List of top Verbal Reasoning Questions asked in NPAT

Read the below passage and answer the questions that follow.
Most of us think astrology was a fanciful misconception about the world that flourished in times of widespread superstition and ignorance, and did not, could not, survive advances in mathematics and science. Alexander Boxer is out to show how wrong that picture is, and (his book) A Scheme of Heaven will make you fall in love with astrology, even as it extinguishes any niggling suspicion that it might actually work. 
Boxer, a physicist and historian, kindles our admiration for the earliest astronomers. My favourite among his many jaw-dropping stories is the discovery of the preces sion of the equinoxes. This is the process by which the sun, each mid-spring and mid-autumn, rises at a fractionally different spot in the sky every year. It takes 26,000 years to make a full revolution of the zodiac-a tiny motion first detected by Hipparchus around 130 BC. And of course, Hipparchus, to make this observation at all, ’had to rely on the accuracy of star-gazers who would have seemed ancient even to him.... Boxer goes much further, dubbing it ’the ancient world’s most ambitious applied mathematics problem’. 
For as long as lives depend on the growth cycles of plants, the stars will, in a very general sense, dictate the destiny of our species. How far can we push this idea before it tips into absurdity? The answer is not immediately obvious, since pretty much any scheme we dream up will fit some conjunction or arrangement of the skies. As civilisations become richer and more various, the number and variety of historical events increases, as does the chance that some event will coincide with some planetary conjunction. Around the year 1400, the French Catholic cardinal Pierre d’Ailly concluded his astrological history of the world with a warning that the Antichrist could be expected to arrive in the year 1789, which of course turned out to be the year of the French Revolution. 
But with every spooky correlation comes an even larger horde of absurdities and fatuities. Today, using a machine-learning algorithm, Boxer shows that ’it’s possi ble to devise a model that perfectly mimics Bitcoin’s price history and that takes, as its input data, nothing more than the zodiac signs of the planets on any given day’. ... Boxer writes: ”Today there’s no need to root and rummage for incidental correlations. Modern machine-learning algorithms are correlation monsters. They can make pretty much any signal correlate with any other.” 
We are bewitched by big data, and imagine it is something new. We are ever indulgent towards economists who cannot even spot a global crash. We docilely conform to every algorithmically justified norm. Are we as credulous, then, as those who once took astrological advice as seriously as a medical diagnosis? Oh, for sure. At least our forebears could say they were having to feel their way in the dark. The statistical tools you need to sort real correlations from pretty patterns weren’t developed until the late 19th century. What’s our excuse? According to Boxer: ”Those of us who are enthusiastic about the promise of numerical data to unlock the secrets of ourselves and our world would do well simply to acknowledge that others have come this way before.”
Read the below passage and answer the questions that follow.
After almost 10 minutes of standing in line at a coffee shop, Ritchie Torres realised he only had cash in his pocket- a form of payment no longer accepted by this store. ”It was a humiliating experience,” he said. ”I remember wondering aloud, how could a business refuse to accept cash, which is legal tender?” Torres is a City Council member in New York. He says his constituents, especially seniors, have also complained about a spurt of cashless stores. So, Torres led the charge on a bill to ban businesses from rejecting cash.
 ”A cashless economy is not an inclusive economy,” said Tazra Mitchell, Policy Director at the research and advocacy group DC Fiscal Policy Institute. Excluding people from paying with cash means, ”essentially discriminating against people who are low-income, people who are homeless, also undocumented,” she said. Getting a credit or debit card often requires a form of ID, a utility or another bill, money to deposit and a financial history. Mitchell said that in Washington, D.C., nearly a third of residents rely on cash every day because they don’t have a card or even a bank account. In fact, as cities have cracked down on the cashless economy and spurred new conversations about whom it leaves out, some of the biggest names that tried going cashless... have reversed their policies in favour of accepting cash. Credit card companies, which get a cut every time a card is swiped, have rewarded the cashless trend. For example, in 2018, Visa paid $10,000 each to 50 businesses that stopped accepting cash. And some store owners have argued, cash is inefficient. For example, it slows down the line, requires armoured cars, and attracts break- ins or skimming by workers. 
And indeed, cash is becoming less popular among U.S. shoppers. The Federal Reserve found in 2018 that cash had stopped being the No. 1 payment choice overtaken by debit cards. But cash is still the most common way people pay amounts under $10 or $25-especially among those older than 55 and younger than 25. And some people prefer cash for privacy reasons to protect their purchase history from being tracked by advertisers or banks. 
Cash also might carry potential psychological and financial benefits for consumers. Cash is, ”going to feel much more painful to give up because we can see it outflow from our hand,” said Avni Shah, Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Toronto. Her research found that when people pay in cash, they are more mindful of their spending willing to spend less to begin with- but they also value their purchases more and feel more loyal to the seller. 
Shah acknowledged that different businesses may have priorities other than loyalty, such as convenience and speed of getting the customer in and out of the store. Opponents of the bans on cashless establishments have argued that businesses should be able to make these decisions for themselves.