Back Home
Persistent Timer

Further Applications

Q.No: 1
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

The distinctive feature of psychoanalysis is that

A
it provided the laymen with a scientific basis to the theories of psychology.
B
it blasted the popular theory that the conscious mind could be aptly linked the tip of an iceberg.
C
it provided effective means for the cure of mental disorders.
D
it rendered existing trends in psychology defunct.
Solution:
Psychoanalysis has been referred to a curative system for mental healing.
Q.No: 2
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

The distinction between behaviorism and psychoanalysis that is heightened here is which of the following?

A
Behaviorism is wide in scope; psychoanalysis more restricted.
B
Behaviorism are more tolerant in their outlook; psychoanalysis more dogmatic.
C
Behaviorism traces all action to conditioning by habit; psychoanalysis to the depths of the human mind.
D
Behaviorism are more circumspect and deliberate in their propagation of theory; psychoanalysis jump to conclusion impetuously.
Solution:
Behaviorism bid for approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning while psychoanalysis analysed mental factors.
Q.No: 3
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

The statement which is refuted by the passage is this:

A
The popularity enjoyed by psychoanalysis is partly due to the disenchantment with traditional methods of psychology.
B
Psychoanalysis wooed people dissatisfied with other branches of psychology to swell their ranks.
C
Psychoanalysis were pioneers in the realm of analysis of the subconscious mind.
D
Psychoanalysis alienated allied branches of psychology.
Solution:
The passage states that psychoanalysis created for itself a considerable following among those content with traditional methods and attitudes.
Q.No: 4
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

Create a belief in theory and

A
belief will be created itself.
B
theory will be created itself.
C
facts will be created themselves .
D
All of the above.
Solution:
Create a belief in the theory and the facts will create themselves.
Q.No: 5
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

Psychoanalysis are of the opinion that

A
methods of psychoanalysis must be in keeping with individual needs.
B
inferences can be drawn empirically from repeated experiments with any given theory.
C
theory leads to practice.
D
practice culminates into theory.
Solution:
Psychoanalysts believe that practice is entirely a derivative of theory.
Q.No: 6
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

Freudian psychoanalysis was ignored by academic psychology because of which of the following?

A
Its theories were not substantiated by practical evidence.
B
It probed too deep into the human mind thereby divesting it of its legitimate privacy.
C
It did not have a large following.
D
It was pre-occupied with unfamiliar concepts such as dreams and the subconscious mind.
Solution:
Freudian psychoanalysis was neglected by academic psychology because orthodox psychology largely ignored dreams, lapses and neuroses.
Q.No: 7
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

The only statement to receive support from the passage is which of the following?

A
Psychoanalysis concentrated more on the theoretical remedies than their practical implementation.
B
Psychoanalysis broke the shackles of convention in its involvement with humanistic issues.
C
The attitude of psychoanalysis towards allied branches of psychology could at best be described as indifferent.
D
Psychoanalysis dispelled the prevalent notion that dreams were repressed desires.
Solution:
The mission of psychoanalysis has been described as humanistic and one that was the most novel and releasing of the curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.
Q.No: 8
Test Name : CAT Paper 1990
Passage I


The motive force that has carried the psychoanalytic movement to a voluminous wave of popular attention and created for it considerable following among those discontent with traditional methods and attitudes, is the frank direction of the psychological instruments of exploration to the insistent and intimate problems of human relations. However false or however true its conclusions, however weak or strong its arguments, however effective or defective or even pernicious its practice, its mission is broadly humanistic. Psychological enlightenment is presented as a program of salvation. By no other appeal could the service of psychology have become so glorified. The therapeutic promise of psychoanalysis came as the most novel, most ambitious, most releasing of the long procession of curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.

To the contemporary trends in psychology, psychoanalysis actually offered a rebuke, a challenge, a supplement, though it appeared to ignore them. With the practical purpose of applied psychology directed to human efficiency it had no direct relation and thus no quarrel. The solution of behaviorism, likewise bidding for popular approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning, it inevitably found alien and irrelevant, as the behaviorist in reciprocity found psychoanalytic doctrine mystical, fantastic, assumptive, remote. Even to the cognate formulations of mental hygiene, as likewise in its contacts with related fields of psychology, psychoanalysis made no conciliatory advances. Towards psychiatry, its nearest of kin, it took an unfriendly position, quite too plainly implying a disdain for an unprogressive relative. These estrangements affected its relations throughout the domain of mind and its ills; but they came to head in the practice.

From the outset in the days of struggle, when it had but a sparse and scattered discipleship, to the present position of prominence, Freudianism went its own way, for the most part neglected by academic psychology. Of dreams, lapses and neuroses, orthodox psychology had little say. The second reason for the impression made by psychoanalysis when once launched against the tide of academic resistance was its recognition of depth psychology, so much closer to human motivation, so much more intimate and direct than the analysis of mental factors.

Most persons in trouble would be grateful for relief without critical examination of the theory behind the practice that helped them. Anyone at all acquainted with the ebb and flow of cures – cures that cure cures that fail – need not be told that the scientific basis of the system is often the least important factor. Many of these systems arise empirically within a practice, which by trial, seems to give results. This is not the case in psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis belongs to the typical groups of therapies in which practice is entirely a derivative of theory. Here the pertinent psychological principle reads: “Create a belief in the theory, and the fact will create themselves”.

The popularity enjoyed by the psychoanalytical movement may be directly attributed to

A
dissatisfaction with existing methods of psychology.
B
its logical, coherent process of ratiocination.
C
its novel unconventionality in both postulate and practice.
D
its concentration upon the humanistic aspect of psychological analysis.
Solution:
The psychoanalytical movement became popular due to its exploration of intimate problems of human relations.
Q.No: 9
Test Name : CAT 2017 Actual Paper Slot 1
Question Numbers : (1 to 6) The passage below is accompanied by a set of six questions. Choose the best answer to each question.

Understanding where you are in the world is a basic survival skill, which is why we, like most species come hard-wired with specialised brain areas to create cognitive maps of our surroundings. Where humans are unique, though, with the possible exception of honeybees, is that we try to communicate this understanding of the world with others. We have a long history of doing this by drawing maps - the earliest versions yet discovered were scrawled on cave walls 14,000 years ago. Human cultures have been drawing them on stone tablets, papyrus, paper and now computer screens ever since.

Given such a long history of human map-making, it is perhaps surprising that it is only within the last few hundred years that north has been consistently considered to be at the top. In fact, for much of human history, north almost never appeared at the top, according to Jerry Brotton, a map historian... "North was rarely put at the top for the simple fact that north is where darkness comes from," he says. "West is also very unlikely to be put at the top because west is where the sun disappears."

Confusingly, early Chinese maps seem to buck this trend. But, Brotton, says, even though they did have compasses at the time, that isn't the reason that they placed north at the top. Early Chinese compasses were actually oriented to point south, which was considered to be more desirable than deepest darkest north. But in Chinese maps, the Emperor, who lived in the north of the country was always put at the top of the map, with everyone else, his loyal subjects, looking up towards him. "In Chinese culture the Emperor looks south because it's where the winds come from, it's a good direction. North is not very good but you are in a position of subjection to the emperor, so you look up to him," says Brotton.

Given that each culture has a very different idea of who, or what, they should look up to it's perhaps not surprising that there is very little consistency in which way early maps pointed. In ancient Egyptian times the top of the world was east, the position of sunrise. Early Islamic maps favoured south at the top because most of the early Muslim cultures were north of Mecca, so they imagined looking up (south) towards it. Christian maps from the same era (called Mappa Mundi) put east at the top, towards the Garden of Eden and with Jerusalem in the centre.

So when did everyone get together and decide that north was the top? It's tempting to put it down to European explorers like Christopher Columbus and Ferdinand Megellan, who were navigating by the North Star. But Brotton argues that these early explorers didn't think of the world like that at all. "When Columbus describes the world it is in accordance with east being at the top," he says. "Columbus says he is going towards paradise, so his mentality is from a medieval mappa mundi." We've got to remember, adds Brotton, that at the time, "no one knows what they are doing and where they are going."

The role of natural phenomena in influencing map-making conventions is seen most clearly in

A
early Egyptian maps
B
early Islamic maps
C
early Chinese maps
D
early Christian maps
Solution:
Early Egyptian maps kept East at the top because that was the position of sunrise. Hence, natural phenomenon played a key-role in the construction of maps.
Q.No: 10
Test Name : CAT 2018 Actual Paper Slot 1
Directions for questions 1 to 5:

Economists have spent most of the 20th century ignoring psychology, positive or otherwise. But today there is a great deal of emphasis on how happiness can shape global economies, or — on a smaller scale — successful business practice. This is driven, in part, by a trend in "measuring" positive emotions, mostly so they can be optimized. Neuroscientists, for example, claim to be able to locate specific emotions, such as happiness or disappointment, in particular areas of the brain. Wearable technologies, such as Spire, offer data-driven advice on how to reduce stress.

We are no longer just dealing with "happiness" in a philosophical or romantic sense — it has become something that can be monitored and measured, including by our behavior, use of social media and bodily indicators such as pulse rate and facial expressions.

There is nothing automatically sinister about this trend. But it is disquieting that the businesses and experts driving the quantification of happiness claim to have our best interests at heart, often concealing their own agendas in the process. In the workplace, happy workers are viewed as a "win-win." Work becomes more pleasant, and employees, more productive. But this is now being pursued through the use of performance-evaluating wearable technology, such as Humanyze or Virgin Pulse, both of which monitor physical signs of stress and activity toward the goal of increasing productivity.

Cities such as Dubai, which has pledged to become the "happiest city in the world," dream up ever-more elaborate and intrusive ways of collecting data on well-being — to the point where there is now talk of using CCTV cameras to monitor facial expressions in public spaces. New ways of detecting emotions are hitting the market all the time: One company, Beyond Verbal, aims to calculate moods conveyed in a phone conversation, potentially without the knowledge of at least one of the participants. And Facebook [has] demonstrated . . . that it could influence our emotions through tweaking our news feeds — opening the door to ever-more targeted manipulation in advertising and influence.

As the science grows more sophisticated and technologies become more intimate with our thoughts and bodies, a clear trend is emerging. Where happiness indicators were once used as a basis to reform society, challenging the obsession with money that G.D.P. measurement entrenches, they are increasingly used as a basis to transform or discipline individuals.

Happiness becomes a personal project, that each of us must now work on, like going to the gym. Since the 1970s, depression has come to be viewed as a cognitive or neurological defect in the individual, and never a consequence of circumstances. All of this simply escalates the sense of responsibility each of us feels for our own feelings, and with it, the sense of failure when things go badly. A society that deliberately removed certain sources of misery, such as precarious and exploitative employment, may well be a happier one. But we won't get there by making this single, often fleeting emotion, the over-arching goal.

The author’s view would be undermined by which of the following research findings?

A
A proliferation of gyms that are collecting data on customer well-being.
B
There is a definitive move towards the adoption of wearable technology that taps into emotions.
C
Stakeholders globally are moving away from collecting data on the well-being of individuals.
D
Individuals worldwide are utilising technologies to monitor and increase their well-being.
Solution:
This requires us to use the fundamentals of critical reasoning. The author warns us against the use of technology to bully or manipulate individuals to become obsessed with ‘becoming happy’. This ‘happiness’ is not actually happiness. The author clearly blames the many companies that analyse and monitor consumer behaviour. So, option 3, if true, will weaken the author’s argument. If these companies are not using such data, then the author’s warning is misplaced. So, option 3 is the correct answer.
Q.No: 11
Test Name : CAT 2018 Actual Paper Slot 2
Directions for questions 20 to 24: . . . The complexity of modern problems often precludes any one person from fully understanding them. Factors contributing to rising obesity levels, for example, include transportation systems and infrastructure, media, convenience foods, changing social norms, human biology and psychological factors. . . . The multidimensional or layered character of complex problems also undermines the principle of meritocracy: the idea that the ‘best person’ should be hired. There is no best person. When putting together an oncological research team, a biotech company such as Gilead or Genentech would not construct a multiple-choice test and hire the top scorers, or hire people whose resumes score highest according to some performance criteria. Instead, they would seek diversity. They would build a team of people who bring diverse knowledge bases, tools and analytic skills. . . .

Believers in a meritocracy might grant that teams ought to be diverse but then argue that meritocratic principles should apply within each category. Thus the team should consist of the ‘best’ mathematicians, the ‘best’ oncologists, and the ‘best’ biostatisticians from within the pool. That position suffers from a similar flaw. Even with a knowledge domain, no test or criteria applied to individuals will produce the best team. Each of these domains possesses such depth and breadth, that no test can exist. Consider the field of neuroscience. Upwards of 50,000 papers were published last year covering various techniques, domains of enquiry and levels of analysis, ranging from molecules and synapses up through networks of neurons. Given that complexity, any attempt to rank a collection of neuroscientists from best to worst, as if they were competitors in the 50-metre butterfly, must fail. What could be true is that given a specific task and the composition of a particular team, one scientist would be more likely to contribute than another. Optimal hiring depends on context. Optimal teams will be diverse.

Evidence for this claim can be seen in the way that papers and patents that combine diverse ideas tend to rank as high-impact. It can also be found in the structure of the so-called random decision forest, a state-of-the-art machine-learning algorithm. Random forests consist of ensembles of decision trees. If classifying pictures, each tree makes a vote: is that a picture of a fox or a dog? A weighted majority rules. Random forests can serve many ends. They can identify bank fraud and diseases, recommend ceiling fans and predict online dating behaviour. When building a forest, you do not select the best trees as they tend to make similar classifications. You want diversity. Programmers achieve that diversity by training each tree on different data, a technique known as bagging. They also boost the forest ‘cognitively’ by training trees on the hardest cases – those that the current forest gets wrong. This ensures even more diversity and accurate forests.

Yet the fallacy of meritocracy persists. Corporations, non-profits, governments, universities and even preschools test, score and hire the ‘best’. This all but guarantees not creating the best team. Ranking people by common criteria produces homogeneity. . . . That’s not likely to lead to breakthroughs.

Which of the following conditions would weaken the efficacy of a random decision forest?

A
If a large number of decision trees in the ensemble were trained on data derived from easy cases.
B
If a large number of decision trees in the ensemble were trained on data derived from easy and hard cases.
C
If the types of ensembles of decision trees in the forest were doubled.
D
If the types of decision trees in each ensemble of the forest were doubled.
Solution:
2nd last paragraph, last 4-5 lines, it can be inferred from the lines that the right answer is option (1).
Solution:
Psychoanalysis has been referred to a curative system for mental healing.


Solution:
Behaviorism bid for approval by reducing adjustment to a program of conditioning while psychoanalysis analysed mental factors.


Solution:
The passage states that psychoanalysis created for itself a considerable following among those content with traditional methods and attitudes.


Solution:
Create a belief in the theory and the facts will create themselves.


Solution:
Psychoanalysts believe that practice is entirely a derivative of theory.


Solution:
Freudian psychoanalysis was neglected by academic psychology because orthodox psychology largely ignored dreams, lapses and neuroses.


Solution:
The mission of psychoanalysis has been described as humanistic and one that was the most novel and releasing of the curative systems that mark the history of mental healing.


Solution:
The psychoanalytical movement became popular due to its exploration of intimate problems of human relations.


Solution:
Early Egyptian maps kept East at the top because that was the position of sunrise. Hence, natural phenomenon played a key-role in the construction of maps.


Solution:
This requires us to use the fundamentals of critical reasoning. The author warns us against the use of technology to bully or manipulate individuals to become obsessed with ‘becoming happy’. This ‘happiness’ is not actually happiness. The author clearly blames the many companies that analyse and monitor consumer behaviour. So, option 3, if true, will weaken the author’s argument. If these companies are not using such data, then the author’s warning is misplaced. So, option 3 is the correct answer.


Solution:
2nd last paragraph, last 4-5 lines, it can be inferred from the lines that the right answer is option (1).


© 2025 CL Educate Ltd. All rights reserved.