for the people below and that the ignoramus ones who gather there to listen to their sermons need to be told again and again that this and not that is the right thing for them to do. Hence sermons become essential. By constantly lending them ears, we only help embolden them to get away with this impression.
Sermons are not always innocuous these days. In fact, more often they are not. They could be inflammatory. Religious and political sermons could be deadly if they are taken to heart. This usually happens with the fanatics, and there is no dearth of these. They tend to take the sermons in letter and not in spirit. This creates situations that have wide ramifications. In the recent past some of these religious sermons have caused many conflagrations than have brought amity which is what a religion is supposed to aim at. Obviously, because of the excessive dose of religious sermons, there have been more fragmentations in our society than there had ever been before.
But it is the political sermons, of all the sermons, that are amusing. Political sermons are so only in the sense that politicians make them, and not because they are political in character. But the occasions they choose to make these sermons are quite sombre and there is nothing ludicrous about them. While celebrating Martyr’s Day, we are told by our leaders to inculcate the qualities of the Father of the nation. Fine indeed! But the very next day when we are celebrating the birth day of Netaji (not exactly the next day), we are asked to emulate his qualities. On another day we are asked to follow in the footsteps of Shivaji and so on and so forth. There is obviously nothing wrong with these sermons. The trouble would begin when someone decides to take these sermons seriously and sets out on inculcating the qualities of those personages who are no longer on the scene. Not all of them had similar qualities. For instance, the only agenda on which both Gandhiji and Netaji agreed was India’s freedom. Imagine the condition of the man who inculcates the qualities of all these great persons. What then will remain of him?

The writer indicates that a typical sermonizer we encounter

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

One of the easiest things to do in the world, one may be forgiven to say, is to sermonize. Also, one of the commonest things to do is to sermonize. It costs nothing to the one who sermonizes and gives some food for thought to the ones who are at the receiving end of these sermons, although there have been some victims of sermons as well. This might sound queer, but the fact of the matter is—there are quite a few victims in our own midst. What, imagine for a while, must be passing through the minds of those who harangue others with their sermons and what must be passing through the minds of those subjected to these unsolicited dose of words that sound more like hyperbole than anything else? And why people take to sermonizing? Well, those speaking from the pulpit have this uncanny tendency of believing that they only know what is right or wrong for the people below and that the ignoramus ones who gather there to listen to their sermons need to be told again and again that this and not that is the right thing for them to do. Hence sermons become essential. By constantly lending them ears, we only help embolden them to get away with this impression.
Sermons are not always innocuous these days. In fact, more often they are not. They could be inflammatory. Religious and political sermons could be deadly if they are taken to heart. This usually happens with the fanatics, and there is no dearth of these. They tend to take the sermons in letter and not in spirit. This creates situations that have wide ramifications. In the recent past some of these religious sermons have caused many conflagrations than have brought amity which is what a religion is supposed to aim at. Obviously, because of the excessive dose of religious sermons, there have been more fragmentations in our society than there had ever been before.
But it is the political sermons, of all the sermons, that are amusing. Political sermons are so only in the sense that politicians make them, and not because they are political in character. But the occasions they choose to make these sermons are quite sombre and there is nothing ludicrous about them. While celebrating Martyr’s Day, we are told by our leaders to inculcate the qualities of the Father of the nation. Fine indeed! But the very next day when we are celebrating the birth day of Netaji (not exactly the next day), we are asked to emulate his qualities. On another day we are asked to follow in the footsteps of Shivaji and so on and so forth. There is obviously nothing wrong with these sermons. The trouble would begin when someone decides to take these sermons seriously and sets out on inculcating the qualities of those personages who are no longer on the scene. Not all of them had similar qualities. For instance, the only agenda on which both Gandhiji and Netaji agreed was India’s freedom. Imagine the condition of the man who inculcates the qualities of all these great persons. What then will remain of him?

Writer’s attitude towards the sermonizers is

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

One of the easiest things to do in the world, one may be forgiven to say, is to sermonize. Also, one of the commonest things to do is to sermonize. It costs nothing to the one who sermonizes and gives some food for thought to the ones who are at the receiving end of these sermons, although there have been some victims of sermons as well. This might sound queer, but the fact of the matter is—there are quite a few victims in our own midst. What, imagine for a while, must be passing through the minds of those who harangue others with their sermons and what must be passing through the minds of those subjected to these unsolicited dose of words that sound more like hyperbole than anything else? And why people take to sermonizing? Well, those speaking from the pulpit have this uncanny tendency of believing that they only know what is right or wrong for the people below and that the ignoramus ones who gather there to listen to their sermons need to be told again and again that this and not that is the right thing for them to do. Hence sermons become essential. By constantly lending them ears, we only help embolden them to get away with this impression.
Sermons are not always innocuous these days. In fact, more often they are not. They could be inflammatory. Religious and political sermons could be deadly if they are taken to heart. This usually happens with the fanatics, and there is no dearth of these. They tend to take the sermons in letter and not in spirit. This creates situations that have wide ramifications. In the recent past some of these religious sermons have caused many conflagrations than have brought amity which is what a religion is supposed to aim at. Obviously, because of the excessive dose of religious sermons, there have been more fragmentations in our society than there had ever been before.
But it is the political sermons, of all the sermons, that are amusing. Political sermons are so only in the sense that politicians make them, and not because they are political in character. But the occasions they choose to make these sermons are quite sombre and there is nothing ludicrous about them. While celebrating Martyr’s Day, we are told by our leaders to inculcate the qualities of the Father of the nation. Fine indeed! But the very next day when we are celebrating the birth day of Netaji (not exactly the next day), we are asked to emulate his qualities. On another day we are asked to follow in the footsteps of Shivaji and so on and so forth. There is obviously nothing wrong with these sermons. The trouble would begin when someone decides to take these sermons seriously and sets out on inculcating the qualities of those personages who are no longer on the scene. Not all of them had similar qualities. For instance, the only agenda on which both Gandhiji and Netaji agreed was India’s freedom. Imagine the condition of the man who inculcates the qualities of all these great persons. What then will remain of him?

The writer views a sermonizer as

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

One of the easiest things to do in the world, one may be forgiven to say, is to sermonize. Also, one of the commonest things to do is to sermonize. It costs nothing to the one who sermonizes and gives some food for thought to the ones who are at the receiving end of these sermons, although there have been some victims of sermons as well. This might sound queer, but the fact of the matter is—there are quite a few victims in our own midst. What, imagine for a while, must be passing through the minds of those who harangue others with their sermons and what must be passing through the minds of those subjected to these unsolicited dose of words that sound more like hyperbole than anything else? And why people take to sermonizing? Well, those speaking from the pulpit have this uncanny tendency of believing that they only know what is right or wrong for the people below and that the ignoramus ones who gather there to listen to their sermons need to be told again and again that this and not that is the right thing for them to do. Hence sermons become essential. By constantly lending them ears, we only help embolden them to get away with this impression.
Sermons are not always innocuous these days. In fact, more often they are not. They could be inflammatory. Religious and political sermons could be deadly if they are taken to heart. This usually happens with the fanatics, and there is no dearth of these. They tend to take the sermons in letter and not in spirit. This creates situations that have wide ramifications. In the recent past some of these religious sermons have caused many conflagrations than have brought amity which is what a religion is supposed to aim at. Obviously, because of the excessive dose of religious sermons, there have been more fragmentations in our society than there had ever been before.
But it is the political sermons, of all the sermons, that are amusing. Political sermons are so only in the sense that politicians make them, and not because they are political in character. But the occasions they choose to make these sermons are quite sombre and there is nothing ludicrous about them. While celebrating Martyr’s Day, we are told by our leaders to inculcate the qualities of the Father of the nation. Fine indeed! But the very next day when we are celebrating the birth day of Netaji (not exactly the next day), we are asked to emulate his qualities. On another day we are asked to follow in the footsteps of Shivaji and so on and so forth. There is obviously nothing wrong with these sermons. The trouble would begin when someone decides to take these sermons seriously and sets out on inculcating the qualities of those personages who are no longer on the scene. Not all of them had similar qualities. For instance, the only agenda on which both Gandhiji and Netaji agreed was India’s freedom. Imagine the condition of the man who inculcates the qualities of all these great persons. What then will remain of him?

Directions: Read the paragraph and answer the question that follows.

Ask an American schoolchild what he or she is learning in school these days and you might even get a reply, provided you ask it in Spanish. But don't bother, here's the answer: Americans nowadays are not learning any of the things that we learned in our day, like reading and writing. Apparently these are considered fusty old subjects, invented by white males to oppress women and minorities.No one ever spent a moment building my self-esteem when I was in school. In fact, from the day I first stepped inside a classroom my self-esteem was one big demolition site. All that mattered was the subject, be it geography, history, or mathematics. I was praised when I remembered that near, fit, friendly, pleasing, like and their opposites took the dative case in Latin. I was reviled when I forgot what a cosine was good for. Generally I lived my school years beneath a torrent of castigation so consistent I eventually ceased to hear it, as people who live near the sea eventually stop hearing the waves.

What is the theme of the passage?

Directions: Read the paragraph and answer the question that follows.

Do you have difficulty keeping resolutions? Do you ever feel overwhelmed by a goal? Many people have unrealistic expectations of what they can accomplish within a period of time. The problem is that they usually have taken on too many responsibilities at once. Does this ever happen to you? You find yourself rushing around each day in order to get projects done.

In order to achieve success with your goals you need to narrow your scope of how many projects you can take on at a time. This requires prioritizing. In order to prioritize you must first get clear on what it is you truly want to achieve. When you pursue a goal you make a decision to put a certain amount of time, energy and effort into an endeavor. If that goal is not in line with what you truly want, you may find your inner self unconsciously sabotaging your efforts in some way.

What is the theme of the passage?

The proposal for combined entrance test for MBA colleges, failed to pass by only a slim margin several times in the Directors Syndicate. Twenty-seven votes were required for passage. Twenty-six directors on the Syndicate voted in favor of the proposal in 1999, whereas only 24 directors voted in favor of it in 2001. This was true even though no director changed his or her vote.

Which of the following, if true, best accounts for the change in the number of votes for the proposal from 26 in 1999 to 24 in 2001?

In July 2002, the Indian airline's flights, serving Delhi-Mumbai route, substantially reduced the price of tickets for the flights. During the months, subsequent to the reduction, the number of tickets sold to Mumbai increased to well above the monthly average for the previous year. Despite this fact, the number of tickets sold by Indian airlines to Mumbai was not noticeably different from the previous year's total.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the apparent paradox in the passage above?

Directions: Read the passage given below and answer the question that follows it.

A recent medical journal published a study, which found that athletes who exercised more than five hours per week were more likely than the other athletes to have high levels of chemical compound riboflavin in their blood. High levels of this compound can be one of the first warning signs of skin cancer, which is almost always caused by excessive exposure of the body to water.

Which one of the following, if true, would cast doubt on the study’s conclusion that exercising more than five hours per week increases the odds of contracting skin cancer?

Directions: Read the passage given below and answer the question that follows it.

Child: All my friends are allowed to watch cartoons and play videogames for longer duration than I am allowed. This practice is unjustifiable.

Mother: You are wrong. If you would complete your homework earlier in the afternoon, you would have plenty of time to watch the cartoons and play videogames.

Which of the following explains why the mother's response to her child is inappropriate?

Which one of the following is the correct statement?

While in the hospital, the author was�

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

Which one of the following is the correct statement ?

The paralytic stroke helped the author�

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

Why did the author consider himself a cripple?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question: