Note the context in which the author uses the word ‘paradoxically’: ‘...by keeping their outer surface below air temperature, the birds might paradoxically be able to draw very slight amounts of heat from the air around them.’ That is, the penguins manage to actually draw heat from the cold Antarctic air by keeping their outer surface temperature below the air temperature. This is best explained by option 2.

Option 1 talks of penguins keeping ‘their body colder’. This is incorrect. Penguins only manage to keep the plumage on certain parts of their body colder than the surrounding air. Options 3 and 4 talk about thermal radiation which is not relevant in the given context.

The question asks us to choose the answer option which would not negate the findings of the study reported in the passage.

Consider option 1. If the penguins’ plumage were made of a material that did not allow any heat transfer through convection or radiation, then the birds cannot minimize heat loss using their plumage. This negates the findings of the study.

Let us look at option 2. If the average air temperature recorded during the month of June 2008 in the area of study were –10 degrees Fahrenheit (instead of 0.32 degrees Fahrenheit reported in the study) and the penguins’ plumage on their heads, chests and backs were at -1.84, -7.24 and -9.76 degrees Fahrenheit, then the birds’ plumage would be warmer than the surrounding air, making heat gain due to convection impossible. So, option 2 too goes against the findings of the study.

Consider option 3. If the temperature of the plumage on the penguins’ heads, chests and backs were found to be 1.84, 7.24 and 9.76 degrees Fahrenheit respectively, then the plumage would be much warmer than the surrounding air. This would mean heat loss for the penguins. Option 3, too, negates the findings of the study.

Let us look at option 4. If the average temperature of the feet of penguins in the month of June 2008 were found to be 2.76 degrees Fahrenheit, instead of 1.76 degrees Fahrenheit, the findings of the study would still hold good. This is the option that does not negate the findings of the study.

See the last lines of the passage; ‘...given the Emperors’ unusually demanding breeding cycle, every bit of warmth counts. . . . Since penguins trek as far as 75 miles to the coast to breed and male penguins don’t eat anything during the incubation period of 64 days, conserving calories by giving up as little heat as possible is absolutely crucial.’

The question asks us to choose the answer option that cannot be inferred from the passage.

Option 1 states that ‘too many options have made it difficult for consumers to trust products’. This is clearly inferred from the passage, which talks of consumer ‘choice anxiety’ and describes companies with limited product options as ‘selling nice things, but maybe more importantly, they’re selling a confidence in those things, and an ability to opt out of the stuff rat race’.

Option 2 states that ‘consumers are susceptible to marketing images that they see on social media.’ This too, is mentioned in the passage: ‘Indeed, choice fatigue is one reason so many people gravitate toward lifestyle influencers on Instagram...’

Option 3 says that ‘having too many product options can be overwhelming for consumers’. This relates to ‘choice anxiety’ described in the passage.

Only option 4 – that consumers tend to prefer products by start-ups over those by established companies—is not inferred from the passage.

The question asks us to choose the statement that, if true, would add the least depth to the author's prediction about start-ups. That is, we need to choose the option which goes against the author's prediction.

What is the author’s prediction about start-ups offering few product options? He predicts that these start-ups would be forced to offer variety due to the steep growth expectations of investors. That is, profit motive drives the push towards new product options. If start-ups are able to meet the desired profit goals without expanding their product range, then the author's prediction is no longer valid. So, option 1 is a possible answer choice.

Consider option 2. If the government doubles tax for these start-ups, the pressure on them to make a profit increases. This actually supports the author's prediction. So, it is ruled out.

If option 3 is true, that is, if regular customers of these start-ups lose trust in them, sales will decline and hence there would be more pressure on them to expand their range to make profit. This option too supports the author's prediction.

That start-ups with few product options are 'still just working within a consumer market that’s broken in systemic ways' is an argument used by the author to make his point about the narrowness of choice for certain consumer segments. This does not in any way go against the author's prediction about these start-ups being forced to expand their product range.

So, the option that adds least depth—goes against—the author's prediction is option 1.

The author first cites the examples of Casper and Glossier while discussing companies that 'have sprouted up to offer consumers freedom from choice'. That is, they are exceptions to the dominant trend of flooding consumers with choice. However, the author does not leave it at that. He argues that even these start-ups promising simplicity of choice will be pushed toward overwhelming variety due to the steep growth expectations from investors. That is, though they are exceptions now, Casper and Glossier may transform into what they are exceptions to.

Consider what the author says about the consumer market in America: ‘The presence of so much stuff in America might be more valuable if it were more evenly distributed..... As options have expanded for people with disposable income, the opportunity to buy even basic things such as fresh food or quality diapers has contracted for much of America’s lower classes.’

The author is likely to support the introduction of more choice in a price range catering to the lower classes. So, we narrow down the answer options to 1 and 3, which are in the $5 and $10 range. Of these two options, the author is more likely to support the range of 10 products than the range of 25 products, as he argues in the passage that more choice means choice fatigue.

The question asks us to choose the option that would not weaken the author's claims.

Consider option 1. The author claims that 'the presence of so much stuff in America might be more valuable if it were more evenly distributed, but stuff’s creators tend to focus their energy on those who already have plenty'. That is, product choice for higher income groups does not really benefit the poor. But if product options increased market competition, bringing down the prices of commodities, which, in turn, increased purchasing power of the poor, then the author's claim is weakened.

Option 2 relates to sales growth of companies with fewer product options. The author claims that people when presented with a few options make better, easier decisions than when presented with many. So, if the annual sales growth of companies with fewer product options were higher than that of companies which curated their products for target consumers, then the author's claim is actually strengthened.

Consider option 3. The author claims that choice fatigue is the reason why people gravitate toward lifestyle influencers on Instagram. If the annual sale of companies that hired lifestyle influencers on Instagram for marketing their products were 40% less than those that did not, then the author's claim is weakened.

Consider option 4. The author states that 'research has consistently held that people who are presented with a few options make better, easier decisions than those presented with many'. But if the empowerment felt by purchasers in buying a commodity were directly proportional to the number of options they could choose from, it would weaken author's claim.

Diyab's descriptions of grandeur of Versailles match the description of the lavish Middle Eastern palace in Aladdin's story. That is, Galland simply takes up Diyab’s description of a French palace and pins this description on an exotic Middle Eastern palace in the story of Aladdin. That the opulence described is not one witnessed by a French adventurer encountering the exotic Middle East but that of a Middle Eastern observer encountering the wonder of 18^th century France is what 'flips the script' (reverses the situation) according to the passage. If the descriptions did not match, there is no question of the script being flipped. So, option 3, if true, would invalidate the idea that Galland's story reverses the point of view of the narrative.

In the last paragraph, the passage argues that the reason why storytellers are still fascinated by the story of Aladdin is not just because of the story’s narrative drama or the way it reflects the history of the French and the Middle East, but because it is a story about ‘Middle Easterners coming to Paris and that speaks to our world today’. In other words, the tale of Aladdin resonates even today.

In paragraph 3, the passage states that though scholars thought for many years that the story line of Aladdin was inspired by plots of French fairy tales of the time, the evidence suggesting that Diyab based the story on his own life flips the script. This was a story of a young Arab in France, not the other way around.

The passage supports its claim about the authorship of Aladdin citing the narrative sensibility of Diyab's travelogue ('There is little in the writings of Galland that would suggest that he was capable of developing a character like Aladdin with sympathy, but Diyab’s memoir reveals a narrator adept at capturing the distinctive psychology of a young protagonist...'), the depiction of the affluence of Versailles in Diyab's travelogue ('The descriptions he uses were very similar to the descriptions of the lavish palace that ended up in Galland’s version of the Aladdin story') and Galland's acknowledgement of Diyab in his diary (' Galland... wrote in his diary that he first heard the tale from a Syrian storyteller from Aleppo named Hanna Diyab).

The passage clearly states that Diyab himself narrated the story of Aladdin to Galland (who wrote the Arabian Nights) and argues that Diyab might have based it on his own life. So, option 3 is the correct option.

Option 1 suggests that Galland simply derived the story from Diyab's travelogue (as opposed to hearing it from Diyab himself). This is incorrect. The passage argues the story of Aladdin is based on Diyab's own life, so options 2 and 4 are incorrect.

According to the paragraph, the undue obsession with the idea of creativity today is actually getting in the way of real creativity. Option B sums up the paragraph well.

While the paragraph talks about the obsession with the idea of creativity and how that is hampering creativity, Option A talks of the obsession with 'original thought' making it difficult to define the concept. This is incorrect.

Option C blames the industry that has built up researching creativity for the destruction of the creative process. This is too extreme and not what the paragraph says.

Option D says that the proliferation of creativity has stifled the creative process. This is incorrect.

The main idea of the given paragraph is that, while physicists routinely pre-publish research in order to speed up scientific progress and allow access to knowledge, the conservative research community of biologists is less accepting of the idea. Option B sums up the paragraph well.

Option A states the exact opposite of what the paragraph says about biologists.

Option C is incorrect as it says 'almost all peer-reviewed journals' are reluctant to accept pre-prints. The paragraph does not say so.

Like C, D over-generalizes, saying that preprints are not accepted by 'most' scientific communities.

Sentence 3 introduces the main idea of the paragraph; so it is the opening sentence.
32 is a unit: 2 explains the term ‘modern scientific method’ mentioned in 3.
14 is also a unit: sentence 1 talks about a new invention, commercial fusion power and 4 explains how the scientific method is key to this invention.
3214 forms a cogent paragraph.

While all other sentences relate to neuromarketing and how it has been received by marketers, advertisers and scientists, sentence 5 is about an unrelated idea – how marketers and advertisers have started drawing on science/scientific methods in developing tests and theories.

3412 makes a cogent paragraph;

5 is the odd one out.

Sentence 2 states the main idea of the passage and is the best opening sentence. 41 is a unit:

sentence 4 explains how development began half a century ago and how it lost its way.

Sentence 1 explains the view on the vision and practice of development today.

Sentence 3 carries forward the idea in 2 and states what the rethink and reconstitution of development entails.

So, 2413 is the correct order.

Sentence 2 is the best opening sentence, as it explains what the Northwest Passage is (a group of islands acquired by Canada in 1880). Sentence 1 relates to 2, presenting the US position on Canada’s claim of sovereignty over all shipping routes through the Passage.

This leads on to the idea in sentence 4– both countries have not legally settled the question of access through the Passage yet. Sentence 3 concludes the paragraph explaining how the dispute could turn out to be transitory due to the Arctic Ocean turning ice-free in summer. So, 2143 is the correct order.

The main idea of the paragraph is that, in an economic downturn, the capitalist, worried about the cost of competition arising from free markets, finds that he can ally with the distressed unemployed workers and use the cover and the political organization provided by them to capture the political agenda.

Option B sums up the paragraph well.

Option A implies that it is the goal of the unemployed, too, to stifle competition in free markets. This is incorrect. Similarly, C implies the unemployed capture the political agenda along with the capitalist. That is not what the paragraph states. Option D is not in line with the main idea of the paragraph either.

Sentences 2 and 5 form a unit: 5 answers the question posed in 2. In the same way 3 and 4 form a unit. But while these four sentences focus on genetic engineering – the promise it offers on the one hand and the ethical predicament it presents on the other, sentence 1 talks about a slightly different, broader discipline– biotechnology– and a different idea – how the examination of biotechnology by philosophers may help formulate and assess moral arguments.

Sentence 1 is hence the odd one out.

Of the given options, the quote that stresses on the importance of fiction most strongly is option A. Here, the author more or less equates fiction with unity and truth with disunity. Option B is less about overemphasizing the importance of fiction than about disparaging the power of truth. Options C and D are expository and neither of these overemphasises the importance of fiction.

The central idea of the passage is that when it comes to uniting people around a common story, fiction has several advantages over objective truth. The author states that ‘Even if we need to pay some price for deactivating our rational faculties, the advantages of increased social cohesion are often so big that fictional stories routinely triumph over the truth in human history’.

So, option C is the right choice.

Note that the passage is not about the choice between truth and power. The author states truth doesn’t always convey power and talks about the ‘complicated’ relationship between the two.

According to the author, scholars have known for thousands of years that ‘the advantages of increased social cohesion are often so big that fictional stories routinely triumph over the truth in human history’ and that this is ‘why scholars often had to decide whether they served the truth or social harmony’. Here, the author implies that scholars know how to balance truth on the one hand and social unity on the other.

According to the author, ‘An uncompromising adherence to the truth is an admirable spiritual practice, but it is not a winning political strategy’. In other words, leaders retain power by not sticking to the unvarnished truth, but by deviating from it.

According to the author, during the national struggle, nationalists maintained that European power had 'failed to colonize the inner, essential, identity of the East which lay in its distinctive, and superior, spiritual culture'. If, as mentioned in option D, the colonial period saw the hybridisation of Indian culture in all realms-- if there were no home/world dichotomy on which the author bases his argument-- then, that would seriously weaken the author's claims in the passage.

In the last paragraph, the author says that it would be a grave error to think that the ideological framework within which nationalism answered 'the women's question' did not mean a total rejection of the West. This implies the nationalists embraced some aspects of the West and rejected some aspects, selectively. If option A were true and Indian nationalists rejected the cause of English education for women, that would really not weaken the author's claims in any way.

The author argues that colonial modernity, in terms of science, technology, rational forms of economic organization, and modern methods of statecraft 'had given the European countries the strength to subjugate the non-European people'. It was this domination that the colonized people were trying to overcome. So, option B, if true, strengthens the author's claims in the passage.

Just like option B, option C, if true, strengthens the author's claim that in the material realm, the European powers were ahead and this in turn gave them the strength to subjugate non-European people.

In the matching of the home/world dichotomy with gender-based social roles, the liberals are apt to (likely to), according to the author, see a total rejection of the West by Indian nationalists : ‘It would be a grave error to see in this, as liberals are apt to in their despair at the many marks of social conservatism in nationalist practice, a total rejection of the West.’ In other words, in the liberals’ view Indian nationalist discourses reaffirmed traditional gender roles for Indian women.

In the second paragraph, the author talks about the material/spiritual dichotomy and states that it 'was condensed into an analogous, but ideologically far more powerful, dichotomy: that between the outer and the inner'. So, option D is true. The author also states that 'Applying the inner/outer distinction to the matter of concrete day-to-day living separates the social space into ghar and bahir, the home and the world'. So, option B is also true.

In the third paragraph, the author elaborates on how the material/spiritual dichotomy acquired 'a very special significance in the nationalist mind', as the nationalists asserted that the West 'had failed to colonize the inner, essential, identity of the East which lay in its distinctive, and superior, spiritual culture'. In other words, the spiritual/material dichotomy helped in safeguarding the identity of Indian nationalism. So, option A is true.

On the other hand, nowhere in the passage does the author say as mentioned in option C that the spiritual/material dichotomy was a 'continuation of age-old oppositions in Indian culture'.

The author begins the passage by describing the 'contradictory pulls' on Indian nationalist ideology. In science, technology, economic organization and modern methods of statecraft, the West dominated. In fact, to overcome this domination, instead of fighting the colonialists on this front, colonized people 'had to learn those superior techniques of organizing material life and incorporate them within their own cultures'. In other words, despite its fight against colonial domination, Indian nationalism had adopt Western ideas in the material sphere.

In the last two paragraphs, the passage speaks of the problems that arise due to monolingualism and the advantages of multilingualism. According to the passage, ‘Multilingualism can help us live in a more connected and more interdependent world.’. So, the correct choice is option D.

The second paragraph details the reasons for decline of languages: 'through war, famine and natural disasters', and language shift 'for complex political, cultural and economic reasons – sometimes voluntary for economic and educational reasons, although often amplified by state coercion or neglect'. Options B, C and D cover these points.
The passage does not attribute the decline of languages to internet use. So, option A is the correct answer choice.

The passage states that ‘Welsh, long stigmatized and disparaged by the British state, has rebounded with vigor’. Here, the author cites the example of Welsh to show that languages can bounce back after a forced language shift.

In the first paragraph, the passage states that indigenous languages ‘function as vehicles for the transmission of cultural traditions, environmental understandings and knowledge about medicinal plants’, that ‘ speech communities are increasingly involved in projects to protect their languages – in print, on air and online’ and that ‘most of the world's languages are still transmitted orally with no widely established written form’.

So, options B, C and D can be inferred from the passage.

Though the passage states that indigenous languages have ‘unusual words and intriguing grammar’, it does not say that this makes these languages challenging to document. Option A cannot be inferred from the passage.

Option A states that the confidence with which we maintain something to be true is 'usually independent of the source' of the alleged truth. This is the exact opposite of what the passage states in the last few lines: ' And we examine our convictions more or less closely, explain them more or less extensively, and defend them more or less vigorously, usually depending on .... what resources are available for reassuring ourselves or making our beliefs credible to others (look, it's right here on the page; add up the figures yourself; I happen to be a heart specialist).'

Option B states that if we are confident that knowledge is 'widely held', then actions taken on the basis of presumed knowledge become rational and justifiable. This is not what the passage says. The passage states that unless we distinguish knowledge from opinion, wishful thinking or delusion, the actions we take on the basis of presumed knowledge will be irrational and unjustifiable.

Option C sums up the main idea of the second paragraph:'For, the sceptic will note, since reality, under that conception of it, is outside our ken, we have no way to compare our mental representations with things-as-they-are-in-themselves and therefore no way to determine whether they are correct or incorrect.'The author is hence likely to support statement C.

According to the passage, the sceptic questions our ability to know 'reality' defined as things-as-they-are-in-themselves, independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions because 'it floats above the processes of our conceiving it'.

Option D states that the sceptic would advocate knowing reality independently. This is incorrect.

The argument being made here is that if reality is independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions, then it is clearly out of our scope of understanding, as it exists outside our ability to conceive or perceive it. Option B is hence the right choice.

A straightforward question. Note what the passage states: ‘We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on how we acquired them (I saw it with my own eyes; I heard it on Fox News; a guy at the office told me) and how broadly and strenuously they seem to be shared or endorsed by various relevant people: experts and authorities, friends and family members, colleagues and associates.
Note that option B relates to factors based on which we examine or defend our convictions. Option C does not relate to the question.

Note the ‘except’ in the question. The answer option is one that is not an argument made by the author. The author says that the ‘most common’ way of dealing with scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is to ignore it.

Option B states that it is ‘the best way’ . So, option B is not an argument made by the author.
All other options relate to what is discussed in the passage:

Option A- ‘unless we can ground our claims to knowledge as such, which is to say, distinguish it from mere opinion, superstition, fantasy, wishful thinking, ideology, illusion or delusion, then the actions we take on the basis of presumed knowledge – boarding an airplane, swallowing a pill, finding someone guilty of a crime – will be irrational and unjustifiable.’

Option C-’While it is not clear that the scandal matters to anyone but philosophers, philosophers point out that it should matter to everyone, at least given a certain conception of knowledge.’

Option D- ‘Thus the sceptic may repeat (rattling loudly), you cannot be sure you 'know' something or anything at all – at least not, he may add (rattling softly before disappearing), if that is the way you conceive' 'knowledge'’.

The given paragraph calls petitioning an "expeditious" democratic tradition and goes on to explain why: unlike elections which are episodic, petitions can ensure the voices of people are heard and integrated constantly into democratic government. Option A covers all key ideas and is the best of the given summaries.

Option B is incorrect as the paragraph given does not say we should rely more on petitioning than on elections.

Option C is incorrect as the paragraph does not call petitions "an ideal form of a representative democracy".

Option D is easily ruled out as it is not what the paragraph is about.

The passage describes how the stories of the Undead have evolved from ill-defined eerie creatures of Mankind's earliest years to more definite shaped and even supernatural/magical creatures as mankind became more sophisticated.

Options B and C are vague and do not even mention the word 'Undead'. Option D is about only one aspect of the passage.

The given line implies that the Undead were thought to be abnormal and hence accorded attributes which were not normal. Option C is the correct answer.

Option A states the Undead are deified (treated like deities). This is not what the given line says.

The given line does not express the opinion of the Undead. So, option B is incorrect.

Option D is about the "natural attributes" of the Undead, which is not what the given line is about.

Trickily worded question, combining the "if false" condition with "all of the following ...except". As it is easier to evaluate true statements than false, let us re-frame the question as "All the following statements, if true, are not in accordance to the passage except one".

Option A, if true, is not in accordance to the passage: "And as Mankind became more sophisticated, ... Now they began to take on more definite shapes. Some still remained vague and ill-defined but, as Mankind strove to explain the horror which it felt towards them, such creatures emerged more readily into the light."

Option B, if true, is also not in accordance to the passage: 'However, the relationship between the magician and an Undead creature was often a very tenuous and uncertain one."

Option C, if true, is also clearly not what the passage says. The passage says even as Man became sophisticated, he continued to believe in the Undead.

Option D, if true, is in accordance to the passage: "From the Middle Ages and into the Age of Enlightenment, theories of the Undead continued to grow and develop." So, option D is the correct answer.

The given line implies that in Mankind's earliest years, belief in eerie creatures which were neither quite alive nor dead existed. Option B is the correct answer.

The passage does say that technologies, like laws and customs, shape their inhabitants by ‘privileging certain dimensions of their human nature’. But it does not say that technologies do so 'at a high cost to lived nature'. Option A cannot be inferred.

The passage explains that customs such as parental authority represent the 'interest of childhood in safety and growth', and goes on to say that 'this notion of representation does not imply an eternal human nature'. So, option B is implied.

Option C is inferred based on the lines, "A hermeneutics of technology must make explicit the meanings implicit in the devices we use and the rituals they script. Social histories of technologies such as the bicycle, artificial lighting or firearms have made important contributions to this type of analysis. Critical theory of technology attempts to build a methodological approach on the lessons of these histories."

Option D is inferred from the first paragraph, which says that according to the critical theory of technology, "advances in the formal claims of human rights take center stage while in the background centralization of ever more powerful public institutions and private organizations imposes an authoritarian social order".