Comprehension
Direction for Reading Comprehension: The passages given here are followed by some questions that have four answer choices; read the passage carefully and pick the option whose answer best aligns with the passage.
It has been said that knowledge, or the problem of knowledge, is the scandal of philosophy. The scandal is philosophy’s apparent inability to show how, when and why we can be sure that we know something or, indeed, that we know anything. Philosopher Michael Williams writes: ‘Is it possible to obtain knowledge at all? This problem is pressing because there are powerful arguments, some very ancient, for the conclusion that it is not . . . Scepticism is the skeleton in Western rationalism’s closet’. While it is not clear that the scandal matters to anyone but philosophers, philosophers point out that it should matter to everyone, at least given a certain conception of knowledge. For, they explain, unless we can ground our claims to knowledge as such, which is to say, distinguish it from mere opinion, superstition, fantasy, wishful thinking, ideology, illusion or delusion, then the actions we take on the basis of presumed knowledge –boarding an airplane, swallowing a pill, finding someone guilty of a crime – will be irrational and unjustifiable.
That is all quite serious-sounding but so also are the rattlings of the skeleton: that is, the sceptic’s contention that we cannot be sure that we know anything – at least not if we think of knowledge as something like having a correct mental representation of reality, and not if we think of reality as something like things-as-they-are-in-themselves, independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions. For, the sceptic will note, since reality, under that conception of it, is outside our ken (we cannot catch a glimpse of things-in-themselves around the corner of our own eyes; we cannot form an idea of reality that floats above the processes of our conceiving it), we have no way to compare our mental representations with things-as-they-are-in-themselves and therefore no way to determine whether they are correct or incorrect. Thus the sceptic may repeat (rattling loudly), you cannot be sure you ‘know’ something or anything at all – at least not, he may add (rattling softly before disappearing), if that is the way you conceive ‘knowledge’.
There are a number of ways to handle this situation. The most common is to ignore it. Most people outside the academy – and, indeed, most of us inside it – are unaware of or unperturbed by the philosophical scandal of knowledge and go about our lives without too many epistemic anxieties. We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on how we acquired them (I saw it with my own eyes; I heard it on Fox News; a guy at the office told me) and how broadly and strenuously they seem to be shared or endorsed by various relevant people: experts and authorities, friends and family members, colleagues and associates. And we examine our convictions more or less closely, explain them more or less extensively, and defend them more or less vigorously, usually depending on what seems to be at stake for ourselves and/or other people and what resources are available for reassuring ourselves or making our beliefs credible to others (look, it’s right here on the page; add up the figures yourself; I happen to be a heart specialist).
Question: 1

“. . . we cannot catch a glimpse of things-in-themselves around the corner of our own eyes; we cannot form an idea of reality that floats above the processes of our conceiving it . . .” Which one of the following statements best reflects the argument being made in this sentence?

Updated On: Jul 22, 2025
  • If the reality of things is independent of our perception, logically we cannot perceive that reality.
  • If the reality of things is independent of our eyesight, logically we cannot perceive our perception.
  • Our knowledge of reality floats above our subjective perception of it.
  • Our knowledge of reality cannot be merged with our process of conceiving it.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The argument in the given sentence reflects a philosophical skepticism about the possibility of knowing reality as it is in itself, independently of our perception. This perspective is grounded in the idea that we cannot perceive or understand reality without the influence of our own conceptualizations. In the context of the passage, it emphasizes the skeptical view that our knowledge cannot transcend our subjective experiences and perceptions. 

Let's analyze the provided options:

  • Option 1: If the reality of things is independent of our perception, logically we cannot perceive that reality. This option aligns with the passage’s argument; it reflects the skepticism stating that if reality exists independently, our perception cannot grasp it directly.
  • Option 2: If the reality of things is independent of our eyesight, logically we cannot perceive our perception. This statement conflates perception with eyesight alone and fails to capture the broader argument about conceptual independence from perception.
  • Option 3: Our knowledge of reality floats above our subjective perception of it. This contradicts the passage’s argument. The passage suggests that knowledge is bounded by perception.
  • Option 4: Our knowledge of reality cannot be merged with our process of conceiving it. This seems to imply a separation, but the argument is about the dependence on perception, not separation.

Thus, the best reflection of the given sentence and the passage is option 1: If the reality of things is independent of our perception, logically we cannot perceive that reality.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

The author of the passage is most likely to support which one of the following statements?

Updated On: Jul 22, 2025
  • The confidence with which we maintain something to be true is usually independent of the source of the alleged truth.
  • For the sceptic, if we think of reality as independent of our perceptions, ideas ordescriptions, we should aim to know that reality independently too.
  • The scandal of philosophy is that we might not know anything at all about reality if we think of reality as independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions.
  • The actions taken on the basis of presumed knowledge are rational and justifiable if we are confident that that knowledge is widely held.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The passage discusses the epistemological challenge within philosophy regarding the nature and certainty of knowledge. Philosophers grapple with how we can be confident about what we know and differentiate real knowledge from mere beliefs or illusions. The passage highlights skepticism as a central issue, which questions whether any knowledge, especially when detached from perceptions or representations, can be verified. The author points out that reality, if considered independent of our mental constructs, cannot be directly compared to our perceptions to confirm their correctness.
Among the options provided:
  • The first option suggests that our confidence in truth is not linked to its source, which is unrelated to the passage's core argument about the nature of knowledge and skepticism.
  • The second option advocates knowing reality independently if it is separate from our perceptions. This counters the passage's presentation of skepticism, which doubts the possibility of such independent knowledge.
  • The correct choice is: "The scandal of philosophy is that we might not know anything at all about reality if we think of reality as independent of our perceptions, ideas or descriptions." This directly aligns with the passage's emphasis on skepticism showing that when considering reality as detached from our perceptions, verifying our knowledge is problematic.
  • The fourth option implies that the validity of actions based on presumed knowledge depends on shared beliefs, which the passage's focus on philosophical skepticism does not support.
Therefore, the author of the passage is most likely to support the statement about the philosophical scandal regarding knowledge and reality being independent of perceptions.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

According to the last paragraph of the passage, “We hold our beliefs and presumptive knowledges more or less confidently, usually depending on” something. Which one of the following most broadly captures what we depend on?

Updated On: Apr 28, 2025
  • Remaining outside the academy; ignoring epistemic anxieties.
  • How much of a stake we have in them; what resources there are to support them.
  • How we come to hold them; how widely they are held in our social circles.
  • All of the options listed here.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The correct answer is (C): How we come to hold them; how widely they are held in our social circles.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

The author discusses all of the following arguments in the passage, EXCEPT:

Updated On: Jul 22, 2025
  • sceptics believe that we can never fully know anything, if by “knowing” we mean knowledge of a reality that is independent of the knower.
  • the best way to deal with scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is to ignore it.
  • philosophers maintain that the scandal of philosophy should be of concern to everyone.
  • if we cannot distinguish knowledge from opinion or delusion, we will not be able to justify our actions.
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The passage discusses various arguments around the theme of knowledge skepticism. Here’s a breakdown of each statement to determine which argument is NOT covered in the passage:
  • The argument that sceptics believe that we can never fully know anything, if by “knowing” we mean knowledge of a reality that is independent of the knower is discussed. The passage describes skepticism about knowing anything when reality is perceived as independent of our senses, which is covered by the passage.
  • The argument stating the best way to deal with scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is to ignore it is discussed in the sense that most people, both inside and outside the academic world, tend to ignore these epistemic doubts, leading to less anxiety about them. This doesn't explicitly state it as the "best way," but notes it as a common approach. This argument is mentioned, but not exactly as stated.
  • The notion that philosophers maintain that the scandal of philosophy should be of concern to everyone is clearly discussed, as philosophers argue that skepticism about knowledge affects all individuals, not just philosophers.
  • The argument about if we cannot distinguish knowledge from opinion or delusion, we will not be able to justify our actions is also present, as the passage explains how undistinguishable knowledge leads to irrational and unjustifiable actions.
Therefore, the passage does cover the argument about ignoring skepticism, but not exactly as the "best way." Hence, the argument the best way to deal with scepticism about the veracity of knowledge is to ignore it is the one that doesn't fully align with the passage.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension

View More Questions

Questions Asked in CAT exam

View More Questions