Time Left - 30:00 mins
Critical Reasoning Quiz || CLAT 2022 || 13.09.2021
Attempt now to get your rank among 148 students!
Question 1
Directions: Questionsin the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The future of the United Kingdom will now be gravely affected because of recent events.
Question 2
Directions: Questionsin the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
Conservative factions in many European nations may succeed in achieving their demands for a decision making poll in their own countries.
Question 3
Directions: Questionsin the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
Inspite of the Bank of England's move, there is an urgent requirement for efficient handling of the country's financial markets.
Question 4
Directions: Questionsin the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
George Soros is a financial observer and commentator.
Question 5
Directions: Questionsin the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The British people have spoken. The prime minister has resigned. Already, the consequences of what the voters said and why they said it have begun to reshape Britain’s future in profound and potentially dangerous ways. The country has embarked on a perilous journey in which our politics and our economy must be transformed. The vote to leave the EU will challenge not only the government and politicians but all of us whose opinions have been rejected.
Britain’s place in the world must now be rethought. That will demand the kind of debate about our alliances that we have not had since the Suez crisis forced a post-imperial reality on Britain. Once again, the country’s very idea of itself will have to be reimagined too. The deep strains on the nation’s fabric that are partly expressed as a pro-European Scotland, Northern Ireland – and London – and an anti-European England and Wales must be urgently addressed. And a new relationship with a Europe that is in no mood to be generous must be negotiated. As a gleeful Nigel Farage pointed out early on Friday, there are also already voices from the populist right in Denmark, France and the Netherlands arguing for their own definitive vote. And while the Bank of England successfully steadied the City after dramatic early falls in the value of shares and a tumbling pound, these things will take careful management if they are not to translate into a new crunch on the banks, a recession or even – as George Soros warned earlier in the week – a sudden inability to finance the balance of payments.
The Suez Crisis reshaped the status and dynamics of British social structures and its place in the political map of the world.
Question 6
Directions: Questions in the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
The societal setup of the past was unfair to certain sections of the populace.
Question 7
Directions: Questions in the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
Playing the "underprivileged" card was the easiest way to get a government job in the post-Independence era.
Question 8
Directions: Questions in the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
Caste based politics is now one of the biggest forms of politics taking place in our country.
Question 9
Directions: Questions in the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
Caste based politics has fundamentally shattered the very foundations on which our democratic setup was built.
Question 10
Directions: Questions in the form of inference/conclusions are based on the passages given below. The passage is followed by five inferences. You are required to examine each inference separately in the context of the passage and decide upon its degree of truth or falsity.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
In India, the working of democracy has effortlessly adapted to the undemocratic social structures of the past. Obviously, the two are mutually opposed; in other societies the contradiction would have asphyxiated the institution. In India the older tradition co-opted the younger institution. People flocked to polling booths but voted mostly according to caste affiliations. Numerical majorities prevailed, but candidates continued to represent segments of the established hierarchic structure. In the 1990s, the largely agrarian intermediate castes- sought to convert their steadily growing economic clout into political power. Their leaders asked for — and got — reservations in government jobs in the name of the downtrodden. But the OBCs remained inimical to those lower down the traditional social hierarchy, the Dalits and minority tribes, earlier beneficiaries of affirmative action as part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Irrespective of their social background, the elected are acutely conscious of their status. The privileges and immunities that proclaim their superior status have grown, not lessened, in democratic India. The process unconsciously mimics the special privileges accorded to the higher castes. The democratic idea has blended too with the felt need to project power. Elected representatives show no reticence in flaunting their visible symbols of authority.
The 1990s saw a large section of the land-owning agricultural population turn to active politics to uplift the weaker sections in the caste hierarchy.
- 148 attempts
- 1 upvote
- 1 comment
Tags :
CLAT UGEnglish LanguageMar 29CLAT UG
