Free Verbal Practice Test - CAT 

Look at the lines from the first paragraph “Objectivism holds that there is a single neutral description of each event that is unskewed by any particular point of view and that has a privileged position over all other accounts.” Legal discourse believes in objectivism and objectivism believes in the existence of neutral objective observations and observers.
So option (c) is wrong.
Look at the lines “The compelling force of personal narrative can create a sense of empathy between legal insiders and people traditionally excluded from legal discourse and, hence, from power.”
These lines indicate that a person excluded or doesn’t know legal discourse is excluded from power also.
The corollary is that a person having knowledge on legal discourse has power also.
So option (a) is correct.
Options (b) and (d) do not find any support in this passage.
 

So the correct answer is option (b)

The paragraph starts with an ideology of what Politics is actually and what it is made to be. The concluding sentence, will thus, talk about who has pioneered this ideology.

Option (b) is the best option. 

This question is taken from an editorial. Option (b),(c),(d) actually follow option (a) in the editorial, which in turn is the last sentence of the paragraph. Option (a) is the correct answer

The paragraph talks about why the ENP policy will be good to implement and what it will put an end to. Option (c) is the best concluding line for this paragraph as it provides a gist of the advantages of the ENP policy.

Option (d)The passage talks about the reasons for London's blackout and how the private electricity company could not provide a satisfactory explanation. Option (d) is in logical continuance with this idea as it talks about how the press coverage won't be much even though the mayor had no hesitation in appearing on radio and television. Option (a) is too vague and is eliminated. Option (b) predicts the future when this is not discussed in the passage. It is eliminated. Option (c) brings in piped-gas which goes outside the scope of the passage. So the correct answer is option (d)

This sentence uses idiomatic paired coordinators, not only...,but also.., to relate two basic kinds of loans to the prime lending rate: (1) loans to small and medium-sized businesses and (2) consumer loans. A, the best choice, is the only one that maintains the necessary parallelism in the phrases following the paired coordinates: not only on..., but also on.... Choices B and D omit the on after but also. Choice C (not only the interest rates ..., but also on) is not parallel either. Choice C especially garbles the meaning.

D, the best choice, uses parallel phrases for the two major coordinate members (in the rise of... and in the victory of ...) and also for the series listed in the first of these (s in t, u in v, w in x, and y in z). D's placement of the In... reformismphrase at the beginning of the sentence is direct and efficient. Choices A, B and C omit and before the Mahdi, the last element in the first series; thus, they incorrectly merge the second major member (the victory of) into the series listed under the first member (the rise of). Furthermore, in B and C the in...reformismphrase has been awkwardly set between the subject and verb of the sentence.

The word 'chief' means main or principal, and all three words mean the top one. And when we refer to a member of a group, we use of. For example, if we want to name our best friend, we'd say He is the best of my friends, but not He is the best among my friends.

Now, run these through your head to see how they sound:

·The main reason of all the reasons.
·The main reason among all the reasons.

The first sounds better and is more precise.
So, the answer is option (b).

The tricky part is to choose between it and they. 'They' would imply that the travelers  themselves first seemed to do one thing and then ended up doing another. The expletive 'it'(indefinite pronoun), the pronoun with no clear antedecent - makes more sense, it simply suggests that initial cost indications were misleading. Using 'it', it is necessary to include the phrase 'they would' to make it clear what seemed to be the case.

Furthermore, the "past future" of would in C is more precise than the simple past in D. Since we're talking about something we'd learn after a certain point in the past, would is better.

We can easily see that there is a link between A and E. A mentions the problem of over branding in the 1930s and 1940s. E follows it up by saying that Germany has been nervous since then to promote itself. This rules out options (a) and (b). B is the introductory sentence as it talks about the home of Romanticism which is Germany that is talked about in all the other sentences. This determines option (c) as the answer. D follows logically from B by talking about the tour to Germany when the British were fascinated about the place.

D introduces the concept of cognitive age which is followed up in A. Hence DA is the link. From this all options except option (a) can be eliminated. To verify if the remaining sentences make logical sense, we can see that C is elaborating on the inverse relationship that is given in A. B becomes the introductory sentence.
Hence, the correct sequence is BDAC.

We see a link between statements D and A. D talks about how just about everything has been photographed and A follows it up by mentioning "this insatiability”. Hence DA is the link. This rules out options (a) and (b). We can see that all the statements are talking about photographs of something. Only B introduces the topic of images in Plato's cave. Hence B is the introductory statement. Hence option (c) is the answer.

George's 70 percent figure pretty much tells us that numbers and statistics is the name of the game here. We're asked to evaluate George's response to Tina, so let's see what Tina has in mind. Tina's statement is a comparison among individuals: If my parents have earned doctorates and yours didn't, then Tina says that the odds are better that I will earn a doctorate than you will. Tina's claim goes no further. She doesn't claim that children of doctors are guaranteed to earn doctorates, and she doesn't even claim that they are likely to earn doctorates. She merely claims that these children are more likely to earn doctorates than their counterparts who do not have a parent that earned a doctorate.

Thus the irrelevancy of George's 70 percent figure, which gives us information on a different group - those who already earned their doctoral degree. Because he has shifted the scope, the data George presents can be true and still have no bearing on Tina's claim. An example: Suppose that there are 10 people in the world with doctorates. Tina merely claims that children of these people are most likely to get doctorates than children of other people. George comes along and says that of the 10 people, say, 8 of them (over 70%) come from doctorate-less parents. Does that alter Tina's claim in any way? No. All other factors being equal, the children of those doctors could still likely to earn doctors, even if most doctorate holders don't have the particular heritage. Because of this, George's consideration doesn't contradict Tina's claim if any way, and we can therefore say that George's statement is consistent with it. (C) is the answer.

The evidence of the study indicates that students on full scholarships maintain higher grade point averages (GPAs) than do students who work or take out loans. From this evidence, the study concluded that the scholarships "enable” those students to earn higher GPAs by alleviating financial stress and freeing up the students' time. Notice how the evidence links scholarships and higher GPAs, but the conclusion jumps into the realm ofcause and effect. The word enable is your clue that the author is now speaking of a casual mechanism.

The author assumes that the only possible reason for the association in the casual mechanism cited in the conclusion, and the correct answer will likely bolster this notion by eliminating an alternative explanation. Choice (d) hits on the right issue. It's possible that the author of this argument got the casual mechanism backwards. She agrees that scholarships lead to high GPA's, but may be the opposite is true: high GPA's lead to scholarships. The argument won't work if there's another reason for the correlation cited in the evidence. If high GPAs are the primary criterion for the scholarships in the first place, then it's not surprising that scholarship holders tend to earn higher GPAs than others. The students must generally be of otherwise equal ability before the conclusion can safely be drawn. (d) is the answer because it eliminates a very plausible alternative explanation for the correlation cited in the first sentence, and this is the assumption cited in the first sentence, and thus is the assumption on which this conclusion depends.

The first statement is a judgment that Europe's economy is in doldrums and that no one seems to know a way out. In regard to the second statement, first of all it cannot be fact as there is no data or information that is mentioned in the statement. So we are left with either judgment or inference. For inference we should be having a fact in some respect, but it is not visible here. Since ' two

noisy arguments...' cannot be regarded as a fact in any way... we cannot draw a conclusion based on them. Hence the second statement must be a judgment. Now we come to the third statement. For this statement we cannot say that it is a fact as no data has been provided to support the statement.

Here two we have to conclude b/w judgment or inference. Now in ' A clear majority of voters....' we cannot say that any election has been held till yet for the result. So one cannot say that we have a clear majority of voters since there are no statistics for the same . Also along with it, "and national governments are set....." kind of a statement can be made if one has drawn any conclusions

From one's own thought. So some conclusion is drawn on one's personal analysis for which no statistics is available. Hence this is also a judgment. The last statement is a fact as it simply states that the freedom of movement of people in enshrined in the 50-year-old treaty of Rome.

Directions for questions 94 and 95 :In questions below, each passage consist of six sentences when properly sequenced, form a coherent paragraph. The first and the sixth sentences are at their right place. The middle four sentences in each question have been jumbled up. These are labeled as P, Q, R and S. Type in the most logical order of sentences in the box following the question. For example if the correct sequence is PQSR, type PQSR( in capital letters and without any space between the characters ) in the box .

$S_1$ gives the definition of Palaeobotany. There is a clear sequence of Q followed by R as R gives an example of the evolution mentioned in Q. Similarly, there is a clear sequence of P followed by S as there is a link of fossils between them. Now, the sequence QRPS makes more sense than PSQR as there is no connection between statements S and Q. On the other hand, S is a good precursor to $S_6$ as $S_6$ mentions things like climate, temperature and topography that are closely related to the geologist's area of investigation.
So the answer is QRPS. 

R is most logically follows $S_1$ as the 'this' in R corresponds to Hungary. This is followed by P which says that a great deal of grain is grown in the 'extremely fertile plain, through which the river Danube flows' which is introduced by sentence R. P is logically followed by S as this mentions what else is grown in the plain apart from grain. Finally, Q makes a good bridge between S and $S_6$ as it says that Hungary has also made progress in industrialization that $S_6$ further describes.  

So the answer id RPSQ.

The passage describes various ways of analyzing dreams; a good suggestion comes forth in the last paragraph “It would of course, be incorrect to attempt to read these symbols in accordance with their values as pictures,” and “A correct judgment of the picture- puzzle is possible only if I make no such objections to the whole and its parts, and if, on the contrary, I take the trouble to replace each image by a syllable or word which it may represent by virtue of some allusion or relation.”
 

The passage talks about latent dreams presenting a new line of analysis for dreams.
The first paragraph admits the presence of the manifest dreams based method and seeks to examine dreams through latent dreams making option (d) correct.
All the other options are not mentioned in the passage.