- These tests are a check for your learning and are meant to serve as tools for assessment.
- The test is designed to check your current understanding of the language and whether you are able to logically co-relate different parts of a paragraph.
- Directions for individual questions: The questions below have a paragraph given with one sentence missing at the end or in between. From among the answer choices given, select the sentence that can fill the blank to form a coherent paragraph.
Congratulations - you have completed Para Completion:Test-1.
You scored %%SCORE%% out of %%TOTAL%%.
You correct answer percentage: %%PERCENTAGE%% .
Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%
Your answers are highlighted below.
When we call others dogmatic, what we really object to is (………)
Their giving the dog a bad name.
Their holding dogmas that are different from our own.
The extremism that goes along with it.
The subversion of whatever they actually believe in concomitantly.
Question 1 Explanation:
Who are dogmatic individuals? People who keep opinions of their own and are not willing to accommodate others. This is best reflected in option 2, where people would object to the dogmas held by others, that is their stringent opinions.
I am an entertainer. (……..), I have to keep smiling because in my heart, laughter and sorrow have an affinity.
Even if I have tears in my eyes.
Even though I am depressed inside.
While entertaining people.
In the entertainment business.
Question 2 Explanation:
The key in this question is the phrase ‘I have to keep smiling’. Obviously, before this phrase, we require a something that conveys the opposite meaning and lends a sense of completion to the sentence. We find this is option 1.
The stock markets (……),the state they are in right now speaks volumes about this fact.
Are the barometers of public confidence.
Are the best indicators of public sentiment.
Are used to trade in expensive shares.
Are not used to talking stock of all markets.
Question 3 Explanation:
What attribute of the stock markets is being referred to here? Obviously the one where their importance is highlighted and they can indicate something meaningful. In the given question, the author does not give a positive or a negative opinion about the same. He simply states what the stock markets stand for and this is highlighted best by option 2.
Political power is just as permanent as today’s newspaper. Ten years down the line ,(…..) the most powerful man in any state today.
Nobody will remember what was written in today’s newspaper or.
Few will know, or care about.
When a lot of water will have passed under the bridge, who will care.
Question 4 Explanation:
Option 1 and 4 are rejected as they do not match the sentiment of the author. The next thing is that what will happen 10 years down the lines? What happens during the course of that time period? Well, during such a long time, generally all pieces turn irrelevant and all powerful men lose their power. The point of concern in the question are politicians and this is taken forward in option 3.
(…..), the more they remain the same.
People all over the world change.
The more people change.
The more they are different.
The less people change.
Question 5 Explanation:
The correct option has to be 2 in this case as it reflects the contrast required in this case.
Although, it has been more than 50 years since Satyajit Ray made Pather Panchali, (……) refuse to go away from the mind.
The haunting images.
Its haunting images.
Its haunt of its images.
The haunt of its images.
Question 6 Explanation:
A very easy question: what does not go away from one’s mind? The haunting images posted in the mind of the movie, therefore the option needs to have the pronoun its.
People arguing for a position have been known to cast the opposite in an unnecessarily feeble light (…….). People who indulge in this fallacy may be fearful or ignorant of a strong counter argument. Detecting this fallacy often depends on having already heard a better refutation, or having information on which one to construct.
Casting the opposite as weaker than it really is, is a very effective strategy.
This portrayal of a refutation as weaker than it really is, is a sure way of proving your point.
Casting the opposite as weaker than it really is, is not a very effective strategy.
This portrayal of refutation as weaker than it really is, is unwarranted.
Question 7 Explanation:
How does the author label this strategy? As a fallacy, meaning thereby that the best option that would fit in this question is option 3, labeling the strategy as ineffective.
A deliberation is a form of discussion in which two people begin on different sides of an issue (….). Then each decides in the light of the other argument whether to adopt the other position, to change his or her position somewhat, or to maintain the same position. Both sides realize that to modify one’s position is not to lose, the point is to get closer to the truth of the matter.
Each person argues his or her position most sincerely.
The prerequisite for deliberation to be productive is that persons involved must keep an open mind.
The purpose is to resolve the issue to the satisfaction of both parties.
The trick is to state your viewpoint from a position of strength.
Question 8 Explanation:
The important point in this question is the location of the blank. What happens when a deliberation begins? Obviously, both sides present their cases first and then listen to each other. The blank requires that both sides present their point of view. This is reflected in option 1.
The question of what rights animals should enjoy is a vexatious one. Hundreds of millions of animals are put to death for human use each year. It can be argued that slowing down scientific research would retard discovery of antidotes to diseases such as cancer which kill humans and animals alike (……) What if super intelligent beings from Alpha Centuari landed on earth and decided to use us for their experiments, arguing that they could save far more of their and our lives by doing so?
It will benefit both in the long run.
Is the argument truly fair to animals?
But the progress of human civilization cannot be made contingent on some hypothetical rights of animals.
There is no question of equating human rights with those of animals.
Question 9 Explanation:
In the first half of the argument, before the blank, the author presents the view of science. In the next half of the argument, he presents the contrarian view. This means that a question is required in the middle or statement that changes the flow of information. We find this in option 2.
Many of us live one-eyed lives. We rely largely on the eye of the mind to form our images of reality. It is a mechanical world based on fact and reason (….). So today more and more of us are opening the other eye, the eye of the heart, looking for realities to which the mind’s eye is blind. This is a world warmed and transformed by the power of love, a vision of community beyond the mind’s capacity to see. Either eye alone is not enough. We need “wholesight” , a vision of world in which mind and heart unite.
It has led to unprecedented scientific growth and material well-being.
In the nuclear age, our mind-made world has been found flawed and dangerous, even lethal.
The question is irrelevant whether or not there can be seen and reasoned.
We have built our lives based on it because it seemed predictable and safe.
Question 10 Explanation:
Why are people opening their eyes? Because something bad must have happened, a negative outcome must have ensued and this means that we need an option that introduces this flaw in the world of fact and reason. This is accomplished perfectly by option 2.
Once you are finished, click the button below. Any items you have not completed will be marked incorrect.
There are 10 questions to complete.