Chapter 3 - Expand your Horizon

Chapter 3

Expand your horizons

 

We have now learnt how to read for ideas, somewhat aggressively, constantly searching for meaning, summarizing paragraphs as we go along, and then looking for answers. If we follow this technique, reading comprehension becomes a cakewalk. However, reading speed and comprehension increases through constant practice. We have already given the technique for practice by giving an indicative reading list in Chapter 2. Now we are ready to expand our horizons and start reading with a purpose.

To understand texts, we must understand the several ways that writers use to organize their material. An understanding of writing styles can help one anticipate what the structure of a particular passage could be. These could be:

Chronological – When the passage talks about transition, the author will proceed in a chronological fashion. Questions on the structure would typically address issues like “ When did event X take place? What was the duration? What precedes or follows X?”

Spatial – Descriptive passages use a spatial orientation. Here location, orientation or distance is critical. Travelogues or invasion of a territory would follow the spatial method.

Hierarchical – Sometimes authors use some attribute in ascending/descending order of importance. While explaining a theory, for instance, a writer will follow the hierarchal method.

Categorical – This follows from the previous method, when the author moves from the general to the specific or vice versa.

Understanding these techniques helps in creating mind maps of the passages and answering the questions.

It is true that passages in CAT and other exams are difficult. But they are not impossible. Your familiarity in a particular subject will make a particular passage easy or difficult. So students should develop familiarity with topics by reading something on them.

A good starting point is the editorial page of a newspaper. Discussion about current politics, economic policies, arts and cinema, sports, and so on, form part of the editorial pages. A regular habit of reading this page will keep the student up-to-date with current ideas. But this is not enough.

We have to do something extra in order to be familiar with different topics, which may be classified as follows:

1. Economics – Globalisation, Liberalisation, Free Trade, Capitalism, Communism

2. Political – Different systems of governance and political organization, ideas of political thinkers, democracy, dictatorship.

3. Management – Aspects of managing companies, management techniques in different countries, current thinking, game theory.

4. The arts – Classical music, classical and modern art, theatre, poetry

5. Sciences – Quantum theory, Genetics, Stem cell research, cloning, and so on.

Passages with the above topics have either been asked in CAT or have a high probability of being asked. Being aware of these will surely help the student. Needless to say, any enlightened adult is expected to know about the topics listed above.

The next question students ask is: how is it possible to read so much? Allocation of time, having good books on hand, and speed reading are helpful techniques. These will help you save a considerable amount of time. Do learn speed reading, but if you are not comfortable with speed reading, you can ignore it.

What is Speed Reading

Aggressive reading is not the same as speed-reading. Speed-reading means reading large passages in a short time. It is not an easy skill to acquire, especially if one does not have the habit of reading.

People who practice speed-reading report a higher understanding and higher scores. That is because the mind does not have the time to wander while reading. Through speed-reading practice, one can also expand the area of vision and learn to grab ideas simply by scanning the text. It is a useful technique and works wonders.

Do not try speed-reading if you are not fond of reading. Also, the technique does not always work. The important thing to remember is to be flexible. Sometimes it will work. But at other times, especially if the passage is difficult, it may not work. You must vary your speed and technique according to the difficulty level of the passage and the difficulty level of the questions.

As your vocabulary increases and as you get used to reading different type of passages, you will find that your speed increases automatically. You will also get a sense as to what is important in the passage and what can be easily skipped. In short, practice will increase your speed and our advice is to practice a lot with different type of passages. Be patient, however, because the skill is developed over a long period of time. Do not expect miracles to happen or to increase your speed in a few days or a few weeks.

Understanding, not speed, is critical in attempting comprehension passages. However, we give below four different techniques which are used by students to develop speed. Try the different techniques and choose the one that works best for you.

Some books are to be read only in parts, others to be read but not curiously, and some few to be read wholly, with diligence and attention.            -- Francis bacon

Some techniques of speed-reading:

TECHNIQUE ONE: Skim the questions before reading the passage. Look for “keywords” on which questions are based, while reading the paragraph. Underline these keywords as they appear in the passage. This will help you locate the answers and save time.

TECHNIQUE TWO: Draw a line vertically down the centre of the passage. Instead of reading from left to right as we usually do, read along the line, skimming your eyes to the left and right of the line. You will be able to located 90% of the keywords in the passage by this method.

Skimming through passage should take you about a minute. The job then is to link the keywords in the question to those you have located. The advantage is that you do not have to read the whole passage again but can look at specific places in the passage for the answer.

TECHNIQUE THREE: Read paragraph by paragraph. While reading the first paragraph, mark the keywords but also try to understand what the author is saying. Read the first/middle/last lines of the paragraph and skip the rest. Underline the recurring words or themes. Note the central idea of the paragraph in the margin. Do the same as you read other paragraphs. Now when you read the questions, you will know exactly which paragraph to go to.

TECHNIQUE FOUR: Skim through the passage at top speed, reading diagonally from the top left hand corner to the bottom right hand corner across a paragraph. Again, underline keywords and make some marks that will help you to return to the appropriate place while solving the questions. Return to read carefully the sentences that you have marked. This will save you the time of reading the passage again. When you read the questions, you will save a lot of time, as the answers will probably be in the lines that you have marked.

Try different techniques and see which one works for you. Since each person is different, the reading technique will also be different. Sometimes none of the above, or a combination of the above techniques, works for different people.

A detailed explanation and exercises of the above will be found in speed-reading books. Students can pursue it by getting a good work-book under the guidance of skilled teacher. Even if you are not comfortable with speed-reading, you can follow the method of selective reading – that is, not reading passages word by word but instead picking up ideas as you go along and then answering questions based on it.

We illustrate this by the following example. The passage is taken from CAT 2003.

Example 3.1: Read the passage below and answer the questions based on it. While reading, remember to underline the recurring themes and keywords while skipping the parts containing examples. Keep the questions in mind.

The same passage is reproduced below with the recurrent themes underlines and hints given as to what should have been skipped. Match your reading with the ideas highlighted by us to see whether you are able to spot these ideas and skip the parts that we suggest.

Passage
The controversy over genetically modified food continues unabated in the West. Genetic modification (GM) is the science by which the genetic material of a plant is altered, perhaps to make it more resistant to pests or killer weeds or to enhance its nutritional value. Many food biotechnologists claim that GM will be a major contribution of science to mankind in the 21st century. On the other hand, large numbers of opponents, mainly in Europe, claim that the benefits of GM are a myth propagated by multinational corporations to increase their profits, that they pose a health hazard, and have therefore called for governments to ban the sale of genetically-modified food.

­The anti-GM campaign has been quite effective in Europe, with several European Union member countries imposing a virtual ban for five years over genetically-modified food imports. Since the genetically-modified food industry is particularly strong in the United States of America, the controversy also constitutes another chapter in the US-Europe skirmishes which have become particularly acerbic after the US invasion of Iraq.

To a large extent, the GM controversy has been ignored in the Indian media, although Indian biotechnologists have been quite active in GM research. Several groups of Indian biotechnologists have been working on various issues connected with crops grown in India. One concrete achievement which has recently figured in the news is that of a team led by the former vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University, Asis Datta -- it has successfully added an extra gene to potatoes to enhance the protein content of the tuber by at least 30 percent. Not surprisingly, the new potato has been called the protato. The protato is now in its third year of field trials. It is quite likely that the GM controversy will soon hit the headlines in India since a spokesperson of the Indian Central government has recently announced that the government may use the protato in its midday meal programme for schools as early as next year.

Why should "scientific progress", with huge potential benefits to the poor and malnourished, be so  controversial? The anti-GM lobby contends that pernicious propaganda has vastly exaggerated the benefits of GM and completely evaded the costs which will have to be incurred if the genetically-modified food industry is allowed to grow unchecked. In particular, they allude to different types of costs.

This group contends that the most important potential cost is that the widespread distribution and growth of genetically-modified food will enable the corporate world (alias the multinational corporations – MNCs) to completely capture the food chain. A "small" group of biotech companies will patent the transferred genes as well as the technology associated with them. They will then buy up the competing seed merchants and seed-breeding centres, thereby controlling the production of food at every possible level. Independent farmers, big and small, will be completely wiped out of the food industry. At best, they will be reduced to the status of being sub-contractors.

This line of argument goes on to claim that the control of the food chain will be disastrous for the poor since the MNCs, guided by the profit motive, will only focus on the high-value food items demanded by the affluent. Thus, in the long run, the production of basic staples which constitute the food basket of the poor will taper off. However, this vastly overestimates the power of the MNCs. Even if the research promoted by them does focus on the high value food items, much of biotechnology research is also funded by governments in both developing and developed countries. Indeed, the protato is a by-product of this type of research. If the protato passes the field trials, there is no reason to believe that it cannot be marketed in the global potato market. And this type of success story can be repeated with other basic food items.

The second type of cost associated with the genetically-modified food industry is environmental damage. The most common type of "genetic engineering" involves gene modification in plants designed to make them resistant to applications of weed-killers. This then enables farmers to use massive dosages of weed killers so as to destroy or wipe out all competing varieties of plants in their fields. However, some weeds through genetically modified pollen contamination may acquire resistance to a variety of weed-killers. The only way to destroy these weeds is through the use of ever-stronger herbicides which are poisonous and linger on in the environment.                                                                                  [CAT 2003]

1. Using the clues in the passage, which of the following countries would you expect to be in the forefront of the    anti-GM campaign?

            1. USA and Spain.       2. India and Iraq.         3. Germany and France.         

4. Australia and New Zealand.

2. Which of the following is not a criticism of GM food, as explained in the passage?

1. There are costs which will have to be incurred if the genetically-modified food industry is allowed to grow unchecked

2. It is a myth propagated by multinational corporations to increase their profits

3. They pose a health hazards.

4. None of these

3. What would be the best title for the passage?

1. Genetic Technology and its application to food

2. Controversy over GM food

3. Pros and cons of GM food technology

4. MNCs and their hidden agenda as regards GM food

How to attempt: Keeping the questions in mind, we start reading the passage, underlining the ideas or keywords. Try to read selectively, that is, do not read word-by-word and skip parts of the passage that you think are not going to help in answering the questions. As an illustration, the passage is reproduced below with the ideas/keywords highlighted. Also in italics we have mentioned why portions of the text should be skipped.

Passage

The controversy over genetically modified food continues unabated in the West. Genetic modification (GM) is the science by which the genetic material of a plant is altered, perhaps to make it more resistant to pests or killer weeds or to enhance its nutritional value. Many food biotechnologists claim that GM will be a major contribution of science to mankind in the 21st century. On the other hand, large numbers of opponents, mainly in Europe, claim that the benefits of GM are a myth propagated by multinational corporations to increase their profits, that they pose a health hazard, and have therefore called for governments to ban the sale of genetically-modified food.

­The anti-GM campaign has been quite effective in Europe, with several European Union member countries imposing a virtual ban for five years over genetically-modified food imports. Since the genetically-modified food industry is particularly strong in the United States of America, the controversy also constitutes another chapter in the US-Europe skirmishes which have become particularly acerbic after the US invasion of Iraq.

To a large extent, the GM controversy has been ignored in the Indian media, although Indian biotechnologists have been quite active in GM research. Several groups of Indian biotechnologists have been working on various issues connected with crops grown in India. One concrete achievement which has recently figured in the news is that of a team led by the former vice-chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University, Asis Datta -- it has successfully added an extra gene to potatoes to enhance the protein content of the tuber by at least 30 percent. Not surprisingly, the new potato has been called the protato (skip – this is an example). The protato is now in its third year of field trials. It is quite likely that the GM controversy will soon hit the headlines in India since a spokesperson of the Indian Central government has recently announced that the government may use the protato in its midday meal programme for schools as early as next year.

Why should "scientific progress", with huge potential benefits to the poor and malnourished, be so controversial? The anti-GM lobby contends that pernicious propaganda has vastly exaggerated the benefits of GM and completely evaded the costs which will have to be incurred if the genetically-modified food industry is allowed to grow unchecked. In particular, they allude to different types of costs.

This group contends (skip – continuation of criticism by anti-GM lobby) that the most important potential cost is that the widespread distribution and growth of genetically-modified food will enable the corporate world (alias the multinational corporations – MNCs) to completely capture the food chain. A "small" group of biotech companies will patent the transferred genes as well as the technology associated with them. They will then buy up the competing seed merchants and seed-breeding centres, thereby controlling the production of food at every possible level. Independent farmers, big and small, will be completely wiped out of the food industry. At best, they will be reduced to the status of being sub-contractors.

This line of argument goes on (skip – continuation of criticism by anti-GM lobby) to claim that the control of the food chain will be disastrous for the poor since the MNCs, guided by the profit motive, will only focus on the high-value food items demanded by the affluent. Thus, in the long run, the production of basic staples which constitute the food basket of the poor will taper off. However, this vastly overestimates the power of the MNCs. Even if the research promoted by them does focus on the high value food items, much of biotechnology research is also funded by governments in both developing and developed countries. Indeed, the protato is a by-product of this type of research. If the protato passes the field trials, there is no reason to believe that it cannot be marketed in the global potato market. And this type of success story can be repeated with other basic food items.

The second type of cost associated with the genetically-modified food industry (skip – continuation of criticism by anti-GM lobby) is environmental damage. The most common type of "genetic engineering" involves gene modification in plants designed to make them resistant to applications of weed-killers. This then enables farmers to use massive dosages of weed killers so as to destroy or wipe out all competing varieties of plants in their fields. However, some weeds through genetically modified pollen contamination may acquire resistance to a variety of weed-killers. The only way to destroy these weeds is through the use of ever-stronger herbicides which are poisonous and linger on in the environment.

By reading the highlighted portions, we can immediately conclude that the passage is about controversy on genetically modified foods, and the main opponents are in Europe. The Indian media has largely ignored the debate and later on in the passage the list of criticisms by the anti-GM lobby have been mentioned.

Note that we have skipped large parts of the text as they do not relate to the questions.

Let us look at the questions now.

1. Using the clues in the passage, which of the following countries would you expect to be in the forefront of the    anti-GM campaign?

            1. USA and Spain.       2. India and Iraq.         3. Germany and France.         

4. Australia and New Zealand.

This is not a direct question as no countries have been mentioned in the passage. Some detective work is required, which is not very difficult, since the passage mentions that the anti-GM campaign has been quite effective in Europe, with several European Union member countries imposing a virtual ban...” Well, here is what we are looking for. The countries that need to be discovered must be in Europe, and the answer would be (2).

2. Which of the following is not a criticism of GM food, as explained in the passage?

1. There are costs which will have to be incurred if the genetically-modified food industry is allowed to grow unchecked

2. It is a myth propagated by multinational corporations to increase their profits

3. They pose a health hazards.

4. None of these

The criticisms are mentioned in the first paragraph and also later in the passage. Even if do not read the passage, we see that the choices list down the criticisms of GM foods. The question is: “not a criticism” so the answer becomes obvious – it should not be mentioned in the passage. It should be the fourth choice, or none of these, as all the given choices mention the criticisms.

3. What would be the best title for the passage?

1. Genetic Technology and its application to food

2. Controversy over GM food

3. Pros and cons of GM food technology

4. MNCs and their hidden agenda as regards GM food

The title should be one which captures the essence of the article. In this case, the keywords are: controversy, GM food, technology. So clearly the answer must be (2).

What we have learnt: We can see from the above that reading word-by-word is not important if we are able to pick up the main ideas or structure of the passage. The questions can be answered if we read picking up the keywords and following the general ideas in the passage.

Though the technique works, the student must be aware of two aspects: (i) Start following a technique only if it works for you. If you are uncomfortable with a particular technique described in this, or other books, ignore it. (ii) Different passages may require different techniques. The student has to build a judgement about when to follow which method. This will be achieved after a great of practice.

Star soaring

The first step in expanding your horizons is not to limit yourself to your course books. When there is a treasure available in reading, why limit oneself to only what you must read?

Some frequently asked questions are answered below:

Do not limit yourself to course books: You have to start soaring by going beyond your text-books. It is not necessary to limit yourself to your chosen subjects – you will discover a wealth of inspiration when you read other subjects.

What shall we read? If you do not have the habit of reading, then start with magazines and then graduate to story-books. You will find books written by Jeffrey Archer, Sydney Sheldon and Arthur Hailey very interesting. Read the book reviews in newspapers to help you select the better books.

Please suggest some good books: Once you have formed a habit of reading as suggested by us in the previous chapters, one can graduate into more serious reading. A reading list consisting of well-written books is given below. They are current books taken from best-seller lists. The books will also help you know about the issues that we face in our lives. All the books are easily available in book shops and libraries.

Non Fiction

1. Hot, Flat, and Crowded by Thomas L. Friedman

2. What Next? Surviving The Twenty-First Century by Chris Patten

3. Terror and Consent by Philip Bobbitt

4. The Secret by Rhonda Byrne

5. The Way of The World by Ron Suskind

6. The Indian Renaissance: India’s Rise after a Thousand Years of Decline by Sanjeev Sanyal

7. Empires Of Indus by Alice Albinia

8. The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008 by Bob Woodward

9. Foreign Correspondent: Fifty Years of Reporting South Asia by J. Elliott, B. Imhasly, S. Denyer

10. The Snowball: Warren Buffett And The Business of Life by Alice Schroeder

Fiction

1. The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga

2. Sea of Poppies by Amitav Ghosh

3. A Most Wanted Man by John Le Carre

4. The Bourne Sanction by Eric Van Lustbader

5. The Final Reckoning by Sam Bourne

6. Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri

7. The Palace of Illusions by Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni

8. The Immigrant by Manju Kapur

9. Divine Justice by David Baldacci

10. Brisingr by Christopher Paolini

How do I get the time? We understand that students are a harried lot, going from college classes to tuitions to coaching classes, and little time is left to do anything else. But finding time is easy. Simply set aside a few minutes for extra reading. The best time is when you are getting ready to sleep, set aside 30 minutes or so to read something new. Keep that selection near your bed so that it is easy to pick it up. Simply spend 30 minutes or more reading from the book till you fall asleep. If you find books lengthy, read an article instead.

Enjoy your reading: Your task will be easier if you develop an interest in reading. Start with things that interest you. That will create a base for reading outside your interest.

Develop a natural curiosity: If your mind keeps asking questions as you read along, you will find a natural interest developing in you. For instance, if you ask yourself why governance in India is in the pits, you will find that reading about political thinkers becomes so much easier.

Films to books: An important way to develop an interest in reading is to see movies based on literature and then reading the book itself. For instance, if you enjoyed Slumdog Millionaire, read the book as well. You will find there are important differences between the book and the movie, and this will enhance your interest. Movies have been made based on books by Jane Austen, Mark Twain and Shakespeare, so they could be a good starting point to read good books.

By doing the above, you will find your mind is opening up. It will be just a matter of time before your mind starts soaring and you will develop an interest in things that you never liked, for instance, classical music, modern art and even architecture.

We are now ready to do an exercise. Passages on different subjects are given below. Enjoy the passages and you will find each passage giving you some new information. Do the questions as instructed above. Discover your own reading style and see what works best for you.

Exercise 3.1

Directions: Read the passages below and answer the questions based on them.

Passage 1

          AS ONE of the masters of English prose, George Orwell (1903-50) is a puzzling case. Contemporaries knew that he was special, but often found it hard to say why. Getting him into focus grows no easier with time. His best work was political, but his politics were difficult to pin down. Shy in person, though vehement on the page, he could fairly describe himself as simultaneously a left-wing socialist, an anti-communist and a Tory anarchist.

            The puzzle is compounded by the variety and unevenness of Orwell's writing. He is best known for two anti-totalitarian parables, “Animal Farm” (1945) and “Nineteen Eighty-Four” (1949), which made him, just before his death, into one of the first truly global literary stars. Yet their immediate target, Soviet communism, has passed into history, and the second book in particular has acquired a dated feel.

The man himself strikes a notably old-fashioned figure—tall, gaunt, rather shabbily dressed, bent over a typewriter with permafag stuck to the lip. Yet confining Orwell to the austerity of the 1930s and 1940s is a mistake. Anyone who turns back to his finest essays or to his classic piece of war writing, “Homage to Catalonia”, will hear a voice that speaks as urgently to our times as it did to his.

Orwell was born Eric Arthur Blair in Bengal, where his father worked in the office that regulated China's opium trade. Shipped back to England as a child, he trotted obediently off to prep school. Later he wrote of its miseries in “Such, Such Were the Joys”, a vivid recollection of homesickness, arbitrary rule and the oppressiveness of “team spirit”.

An underperforming scholar at Eton, he was just young enough to escape the slaughter of the first world war. Rather than follow school friends to Oxford or Cambridge, he signed up for the colonial police in Burma. The job turned him against colonialism—he was fed up, he wrote, with locking people up for doing what he would do in their shoes—and he soon left.

From this experience came two superb autobiographical stories, “Shooting an Elephant”, a self-critical piece about the disturbing power of crowds, and “A Hanging”, a quietly brilliant polemic against the death penalty.

Back in Europe, Orwell worked in Paris in a hotel kitchen, joined tramps in London doss-houses and visited unemployment-racked regions of Britain. The results were two highly personalised documentaries, “Down and Out in Paris and London” and “The Road to Wigan Pier”.

In 1936 he went to Barcelona to report on the Spanish civil war. Not content to watch, he enlisted with the Republicans, though hostile to their Soviet backers, and almost died of a neck wound.

Spain was Orwell's defining moment and perhaps also the high point of his life. Though recognition followed, his remaining years were hard. Tubercular lungs kept him in continual ill health. In 1945, soon after he and his wife, Eileen, adopted a son, she died during an operation for uterine cancer. When serious money came in at last with “Animal Farm”, releasing Orwell from day jobs, he took the toddler and a housekeeper to live on the remote tip of the Scottish island of Jura.

The other side of Orwell's burning conscience was an almost monkish ability to cut himself off. His health grew worse, his lungs haemorrhaged and in January 1950 he died.

There are striking parallels between Orwell and Albert Camus (1913-60), another tubercular writer preoccupied with the individual in mass society, who died—in a car smash—also at 47. Camus was the better novelist, but their moral vision was remarkably close. Personal engagement and behaving decently mattered more to them in politics than policy or dogma. Neither was happy in party camps. They were distrusted by right and left alike. Both recognised the violence that could result from bad thinking and bad writing—a lesson Orwell put memorably into “Politics and the English Language”. Both believed in the boundlessness of our duty to resist injustice, yet took a bleakly limited view of how far any of us could succeed. Orwell, who was allergic to theory and speculation of all kinds, would have hated the word, but in a sense he was England's existentialist.

Preachy Orwell certainly was. But his anti-authoritarian sermons could almost always make you laugh. He was a master of the one-liner: “Good prose is like a window pane”; “At 50, everyone has the face he deserves.” Whether his weekly column was on writing clearly, resisting tyranny or making tea, he always made it sound like a matter of life and death. Newspapers nowadays tend to have more columns than a Roman temple, all interchangeable and most of them redundant. Few, if any, have Orwell's indispensable voice.

1. Why is confining Orwell to the austerity of the 1930s and 1940s “a mistake” according to the author?

1. because he is not an old fashioned figure

2. because he has written two anti-totalitarian parables

3. because he is as relevant today as he was in the past

4. because his best work was political, but his politics were difficult to pin down.

5. difficult to say

2. What is the difference between Orwell and Camus, according to the passage?

A. They were distrusted by politicians

B. They died at the same age

C. Both were allergic to theory and speculation

D. Both had health problems

            1. A and B but not C and D                             2. A and D but not B and C

            3. A, B, C and D                                              4. A and C but not B and D

5. none of these

3. Why does the author say that George Orwell a puzzling case?

            1. because of the variety and unevenness of Orwell’s writing

            2. several things add to the mystery surrounding him

            3. because contemporaries could not say why he was special

            4. he was preachy and anti- authoritarian

5. difficult to say

4. While describing Orwell’s newspaper articles, the author gives his opinion that:

            1. there will never be a columnist like Orwell again

            2. Orwell was a passionate writer of newspaper columns

            3. his columns were full of one-liners

            4. newspaper columns these days are quite worthless

            5. Orwell was actually quite indispensable.

5. It can be inferred from the passage that:

            A. Orwell was a fiercely independent person

B. Orwell was against colonialism because he was against violence and was a sensitive person

            C. Orwell probably did not attend university

            1. A and C but not B                2. A and B but not C

            3. B and C but not A                4. A, B and C

            5. A but not B and C

Passage 2

            In a secular age, philosophy can look like the ultimate authority on life's great questions, the natural place to seek answers to the riddles of human unhappiness. Philosophers, like rocket scientists, look as if they have access to some very complex and important truths. But despite an enticing exterior, modern philosophy often disappoints those who study it more closely. Issues that seem so urgent to many contemporary theorists and philosophers (What is the signifier? What is the subject?) don't often echo our own priorities (Why am I so shy? How can I be happy?).

            This may explain why, in universities across Britain, more students are now enrolling in the study of ancient philosophy (Plato, Aristotle, the Hellenistic schools) than in the study of theorists such as Derrida, Foucault, Baudrillard and Deleuze. Ancient philosophy remains far more faithful to most people's idea of what philosophy should be about. The ancient philosophers believed quite simply that philosophy should in some way help to change one's life for the better - a beautiful ambition almost entirely absent from modern philosophy (and relegated instead to the problem pages of magazines and afternoon chat shows). "Any philosopher's argument which does not treat human suffering is worthless. For just as there is no profit in medicine if it does not expel the diseases of the body, so there is no profit in philosophy either, if it does not expel the suffering of the mind." These are the words of Epicurus, born on the island of Samos, a few miles off the Ionian coast, in 341BC. They also happen to reflect the aspirations of most students preparing to study philosophy at university, aspirations sadly shared by almost none of their lecturers. In ancient philosophy, we find a repository of the therapeutic ideals which most of us still associate with the subject, but which have largely disappeared from the modern curriculum. To listen again to Epicurus's exhortations: "Let no one put off studying philosophy when he is young, nor when old grow weary of its study. For no one is too young or too far past his prime to achieve the health of his soul. The man who alleges that he is not yet ready for philosophy or that the time for it has passed him by, is like the man who says that he is either too young or too old for happiness."

            Philosophy is best defined not so much by its subject matter, as by its method of inquiry: logical, syllogistic and axiomatic. Many scientific subjects which became independent disciplines began life as branches of philosophy (up until the 19th century, physics courses in universities were described as natural philosophy). Over the long history of philosophy, there have been five areas in which the majority of practitioners have done their thinking: epistemology, ethics, political theory, aesthetics and the philosophy of religion.

            Though the first of these branches regularly puts most people off philosophy, it occupies the dominant position in the modern curriculum. Ethics interests the majority of people, and was of the greatest concern in ancient times. The Hellenistic schools of Greece and Rome - the Epicureans, Sceptics and Stoics - were passionately committed to the idea that philosophy should address the painful practical problems of human life - death, love, sexuality and anger.

            To take an example, confronted with someone who was worried about death, an Epicurean would break the problem into components, arguing that the only things we should fear were those that caused us pain. When dead, we would feel neither pain nor pleasure. Therefore, there was no reason to fear death. "The man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in ceasing to live, has nothing terrible to fear in life," concluded Epicurus.

            The dialogues of Plato similarly engage with the eternally important questions. Few philosophers have had a more practical view of the thinking life. For a start, it wasn't necessary to disengage from ordinary commitments: philosophising could go on alongside shopping, working, bathing, loving; it was no alternative to an active life - rather, its necessary complement. The point was emphasised by Plato's decision to develop Socrates' thoughts within dialogues set in quasi-novelistic contexts. The central tenets of western philosophy were shown to unfold naturally during conversations between a man who didn't wash his cloak too frequently and some of his friends on their strolls to the harbour and visits to the gymnasium in fifth-century BC Athens. The dialogues were strewn with banter and gossip unexpected in philosophical treatises: such static belonged to existence, and thus philosophy, its illuminator, had a duty not to shy from it.

            As Charmides opens, we find Socrates, just returned from the siege of Potideae, catching up with friends at the wrestling school opposite the temple of Basile, south of the Acropolis. They talk about the battle, then the subject turns to a young man called Charmides, said to be extraordinarily pretty, who is on his way to the wrestling school. Socrates recounts his arrival:

            "Charmides came, and he caused a great deal of laughter: each of us sitting down tried to make room for him by pushing his neighbour away in a frantic attempt to have the boy sit next to him, until we forced the man sitting at one end of the row to stand up and tipped the man at the other end off sideways. In the event Charmides came and sat between me and Critias. Well, by then, my friend, I was in difficulties, and the self-assurance I'd felt earlier . . . had been knocked out of me . . . That was the moment . . . when I saw what was inside his cloak. I was on fire, I lost my head . . ."

            Philosophy should not imply its emergence from a vacuum, suggests Plato; it is anchored in a world in which heads will be lost after glimpses inside others' cloaks.

6. What is the difference between ancient philosophy and modern philosophy, as seen from the passage?

A. modern philosophy appears to be far removed from real life while ancient philosophy is not.

B. modern philosophy does not reflect the priorities of the people while ancient philosophy does.

C. modern philosophy is too complex to be understood by common people while ancient philosophy can be understood by common people.

D. modern philosophy is too arcane while ancient philosophy is more open and frank.

            1. A and B only                       2. A, B and C               3. B and C only

            4. B, C and D                           5. A, B, C and D

7. How would an Epicurean deal with a man who was worried about death?

A. he would tell him that there was nothing to worry about.

B. he would tell him that when dead, he would neither feel pain nor pleasure

C. he would break up the problem and say that he should only fear things that caused pain

D. he would explain that there was nothing terrible in ceasing to live.

            1. A and B only           2. A, B and C only                   3. B, C and D only

            4. A, B, C and D          5. C and D only

8. “That was the moment . . . when I saw what was inside his cloak. I was on fire, I lost my head . . ." What can be inferred from this line as to what was inside Charmides' cloak that made Socrates lose his head?

1. he was carrying something unexpected

2. Charmides was actually a woman

3. Charmides was probably carrying some weapons

4. Charmides had a great liking for Socrates

5. not clear from the passage.

9. What is the central theme of the passage?

1. ancient philosophers are more popular than modern ones.

2. ancient philosophers dealt with their subject better than modern philosophers.

3. philosophy is not something esoteric; it should deal with life and life’s problems

4. philosophy and religion should co-exist

5. one should study philosophy as it helps answer life’s questions

10. What is the most important aspect of the dialogues of Plato that makes it a unique treatise?

1. they engage with eternally important questions

2. they show that philosophy was no alternative to an active life

3. they unfolded in conversations with ordinary people

4. they are strewn with dialogues on the meaning of existence.

5. the dialogues are strewn with banter and gossip unexpected in philosophical treatises

Passage 3

To understand how the business organisation has changed over the years, just how rapid take a look at John Kenneth Galbraith's “The New Industrial State”, an intriguing portrait of the state of corporate America back in 1967. Mr Galbraith argued that America was run by a quasi-benevolent oligopoly. A handful of big companies—the big three car companies, the big five steel companies, etc—planned the economy in the name of stability.

They were hierarchical and bureaucratic organisations that were in the business of making long runs of standardised products. They introduced “new and improved” varieties with predictable regularity; they provided their workers with life-time employment; and they enjoyed fairly good relations with the giant trade unions. What's more, they were all American. That world is now dead. America's giant companies have been either eviscerated or transformed by global competition. Most have shifted their production systems from high-volume to high-value, from standardised to customised. And they have flattened their management hierarchies to make themselves nimbler and fitter. Few people these days expect to spend their lives moving up the ladder of a single organisation.

It is reasonable to expect that further dramatic changes lie ahead. But where exactly will they take us? Where is the modern company heading?

There are three standard answers to this question, the first two of which are almost diametrically opposed to each other. The first—particularly popular in anti-globalisation circles—holds that a handful of giant companies are engaged in a “silent takeover” of the world, in the words of Noreena Hertz, a Cambridge University academic. The past couple of decades have seen an unprecedented spurt of mergers. The survivors, it is maintained, are the real lords of the universe today: far more powerful than mere nation states.

Like Mr Galbraith's oligarchs, these corporate barons plan the world economy for their own sinister purposes. But they have none of the offsetting advantages of providing life-time security and a stable environment. The trouble with this view is the facts. As Martin Wolf of the Financial Times has pointed out, Ms Hertz's claim that “51 of the 100 biggest economies of the world are now corporations” abuses statistics. She measures companies by sales, but national economies by GDP (which is a measure of value added, more akin to corporate profits).

Rather than increasing their hold over the universe, big companies have been losing ground. In 1970, both the television and car markets in America were controlled by triumvirates, each with a combined share of around 90%. Today, the big three are hanging on to around half of each market.

Futuristic industries offer no more comfort. Two American business-school professors, Fariborz Ghadar and Pankaj Ghemawat, point out that in computer hardware, computer software and long-distance telephony, the top five companies' shares of worldwide sales declined by 15 to 30 percentage points each between 1988 and 1998. It is hard to think of an industry that has become more competitive in recent years—let alone one that is likely to do so in future.

The second school of thought argues almost the opposite of the first: it says that big companies are a thing of the past. This school has the benefit of having economic theory on its side. In 1937, Ronald Coase, a Nobel-prize-winning economist, asked a fundamental question: “Why do firms exist?” His answer: companies make sense when the “transaction costs” associated with buying things on the market exceed the fixed costs of establishing and maintaining a bureaucracy. Modern technology is shifting the balance of advantage away from firms and towards markets. Their current goal is to focus on the few things at which they undoubtedly excel and to hand over everything else to equally focused specialists.

Yet the idea that the firm will retreat to the periphery of the economy still looks far fetched. As Gary Hamel and C.K. Prahalad, two management academics, have pointed out, firms possess certain “core competences”, usually cultural ones, that cannot easily be purchased on the market. Even leaving culture aside, there are still market failures that persuade firms to try to do things internally rather than externally. If a firm thinks a contractor possesses knowledge that is vital to its own survival, it has every incentive to take over that supplier.

The third forecast is an offshoot of the second: that the discrete company is no longer the basic building block of the modern economy. This school argues that it is being replaced by the “network”.

Networks are seen not just as an answer to external competition, but also as a way of giving more freedom to today's prized “knowledge workers”. The inventor of that term, Peter Drucker, who laid out his own forecast for the firm's future, argues that the way forward lies in networks, such as the purchasing co-operative that has been set up by Detroit's big three car makers.

In Silicon Valley, hierarchical organisations are dissolving into fluid “networks of treaties”. Free-floating groups of entrepreneurs form such a network to market an idea. They then sell it to the highest bidder and move on to produce another idea and to create another firm, with the money being supplied all the while by the valley's venture capitalists.

11. Which of the following are NOT the characteristics of corporate America in 1967, as mentioned in the passage?

            1. they mostly sold standardised products over long periods of time

            2. they provided their workers with life-time employment

3. they enjoyed fairly good relations with the giant trade unions

            4. they had flattened management hierarchies

            5. companies were hierarchical and bureaucratic organisations

12. Which of the following would be the best meaning of the phrase “abuses statistics” as used in the passage?

            1. uses statistics to misrepresent facts             

2. misquotes statistics

            3. uses statistics in a faulty way                                  

4. takes the wrong meaning from statistics

            5. they measure companies by sales

13. It can be inferred from the passage that:

            1. Mr Ghadar and Mr Ghemawat’s hypothesis is not correct

2. Noreena Hertz’s hypothesis is completely opposed by firms like Monorail Corporation

3. Mr Hamel and Mr Prahalad’s hypothesis is completely opposed to Mr Ronald Coase’s

            4. Big companies started to dominated in the 1960s and will lose ground in the future

5. Fariborz Ghadar and Pankaj Ghemawat gave ideas that Mr Prahlad corrected later on

14. What is the best answer of the line: “companies make sense when the “transaction costs” associated with buying things on the market exceed the fixed costs of establishing and maintaining a bureaucracy”?

            1. variable cost must exceed fixed cost in the case of big firms

            2. cost of operations must exceed cost of the fixed cost of the companies

            3. fixed costs should be covered by any company in order to be profitable

            4. revenue from operations must cover all fixed costs for companies

            5. fixed and variable costs of a company must be recovered to remain profitable.

15. The article makes a prediction that:

            1. big firms will soon belong to history

            2. hierarchies will be replaced by networks in the future

            3. innovative methods of doing business will have to be thought of in the future

            4. firms to try to do things internally rather than externally

            5. hierarchical and bureaucratic organisations will not be able to survive in the future

Passage 4

As scientific debates go, the war of words over the genetic roots of violence has itself been marked by unusual violence. It has damaged careers, provoked comparisons with Nazi pogroms, and prompted bitter talk of science being corrupted by political correctness. It has also sparked passionate statements about racists, Luddites, and monkey sex. This is the stuff of great fiction. But it's true. And the arguments are only likely to get fiercer as violence in America continues to rise.

Let's leave aside for the moment the question of whether a convincing connection can yet be made between certain genes and violent behaviour. Even without conclusive evidence that it can, heated questions are being raised. Will the government try to screen people to see if they have genes that incline them to violence? If people do have such a gene, can they be forced into medical therapy? What if tests are used selectively to screen minority children, on the grounds that a growing number of American prison inmates are black or Hispanic? "Research into genetic factors has tremendous impact, and it is likely to yield controversial findings that are highly susceptible to abuse and misunderstanding," says David Wasserman, who teaches philosophy of law, medicine, and social science at the University of Maryland's Institute of Philosophy and Public Policy.

Wasserman knows what he is talking about; he has already been burned by the debate. A 1992 conference he planned on "genetic factors in crime" had its, federal funding yanked after it was denounced for fostering racial prejudice and promoting a "modern-day version of eugenics". Research presented at the conference, its more vehement opponents protested to the New York Times, "would inevitably target minority children in the inner city in the guise of preventing future crime".

Wasserman adamantly denies those charges. "Scientists were brought to this subject by legitimate curiosity," he says. "They did not wake up one day having been mugged and say, 'Let's see if there is a gene responsible for crime.' Scientists see themselves as increasing understanding of human behaviour - though they may be naive about the implications of their research and the political agendas it might further."

Ironically, current efforts to assess what role biology and genetics might play in violent human behaviour started out with the best of intentions, at least from the point of view of the people behind them. Among them were some exploring the link between aggressive behaviour and disturbances in levels of a chemical called serotonin. Gerald L. Brown, a psychiatrist who is clinical director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, explains that serotonin transmits nerve signals in the brain and is important in regulating sleep, sexual behaviour, appetite, and impulsivity. In 1979 Brown was part of the team that first suggested an association between low levels of serotonin and out-of-control aggressive behaviour in a group of U.S. military men. Serotonin depletion appears to have a disinhibiting effect, says Brown, and studies have repeatedly implicated it in explosive, destructive, impulsive behaviour, including suicide. "A more familiar word might be 'violent'," he adds, "but violent is not a scientific term; it's descriptive."

Many things can apparently influence serotonin production, though race isn't one of them; Serotonin levels are 20 to 30 per cent lower in men than in women. They are high in newborns, low in adolescents, and then rise again with age - a pattern that seems to fit with the stereotype of the impulsive teenager. A diet high in L-tryptophan, an amino acid needed to make serotonin, can boost levels of the neurotransmitter in animals. Some studies tentatively suggest that animals subjected to stressful environments make less serotonin, raising the possibility that the same might happen in humans living under the gun, whether on the battlefield or in poor, crime-ridden neighborhoods.

16. Which of the following statements would falsify the claim made in the last paragraph of this passage?

               1.  But there's a suspicion that genes, too, influence serotonin metabolism and behaviour, making certain people more susceptible to impulsivity, especially under stress.

           2.    It is possible that low serotonin makes human beings more violence prone than they otherwise would have been.

3.        Race and gender have little to do with production of serotonin in humans and animals.
   4.      Both animals and humans are likely to produce less serotonin under stressful conditions.

5.    Race is not one of the influences on serotonin production.

17.  Which of the following is a viable conclusion to the debate on whether scientists should look for connections between genes and violent behavioural patterns?

1.    If the state feels that the scientists are unduly stressing on the genetic aspect in their search for answers to violence, then such research ought to be summarily stopped.

2.    There is a definite connection between genes and violent behavioural patterns amongst the adolescents and the way out of criminality is to find out how genes contribute to violence.

3.    It is not really possible to research the connection between genes and violence without demonizing or stereotyping certain minorities.

4.    Genetic research on violence has to be seen in the context of a society desperately seeking solutions to violent crime. In the circumstances, the price of silence might be even more painful than that of noise.

5.    Genetic research on violence should be directed towards relating the serotonin influence to the human psyche.

18. With which of the following statements would the author be most likely to concur?

1.    Serotonin depletion in human beings could lead to a sizeable reduction in violent tendencies.

2.    One way of controlling violence amongst the Blacks and the minorities is genetic screening.

3.    It is not for the scientists to either frame or flaunt social policies, their job is to conduct

       an ethical scientific enquiry into the causes of societal aggression.

4.    Serotonin deficiency or reduction is the only cause of social aggression amongst both              humans and animals.

5.    The scientist’s job is not only to conduct ethical research but also to ease social aggression.

19. Which of the following statements CANNOT be proved on the basis of what is mentioned in this passage?

1.    All aggressive people have low serotonin levels.

2.    People living in war-torn areas or those under undue stress have serotonin levels similar to those of animals.

3.    Low serotonin levels are by their very nature connected to genetics.

4.    All of the above

5.    Serotonin levels are lower in men than in women.

20. The author could go on to discuss in the paragraph following the concluding paragraph all
of the following EXCEPT

1.    How serotonin disturbances are likely to induce violent behaviour.

2.    The connections between gene defects associated with abnormal serotonin metabolism.

3.    Ways in which external factors can contribute to the production of serotonin

4.    Look at ways in which serotonin abnormalities can be treated.

5.    Ways in which serotonin is produced by the human body

Answers

1. 3      It is a mistake to confine Orwell to history because he has not lost relevance even today. Only the third choice answers this question.

2. 5      The passage talks of similarities between the two writers and does not mention differences

3. 2      The passage mentions several things why the Orwell puzzle is compounded, so it was not just one thing.

4. 2      Can be inferred from: “Whether his weekly column was on writing clearly, resisting tyranny or making tea, he always made it sound like a matter of life and death.” Note that other choices are also stated in the passage, but we have to look for the author’s opinion.

5. 4      A is inferred from the fact that he found team spirit oppressive; B is inferred from the reason of his turning back on colonialism and C is inferred from the fact that he did not follow his friends to Oxford and Cambridge.

6. 1      Both A and b are mentioned in the first two paragraphs. However, C and D cannot be inferred as it is not said that modern philosophy is complex or that it is arcane.

7. 3      A is a general statement; B, C and D are mentioned in the fourth last paragraph.

8. 2      Note that Charmides was very pretty and caused some discomfort. But then Socrates saw inside the cloak and “I was on fire” and Socrates had lost his head. Because of such reactions we can say that Charmides was probably a woman.

9. 3      The central theme is that philosophy does not exist in a vacuum; it should deal with life and it is anchored in reality.

10. 2    The most important aspect about the dialogues is that they bring philosophy to the common man: “philosophising could go on alongside shopping, working, bathing, loving; it was no alternative to an active life.”

11. 4    All the choices except (4) are mentioned; but (4) happened later on.

12. 3    This is evident from the example of GDP given in the passage: it uses statistics in a wrong way.

13. 2    Hertz says that firms are taking over the world, but Monorail proves that big companies are a thing of the past. None of the other choices are correct.

14. 4    Transaction costs refer to revenue from operations.

15. 5    The article does not make any of the predictions mentioned in the first three choices.

16. 1    The last two paragraphs nullify the possibility of genes being a contributing factor in the rate of production of serotonin. Hence, [1]

17. 4    The passage clearly states that [1] is not viable, [2] is too definitive and [3] is something that is not desirable according to the writer. Hence, [4]

18. 3 All the options except [3] go against the grain of the passage. Hence, [3]

19. 4    Since the author does not lead to any definitive conclusions in the passage, none of the given options is conclusive. Hence, [4]

20. 5    Option 5 would be outside the discussion and would be an unnecessary diversion.