CAT Question of the Day The question below contains a paragraph followed by alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the paragraph.
The physical study of subatomic particles became possible only during the 20th century, with the development of increasingly sophisticated apparatuses to probe matter at scales of 10−15 metre and less, that is, at distances comparable to the diameter of the proton or neutron. Yet the basic philosophy of the subject now known as particle physics dates to at least 500 BC, when the Greek philosopher Leucippus and his pupil Democritus put forward the notion that matter consists of invisibly small, indivisible particles, which they called atoms.
| OPTIONS | | |  | 1) | Though the philosophy of particle physics dates back to 500 BC, the study of subatomic particle became possible only in the twentieth century. | | | 2) | Though Greek philosophers of 500 BC laid the foundations of particle physics by naming atoms, the study of subatomic particles became possible only in the 20th century. | | | 3) | The development of apparatuses to probe matter particles at scales of 10−15 metre and less made particle physics possible even though the concept was known to the ancient Greeks. | | | 4) | Though atoms were named by the Greeks in 500 BC, the development of apparatuses to probe matter particles less than 10−15 metre made their study possible only in the 20th century. | | | 5) | Though particle physics was known to Greek philosopher Leucippus who named the atoms, their study became possible only in the twentieth century. |
Tip of the Day In Paragraph Summary questions, options that cover the key points of the paragraph, but change the tone of the paragraph, subtly or otherwise, are to be avoided. Look for options that address the essence of the paragraph. Last year's Question of the day (20-Jun-11) Saying that taste is just personal preference is a good way to prevent disputes. The trouble is, it's not true. You feel this when you start to design things. Whatever job people do, they naturally want to do better. It's a matter of pride, and a real pleasure, to get better at your job. But if your job is to design things, and there is no such thing as beauty, then there is no way to get better at your job. If taste is just personal preference, then everyone's is already perfect: you like whatever you like, and that's it. As in any job, as you continue to design things, you'll get better at it. Your tastes will change. And, like anyone who gets better at the job, you'll know you're getting better. If so, your old tastes were not merely different, but worse. Poof goes the axiom that taste can't be wrong.
Which of the following strengthens the author's argument that taste is not just personal preference?
| OPTIONS | | | | | 1) | People generally agree on what is good design and what isn't, and whether one kind of design is more beautiful than the other. | | | 2) | People often agree that some things are beautiful, even if they don't personally think so, because they feel they are supposed to think so. | | | 3) | People do generally get better at their jobs over time, including those who design things, but their improvement may be in other areas apart from change in taste. | | | 4) | What one society or culture considers beautiful, the other may consider ugly, and vice versa. |
|
Comments
Post a Comment