Elitmus Reading Comprehension Question Paper

Elitmus Reading Comprehension Question PaperElitmus Reading Comprehension Question Paper.

In elitmus test you will be getting 3 reading comprehension and 5 question based on each of them.you have to choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

Elitmus sample reading comprehension 1 :

Our propensity to look out for regularities, and to impose laws upon nature, leads to the psychological phenomenon of dogmatic thinking or, more generally, dogmatic behaviour: we expect regularities everywhere and attempt to find them even where there are none; events which do not yield to these attempts we are inclined to treat as a kind of ‘background noise‘; and we stick to our expectations even when they are inadequate and we ought to accept defeat. This dogmatism is to some extent necessary. It is demanded by a situation which can only be dealt with by forcing our conjectures upon the world. Moreover, this dogmatism allows us to approach a good theory in stages, by way of approximations: if we accept defeat too easily, we may prevent ourselves from finding that we were very nearly right. It is clear that this dogmatic attitude, which makes us stick to our first impressions, is indicative of a strong belief; while a critical attitude, which is ready to modify its tenets, which admits doubt and demands tests, is indicative of a weaker belief. Now according to Hume‘s theory, and to the popular theory, the strength of a belief should be a product of repetition; thus it should always grow with experience, and always be greater in less primitive persons. But dogmatic thinking, an uncontrolled wish to impose regularities, a manifest pleasure in rites and in repetition as such, is characteristic of primitives and children; and increasing experience and maturity sometimes create an attitude of caution and criticism rather than of dogmatism.

My logical criticism of Hume‘s psychological theory, and the considerations connected with it, may seem a little removed from the field of the philosophy of science. But the distinction between dogmatic and critical thinking, or the dogmatic and the critical attitude, brings us right back to our central problem. For the dogmatic attitude is clearly related to the tendency to verify our laws and schemata by seeking to apply them and to confirm them, even to the point of neglecting refutations, whereas the critical attitude is one of readiness to change them – to test them; to refute them; to falsify them, if possible. This suggests that we may identify the critical attitude with the scientific attitude, and the dogmatic attitude with the one which we have described as pseudo-scientific. It further suggests that genetically speaking the pseudo-scientific attitude is more primitive than, and prior to, the scientific attitude: that it is a pre-scientific attitude. And this primitivity or priority also has its logical aspect. For the critical attitude is not so much opposed to the dogmatic attitude as super-imposed upon it: criticism must be directed against existing and influential beliefs in need of critical revision oe in other words, dogmatic beliefs. A critical attitude needs for its raw material, as it were, theories or beliefs which are held more or less dogmatically. Thus, science must begin with myths, and with the criticism of myths; neither with the collection of observations, nor with the invention of experiments, but with the critical discussion of myths, and of magical techniques and practices. The scientific tradition is distinguished from the pre-scientific tradition in having two layers. Like the latter, it passes on its theories; but it also passes on a critical attitude towards them. The theories are passed on, not as dogmas, but rather with the challenge to discuss them and improve upon them. The critical attitude, the tradition of free discussion of theories with the aim of discovering their weak spots so that they may be improved upon, is the attitude of reasonableness, of rationality. From the point of view here developed, all laws, all theories, remain essentially tentative, or conjectural, or hypothetical, even when we feel unable to doubt them any longer. Before a theory has been refuted we can never know in what way it may have to be modified.

Q1. In the context of science, according to the passage, the interaction of dogmatic beliefs and critical attitude can be best described as:
(1) A duel between two warriors in which one has to die.
(2) The effect of a chisel on a marble stone while making a sculpture.
(3) The feedstock (natural gas) in fertilizer industry being transformed into fertilizers.
(4) A predator killing its prey.
(5) The effect of fertilizers on a sapling.

Q2. According to the passage, the role of a dogmatic attitude or dogmatic behaviour in he development of science is
(1) critical and important, as, without it, initial hypotheses or conjectures can never be made.
(2) positive, as conjectures arising out of our dogmatic attitude become science.
(3) negative, as it leads to pseudo-science.
(4) neutral, as the development of science is essentially because of our critical attitude.
(5) inferior to critical attitude, as a critical attitude leads to the attitude of reasonableness and rationality.

Q3. Dogmatic behaviour, in this passage, has been associated with primitives and children. Which of the following best describes the reason why the author compares primitives with children?
(1) Primitives are people who are not educated, and hence can be compared with children, who have not yet been through school.
(2) Primitives are people who, though not modern, are as innocent as children.
(3) Primitives are people without a critical attitude, just as children are.
(4) Primitives are people in the early stages of human evolution; similarly, children are in the early stages of their lives.
(5) Primitives are people who are not civilized enough, just as children are not.

Q4. Which of the following statements best supports the argument in the passage that a critical attitude leads to a weaker belief than a dogmatic attitude does?
(1) A critical attitude implies endless questioning, and, therefore, it cannot lead to strong beliefs.
(2) A critical attitude, by definition, is centred on an analysis of anomalies and “noise”.
(3) A critical attitude leads to questioning everything, and in the process generates “noise” without any conviction.
(4) A critical attitude is antithetical to conviction, which is required for strong beliefs.
(5) A critical attitude leads to questioning and to tentative hypotheses.

Q5. According to the passage, which of the following statements best describes the difference between science and pseudo-science?
(1) Scientific theories or hypothesis are tentatively true whereas pseudo-sciences are always true.
(2) Scientific laws and theories are permanent and immutable whereas pseudo-sciences are contingent on the prevalent mode of thinking in a society.
(3) Science always allows the possibility of rejecting a theory or hypothesis, whereas pseudo-sciences seek to validate their ideas or theories.
(4) Science focuses on anomalies and exceptions so that fundamental truths can be uncovered, whereas pseudo-sciences focus mainly on general truths.
(5) Science progresses by collection of observations or by experimentation, whereas pseudo-sciences do not worry about observations and experiments.

Elitmus sample reading comprehension 2 :

  • Fifteen years after communism was officially pronounced dead, its spectre seems once again to be haunting Europe. Last month, the Council of Europe‘s parliamentary assembly voted to condemn the crimes of totalitarian communist regimes,“ linking them with Nazism and complaining that communist parties are still legal and active in some countries.“Now Goran Lindblad, the conservative Swedish MP behind the resolution, wants to go further. Demands that European Ministers launch a continent-wide anti-communist campaign – including school textbook revisions, official memorial days, and museums – only narrowly missed the necessary two-thirds majority. Mr. Lindblad pledged to bring the wider plans back to the Council of Europe in the coming months. He has chosen a good year for his ideological offensive: this is the 50th anniversary of Nikita Khrushchev‘s denunciation of Josef Stalin and the subsequent Hungarian uprising, which will doubtless be the cue for further excoriation of the communist record. Paradoxically, given that there is no communist government left in Europe outside Moldova, the attacks have if anything, become more extreme as time has gone on. A clue as to why that might be can be found in the rambling report by Mr. Lindblad that led to the Council of Europe declaration. Blaming class struggle and public ownership, he explained different elements of communist ideology such as equality or social justice still seduce many “and a sort of nostalgia for communism is still alive.“ Perhaps the real problem for Mr. Lindblad and his right-wing allies in Eastern Europe is that communism is not dead enough – and they will only be content when they have driven a stake through its heart.

The fashionable attempt to equate communism and Nazism is in reality a moral and historical nonsense. Despite the cruelties of the Stalin terror, there was no Soviet Treblinka or Sorbibor, no extermination camps built to murder millions. Nor did the Soviet Union launch the most devastating war in history at a cost of more than 50 million lives oe in fact it played the decisive role in the defeat of the German war machine. Mr. Lindblad and the Council of Europe adopt as fact the wildest estimates of those killed by communist regimes (mostly in famines) from the fiercely contested Black Book of Communism, which also underplays the number of deaths attributable to Hitler. But, in any case, none of this explains why anyone might be nostalgic in former communist states, now enjoying the delights of capitalist restoration. The dominant account gives no sense of how communist regimes renewed themselves after 1956 or why Western leaders feared they might overtake the capitalist world well into the 1960s. For all its brutalities and failures,communism in the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialization, mass education, job security, and huge advances in social and gender equality. Its existence helped to drive up welfare standards in the West, and provided a powerful counterweight to Western global domination. It would be easier to take the Council of Europe‘s condemnation of communist state crimes seriously if it had also seen fit to denounce the far bloodier record of European colonialism oe which only finally came to an end in the 1970s. This was a system of racist despotism, which dominated the globe in Stalin‘s time. And while there is precious little connection between the ideas of fascism and communism, there is an intimate link between colonialism and Nazism. The terms lebensraum and konzentrationslager were both first used by the German colonial regime in south-west Africa (now Namibia), which committed genocide against the Herero and Nama peoples and bequeathed its ideas and personnel directly to the Nazi party. Around 10 million Congolesedied as a result of Belgian forced labour and mass murder in the early twentieth century; tens of millions perished in avoidable or enforced famines in British-ruled India; up to a million Algerians died in their war for independence, while controversy now rages in France about a new law requiring teacher to put a positive spin on colonial history. Comparable atrocities were carried out by all European colonialists, but not a word of condemnation from the Council of Europe. Presumably, European lives count for more No major twentieth century political tradition is without blood on its hands, but battles over history are more about the future than the past. Part of the current enthusiasm in official Western circles for dancing on the grave of communism is no doubt about relations with today‘s Russia and China. But it also reflects a determination to prove there is no alternative to the new global capitalist order – and that any attempt to find one is bound to lead to suffering. With the new imperialism now being resisted in the Muslim world and Latin America, growing international demands for social justice and ever greater doubts about whether the environmental crisis can be solved within the existing economic system, the pressure for alternatives will increase.

Q1. Among all the apprehensions that Mr. Goran Lindblad expresses against communism, which one gets admitted, although indirectly, by the author?
(1) There is nostalgia for communist ideology even if communism has been abandoned by most European nations.
(2) Notions of social justice inherent in communist ideology appeal to critics of existing systems.
(3) Communist regimes were totalitarian and marked by brutalities and large scale violence.
(4) The existing economic order is wrongly viewed as imperialistic by proponents of communism.
(5) Communist ideology is faulted because communist regimes resulted in economic failures.

Q2. What, according to the author, is the real reason for a renewed attack against communism?
(1) Disguising the unintended consequences of the current economic order such as social injustice and environmental crisis.
(2) Idealising the existing ideology of global capitalism.
(3) Making communism a generic representative of all historical atrocities, especially those perpetrated by the European imperialists.
(4) Communism still survives, in bits and pieces, in the minds and hearts of people.
(5) Renewal of some communist regimes has led to the apprehension that communist nations might overtake the capitalists.

Q3. The author cites examples of atrocities perpetrated by European colonial regimes in order to
(1) compare the atrocities committed by colonial regimes with those of communist regimes.
(2) prove that the atrocities committed by colonial regimes were more than those of communist regimes.
(3) prove that, ideologically, communism was much better than colonialism and Nazism.
(4) neutralise the arguments of Mr.Lindblad and to point out that the atrocities committed by colonial regimes were more than those of communist regimes.
(5) neutralise the arguments of Mr. Lindblad and to argue that one needs to go beyond and look at the motives of these regimes.

Q4. Why, according to the author, is Nazism closer to colonialism than it is to communism?
(1) Both colonialism and Nazism were examples of tyranny of one race over another.
(2) The genocides committed by the colonial and the Nazi regimes were of similar magnitude.
(3) Several ideas of the Nazi regime were directly imported from colonial regimes.
(4) Both colonialism and Nazism are based on the principles of imperialism.
(5) While communism was never limited to Europe, both the Nazis and the colonialists originated in Europe.

Q5. Which of the following cannot be inferred as a compelling reason for the silence of the Council of Europe on colonial atrocities?
(1) The Council of Europe being dominated by erstwhile colonialists.
(2) Generating support for condemning communist ideology.
(3) Unwillingness to antagonize allies by raking up an embarrassing past.
(4) Greater value seemingly placed on European lives.
(5) Portraying both communism and Nazism as ideologies to be condemned.

See Also……