Insta–DART (Daily Aptitude and Reasoning Test) 2020 - 21
Quiz-summary
0 of 5 questions completed
Questions:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Information
Considering the alarming importance of CSAT in UPSC CSE Prelims exam and with enormous requests we received recently, InsightsIAS has started Daily CSAT Test to ensure students practice CSAT Questions on a daily basis. Regular Practice would help one overcome the fear of CSAT too.
We are naming this initiative as Insta– DART – Daily Aptitude and Reasoning Test. We hope you will be able to use DART to hit bull’s eye in CSAT paper and comfortably score 100+ even in the most difficult question paper that UPSC can give you in CSP-2021. Your peace of mind after every step of this exam is very important for us.
Looking forward to your enthusiastic participation (both in sending us questions and solving them on daily basis on this portal).
Wish you all the best ! 🙂
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading...
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to finish following quiz, to start this quiz:
Results
0 of 5 questions answered correctly
Your time:
Time has elapsed
You have reached 0 of 0 points, (0)
Categories
- Not categorized 0%
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Answered
- Review
-
Question 1 of 5
1. Question
It is unwise to continue the career training and employment programs administered in most prisons today. These programs do not achieve what they are meant to achieve because most ex-prisoners choose not to pursue the occupations they followed during the time they spent in prison.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the above argument?
Correct
Answer : a
Option (a): weakens the argument by showing that even if ex-prisoners do not pursue the occupation for which they have prepared whilst in prison, the skills they have learn during training in prison may nevertheless be of use in whatever occupation they take up.
Option (b): provides an objection to scrapping career training programmes in prison. But this 1s not the same as weakening the argument, because it has no impact on the claim that it is unwise to continue such programmes since they do not achieve their aims.
Option (c): mentions an advantage of prison career training programmes, thereby to some extent weakening the claim that it is unwise to continue them. But this does not weaken the argument as much as (a), which shows that the claim upon which the conclusion of the argument is based, that the programmes do not achieve their aim (which we can assume is to provide skill which will be useful in future employment) – is not true.
Option (d): does not weaken the argument, because it simply emphasises that training programmes have the goal which the argument claims they do not achieve. (d) tells us nothing about whether they achieve that goal, hence has no impact on the conclusion that these programmes should be scrapped.
Incorrect
Answer : a
Option (a): weakens the argument by showing that even if ex-prisoners do not pursue the occupation for which they have prepared whilst in prison, the skills they have learn during training in prison may nevertheless be of use in whatever occupation they take up.
Option (b): provides an objection to scrapping career training programmes in prison. But this 1s not the same as weakening the argument, because it has no impact on the claim that it is unwise to continue such programmes since they do not achieve their aims.
Option (c): mentions an advantage of prison career training programmes, thereby to some extent weakening the claim that it is unwise to continue them. But this does not weaken the argument as much as (a), which shows that the claim upon which the conclusion of the argument is based, that the programmes do not achieve their aim (which we can assume is to provide skill which will be useful in future employment) – is not true.
Option (d): does not weaken the argument, because it simply emphasises that training programmes have the goal which the argument claims they do not achieve. (d) tells us nothing about whether they achieve that goal, hence has no impact on the conclusion that these programmes should be scrapped.
-
Question 2 of 5
2. Question
Certain physiological changes accompany the psychological stress of telling a lie. Reliable lie detection is possible, because, with the appropriate instruments, we can measure the physiological symptoms of lying.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the above argument?
Correct
Answer : d
Option (b): suggests that for some people who are lying, lie detectors will indicate symptoms of only moderate stress. But this does not weaken
Option (c): does not weaken the argument, because it does not suggest that it is impossible to find and train the personnel who can use lie detection instruments effectively.
Incorrect
Answer : d
Option (b): suggests that for some people who are lying, lie detectors will indicate symptoms of only moderate stress. But this does not weaken
Option (c): does not weaken the argument, because it does not suggest that it is impossible to find and train the personnel who can use lie detection instruments effectively.
-
Question 3 of 5
3. Question
It is unrealistic to expect flu vaccines to given total protection against the flu virus. Every winter 12000 people in the UK die as a result of catching flu. The elderly and those with lung conditions are given priority for flu vaccinations because they are the people most at risk. Flu vaccines protect against the flu strains judged by the WHO (World Health Organization) to be those most likely to be in circulation the following winter. This prediction is often made a full year before the vaccine is used. If a new strain of flu appear, or if the current one changes a little, people will not be protected by the vaccine.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?
Correct
Answer : C
The conclusion of the argument is that it is unreaslistic to expect flu vaccines to given total protection against the virus. The reasons given for this are that the prediction as to which flu strains will be circulating is made a long time before the vaccine is used, and that if a new strain of flu appears the vaccine will not be protective against it.
Option (c): strengthens the argument by providing another reason why total protection cannot be guaranteed, since if the vaccine works less well in those people who are most at risk, it can be expected that some people will not be protected by the vaccinations.
Option (a): is irrelevant to the argument, became the conclusion refers specifically to protection against the flu virus, and there is no information in the passage as to connections between the flu Virus and colds.
Option (b): suggest that it may be wise to vaccinate children against flu, in order to reduce the spread of the virus, but is not relevant to the claim that we can not expect total protection from vaccinations.
Option (d): does not strengthen the argument because it given a reason for accepting that the flu vaccination is extremely effective, and givens no reason as to why it is unrealistic to expect it to be effective in all cases.
Incorrect
Answer : C
The conclusion of the argument is that it is unreaslistic to expect flu vaccines to given total protection against the virus. The reasons given for this are that the prediction as to which flu strains will be circulating is made a long time before the vaccine is used, and that if a new strain of flu appears the vaccine will not be protective against it.
Option (c): strengthens the argument by providing another reason why total protection cannot be guaranteed, since if the vaccine works less well in those people who are most at risk, it can be expected that some people will not be protected by the vaccinations.
Option (a): is irrelevant to the argument, became the conclusion refers specifically to protection against the flu virus, and there is no information in the passage as to connections between the flu Virus and colds.
Option (b): suggest that it may be wise to vaccinate children against flu, in order to reduce the spread of the virus, but is not relevant to the claim that we can not expect total protection from vaccinations.
Option (d): does not strengthen the argument because it given a reason for accepting that the flu vaccination is extremely effective, and givens no reason as to why it is unrealistic to expect it to be effective in all cases.
-
Question 4 of 5
4. Question
The recent experiment on the M42 motor way to provide an extra lane for drivers at peak times by allowing them to use the hard shoulder has been judged a success. It is right, therefore, to extent the scheme to other motor ways, since it will solve the problem of congestion on motor ways relatively easily and cheaply. It is thus preferable to other possible measures, such as building new motorways or adding an extra lane to existing motorways.
Which of the following, if true, most weakness the above argument?
Correct
Answer : d
The argument concludes that allowing drivers to use the hard shoulder on motorways at peak times is preferable to other possible measures, on the grounds that it solves the problem of congestion motorways relatively easily and cheaply, as evidenced by the success of a recent trial of the scheme. However, if (d) is true, then the increase of traffic may mean that the scheme does not solve the problem of congestion on motorways, despite the fact that the trial run was successful, and this may mean that other schemes would provide more effective solutions.
Option (a): is irrelevant to the claim that using hard shoulders would solve the problem of congestion. It simply suggest that it is possible to have motorways without hard shoulders, but has no implications as to how this would affect traffic flow
Option (b): does not weaken the argument, since although it suggests that many people are not discouraged from using motorways by the availability of public transport, it gives no definite information as to future increases in the volume of motorway traffic
Option (c): gives a reason for thinking that the measures that the argument rejects could be difficult to implement, hence it does not weaken the argument.
Incorrect
Answer : d
The argument concludes that allowing drivers to use the hard shoulder on motorways at peak times is preferable to other possible measures, on the grounds that it solves the problem of congestion motorways relatively easily and cheaply, as evidenced by the success of a recent trial of the scheme. However, if (d) is true, then the increase of traffic may mean that the scheme does not solve the problem of congestion on motorways, despite the fact that the trial run was successful, and this may mean that other schemes would provide more effective solutions.
Option (a): is irrelevant to the claim that using hard shoulders would solve the problem of congestion. It simply suggest that it is possible to have motorways without hard shoulders, but has no implications as to how this would affect traffic flow
Option (b): does not weaken the argument, since although it suggests that many people are not discouraged from using motorways by the availability of public transport, it gives no definite information as to future increases in the volume of motorway traffic
Option (c): gives a reason for thinking that the measures that the argument rejects could be difficult to implement, hence it does not weaken the argument.
-
Question 5 of 5
5. Question
It is becoming fashionable to use ‘carbon offsetting in order to salve your conscience about
the pollution to which you contribute when taking an airline flight. Companies have been set up that enable you to buy offsets that, for example, help build bio-gas digesters in India, install
to hydroelectric power in Bulgaria or distribute energy-efficient light bulbs in Jamaica. There are two reasons why we should disapprove of this practice. First, the availability of the scheme makes people think there is nothing wrong with supporting the carbon polluting aviation industry. If people want to contribute to such schemes, they could do so without taking a flight. Second, the companies that offer carbon offsetting are not sufficiently regulated for customers to know whether the money paid over relay does go to the energy saving scheme, or even whether the scheme really will save energy and there by reduce carbon emissions.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?
Correct
Answer : d
The argument given two reasons for disapproving of carbon offsetting; first, that the availability of the scheme makes people think there is nothing Wrong with flying, and second that customers cannot know that their financial contribution does reduce carbon emissions.
Option (d): strengthens the case against carbon offsetting by showing that in some cases any reduction in carbon emissions would have happened anyway, thus cannot be claimed to compensate for the carbon emissions caused by someone taking a flight.
Option (a): gives a reason for thinking that thee business of carbon offsetting may eventually be better regulated, and thus that some of the objections in the argument may eventually not apply. Hence it does not strengthen the argument.
Option (b): does not strengthen the argument, since it suggests that the carbon emissions
produced by aircraft may be less problematic than the argument assumes.
Option (c): neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. It suggests that it is worth-while to make financial contributions to energy saving schemes, but has no implications for the question as to whether this should be done by carbon off setting schemes.
Incorrect
Answer : d
The argument given two reasons for disapproving of carbon offsetting; first, that the availability of the scheme makes people think there is nothing Wrong with flying, and second that customers cannot know that their financial contribution does reduce carbon emissions.
Option (d): strengthens the case against carbon offsetting by showing that in some cases any reduction in carbon emissions would have happened anyway, thus cannot be claimed to compensate for the carbon emissions caused by someone taking a flight.
Option (a): gives a reason for thinking that thee business of carbon offsetting may eventually be better regulated, and thus that some of the objections in the argument may eventually not apply. Hence it does not strengthen the argument.
Option (b): does not strengthen the argument, since it suggests that the carbon emissions
produced by aircraft may be less problematic than the argument assumes.
Option (c): neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. It suggests that it is worth-while to make financial contributions to energy saving schemes, but has no implications for the question as to whether this should be done by carbon off setting schemes.
Join our Official Telegram Channel HERE for Motivation and Fast Updates
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Motivational and New analysis videos