Because it’s so easy to judge the idiocy of others, it may be sorely tempting to think this doesn’t apply to you. But the problem of unrecognized ignorance is one that visits us all. And over the years, I’ve become convinced of one key, overarching fact about the ignorant mind. One should not think of it as uninformed. Rather, one should think of it as misinformed.
An ignorant mind is precisely not a spotless, empty vessel, but one that’s filled with the clutter of irrelevant or misleading life experiences, theories, facts, intuitions, strategies, algorithms, heuristics, metaphors, and hunches that regrettably have the look and feel of useful and accurate knowledge. This clutter is an unfortunate by-product of one of our greatest strengths as a species. We are unbridled pattern recognizers and profligate theorizers. Often, our theories are good enough to get us through the day, or at least to an age when we can procreate. But our genius for creative storytelling, combined with our inability to detect our own ignorance, can sometimes lead to situations that are embarrassing, unfortunate, or downright dangerous—especially in a technologically advanced, complex democratic society that occasionally invests mistaken popular beliefs with immense destructive power. As the humorist Josh Billings once put it, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” (Ironically, one thing many people “know” about this quote is that it was first uttered by Mark Twain or Will Rogers—which just ain’t so.) Because of the way we are built, and because of the way we learn from our environment, we are all engines of misbelief. And the better we understand how our wonderful yet kludge-ridden, Rube Goldberg engine works, the better we—as individuals and as a society—can harness it to navigate toward a more objective understanding of the truth.
Which of the following statement is NOT true about an ignorant mind?
- An ignorant mind is often filled with unfounded and misguided distractions.
- An ignorant mind succumbs to illusionary pattern detection.
- An ignorant mind theorizes without robust evidence.
- An ignorant mind is unaware of its own limitations.
- An ignorant mind often fuels scepticism.
The Correct Option is
Approach Solution - 1
To determine which statement is NOT true about an ignorant mind, we need to evaluate each option in the context of the given comprehension passage.
- An ignorant mind is often filled with unfounded and misguided distractions.
This aligns with the passage description of an ignorant mind being filled with clutter, misleading life experiences, theories, and hunches that simulate accurate knowledge. Therefore, this statement is true. - An ignorant mind succumbs to illusionary pattern detection.
The passage describes humans as “unbridled pattern recognizers” and “profligate theorizers,” which often leads to erroneous beliefs and theories. Hence, this statement accurately reflects the characteristics of an ignorant mind and is true. - An ignorant mind theorizes without robust evidence.
The text explicitly states that an ignorant mind contains theories and strategies that appear convincing yet might not be valid, highlighting its tendency to theorize based on insufficient evidence. Therefore, this is true. - An ignorant mind is unaware of its own limitations.
The passage implies a lack of self-awareness among ignorant minds due to their inability to recognize ignorance. Thus, this statement is true. - An ignorant mind often fuels scepticism.
This statement implies that an ignorant mind promotes scepticism. However, the passage focuses on how an ignorant mind is filled with misleading information, leading to a lack of awareness and acceptance of misconceptions, not necessarily fostering scepticism. Hence, this is the false statement among the options given.
Therefore, the statement "An ignorant mind often fuels scepticism." is NOT true about an ignorant mind according to the context of the passage.
Approach Solution -2
Step 1: Analyze the passage.
The passage emphasizes that an ignorant mind is filled with false and misleading information, is prone to errors due to pattern detection, lacks awareness of its own limitations, and often forms theories without proper evidence.
Step 2: Evaluate each option.
- Option 1: This is true, as the passage describes the ignorant mind as cluttered with distractions.
- Option 2: The passage highlights that pattern detection leads to illusions, making this true.
- Option 3: The passage notes that ignorant minds theorize without evidence, so this is true.
- Option 4: This is true, as the passage mentions the ignorant mind's lack of awareness about its limitations.
- Option 5: The passage does not suggest that ignorance fuels scepticism; rather, it is associated with false beliefs, making this false.
Based on the passage, what does the author BEST mean when he says, “we are all engines of misbelief?”
- Driven by misbelief, we blend our creativity and ignorance.
- We are naturally inclined to form, and often share, misleading and inaccurate beliefs.
- We are prone to holding beliefs that are not necessarily true.
- Our brains are wired with certain heuristics that can lead to systematic errors in judgement.
- We are always fuelled by our ignorance to spread information.
The Correct Option is D
Approach Solution - 1
The question asks what the author means by the statement, "we are all engines of misbelief," based on the provided passage. Let's break down the relevant parts of the passage and analyze the options to determine the correct interpretation.
The passage discusses our propensity to hold beliefs that might be inaccurate, emphasizing that our minds are not empty vessels but filled with potentially misleading information. This supports the notion that we are prone to forming beliefs that are not necessarily true, influenced by our cognitive biases and the nature of how we learn.
Let's examine each option:
- Driven by misbelief, we blend our creativity and ignorance.
- This option reflects the idea of creativity combining with ignorance, but it does not encapsulate the systematic nature of misbelief as highlighted by the author.
- We are naturally inclined to form, and often share, misleading and inaccurate beliefs.
- This option accurately describes the tendency to hold and propagate false beliefs, but it doesn't fully explain why this happens.
- We are prone to holding beliefs that are not necessarily true.
- This option captures the general vulnerability to error in our beliefs but lacks the detail about the cognitive mechanisms behind it.
- Our brains are wired with certain heuristics that can lead to systematic errors in judgement.
- This option best captures the author's explanation in the passage that emphasizes the systematic nature and cognitive basis (heuristics) for our susceptibility to misbelief. It aligns with the author's emphasis on how our mental processes inherently lead to errors in judgment.
- We are always fuelled by our ignorance to spread information.
- This option suggests a deliberate propagation of ignorance, which doesn't fully align with the author's focus on inherent cognitive processes.
Conclusion: The correct answer is: Our brains are wired with certain heuristics that can lead to systematic errors in judgement. This option best explains how the inherent cognitive mechanisms predispose us to such errors, consistent with the author's discussion about misbelief in the passage.
Approach Solution -2
Step 1: Understand the phrase.
The phrase "engines of misbelief" refers to the mechanisms in our minds that produce errors in judgment due to heuristics.
Step 2: Analyze options.
- Option 1: Creativity and ignorance are mentioned, but the focus is not on blending them.
- Option 2: Misleading beliefs are a result, not the primary cause described in the passage.
- Option 3: While true, it doesn't capture the role of heuristics emphasized in the passage.
- Option 4: The passage directly links heuristics to systematic judgment errors, making this the best choice.
- Option 5: The passage discusses ignorance, but not as a direct fuel for spreading information.
With which of the following statements will the author agree the MOST?
- We must try not to see patterns in everything that we observe.
- We must be aware that the patterns we see may not necessarily reflect the truth.
- We must be sceptical of the beliefs we have, regardless how true they seem to us.
- The more we are sure of something, the more we are wrong about it.
- Our desire to see patterns in everything makes us unable to detect misbeliefs in others.
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
The question asks us to identify the statement with which the author would most likely agree. To determine this, we must closely examine the given passage and the options.
The passage discusses the concept of ignorance, emphasizing that an ignorant mind is not empty but filled with misleading information. It highlights the human tendency to see patterns and form theories based on incomplete or incorrect information. This tendency can lead to dangerous misconceptions. The author suggests that being aware of these misbeliefs can help us reach a more objective understanding of the truth.
Let's analyze each option:
- Option 1: "We must try not to see patterns in everything that we observe."
- This option suggests avoiding the observation of patterns entirely. The passage does not support this as it acknowledges pattern recognition is a strength, albeit one that can lead to errors.
- Option 2: "We must be aware that the patterns we see may not necessarily reflect the truth."
- This aligns closely with the author's viewpoint. The passage stresses the importance of questioning the validity of perceived patterns, acknowledging that they may lead to false beliefs.
- Option 3: "We must be sceptical of the beliefs we have, regardless of how true they seem to us."
- While skepticism is implied, the passage specifically emphasizes the need to be aware that patterns might not reflect truth rather than general skepticism of all beliefs.
- Option 4: "The more we are sure of something, the more we are wrong about it."
- This is too absolute and doesn't encapsulate the author's argument. The author speaks about awareness and understanding, not a direct correlation between certainty and wrongness.
- Option 5: "Our desire to see patterns in everything makes us unable to detect misbeliefs in others."
- The passage focuses on individual misbeliefs rather than detecting them in others.
Upon evaluating the options, Option 2 best reflects the author's view that while pattern recognition is intrinsic to humans, these patterns might not always reflect reality, and awareness of this is crucial. Therefore, the correct answer is:
"We must be aware that the patterns we see may not necessarily reflect the truth."
Approach Solution -2
Step 1: Evaluate the passage's key idea.
The passage discusses the dangers of false pattern recognition and the importance of questioning assumptions.
Step 2: Analyze options.
- Option 1: While valid, the passage does not emphasize avoiding pattern recognition entirely.
- Option 2: This aligns with the passage's focus on distinguishing real patterns from false ones, making it the best choice.
- Option 3: The passage does not stress universal scepticism but rather critical awareness.
- Option 4: This is exaggerated and not supported directly in the passage.
- Option 5: Misbeliefs arise from ignorance, but the focus here is on pattern recognition.
Top Questions on Reading Comprehension
- Acrucial moderating factor in how people experience comparisons is self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to interpret upward comparison as informative rather than threatening. They are more resilient in the face of others’ success and more likely to believe they can reach their own goals. In contrast, people with low self-esteem are more prone to interpret comparison as judgment, reinforcing negative self-views and triggering feelings of inadequacy.
This dynamic creates a self-reinforcing loop. People with high self-esteem are less vulnerable to upward comparison, which intensifies those doubts. Those with a secure sense of self are more likely to use comparison as a learning tool. The same external stimulus—a colleague’s achievements, a friend’s popularity—can have radically different effects depending on internal stability.
Self-esteem also influences how people choose their comparison targets. Research has found that individuals often engage in “selective comparison,” seeking out those who confirm their existing beliefs about themselves. This can become a subtle form of self-sabotage. Someone who feels unworthy may subconsciously seek out targets that reinforce that sense, perpetuating a narrative of inferiority. One of the most promising antidotes to social comparison is temporal comparison—evaluating oneself not against others, but against one’s own past. This method has been shown to increase motivation and satisfaction, especially when individuals can see concrete progress. Temporal comparison activates the same reward circuits as social comparison but avoids the threat systems associated with social ranking. It also reinforces agency: individuals focus on what they can control and improve rather than what others control. In therapeutic and coaching settings, temporal comparison is used to help clients build self-efficacy and track growth over time.
Moreover, people who focus on self-improvement rather than social dominance are less likely to fall into cycles of envy or self-pity. They can still use others as inspiration, but they do so without attaching their self-worth to the outcome. This is not to say they never compare—but that they focus on learning, rather than judgment. The most skilful approach to comparison may lie in eliminating it, but in reframing it as feedback. When we interpret comparison as information rather than a verdict, we can ask, “What can I learn from this?” This shift turns comparison into a growth tool. Teachers mentor their students, not as rivals. Psychologists emphasize that the key variable here is mindset.
A fixed mindset sees comparison as a threat. If someone else is better, it means we are worse. A growth mindset sees comparison as a map. If someone else has reached a certain level, it means the path exists. This reframing is not just a cognitive trick. It changes the emotional tone of comparison, making it more likely to inspire than to wound. Reframing also requires emotional regulation—the ability to notice an initial pang of envy or shame without reacting impulsively. With practice, individuals can learn to pause, reflect, and reinterpret their emotional responses. Over time, this builds resilience and self-trust, allowing comparison to become a learning tool rather than a cage.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
When people who are talking don’t share the same culture, knowledge, values, and assumptions, mutual understanding can be especially difficult. Such understanding is possible through the negotiation of meaning. To negotiate meaning with someone, you have to become aware of and respect both the differences in your backgrounds and when these differences are important. You need enough diversity of cultural and personal experience to be aware that divergent world views exist and what they might be like. You also need the flexibility in world view, and a generous tolerance for mistakes, as well as a talent for finding the right metaphor to communicate the relevant parts of unshared experiences or to highlight the shared experiences while demphasizing the others. Metaphorical imagination is a crucial skill in creating rapport and in communicating the nature of unshared experience. This skill consists, in large measure, of the ability to bend your world view and adjust the way you categorize your experiences. Problems of mutual understanding are not exotic; they arise in all extended conversations where understanding is important.
When it really counts, meaning is almost never communicated according to the CONDUIT metaphor, that is, where one person transmits a fixed, clear proposition to another by means of expressions in a common language, where both parties have all the relevant common knowledge, assumptions, values, etc. When the chips are down, meaning is negotiated: you slowly figure out what you have in common, what it is safe to talk about, how you can communicate unshared experience or create a shared vision. With enough flexibility in bending your world view and with luck and charity, you may achieve some mutual understanding.
Communication theories based on the CONDUIT metaphor turn from the pathetic to the evil when they are applied indiscriminately on a large scale, say, in government surveillance or computerized files. There, what is most crucial for real understanding is almost never included, and it is assumed that the words in the file have meaning in themselves—disembodied, objective, understandable meaning. When a society lives by the CONDUITmetaphor on a large scale, misunderstanding, persecution, and much worse are the likely products.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Later, I realized that reviewing the history of nuclear physics served another purpose as well: It gave the lie to the naive belief that the physicists could have come together when nuclear fission was discovered (in Nazi Germany!) and agreed to keep the discovery a secret, thereby sparing humanity such a burden. No. Given the development of nuclear physics up to 1938, development that physicists throughout the world pursued in all innocence of any intention of finding the engine of a new weapon of mass destruction—only one of them, the remarkable Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, took that possibility seriously—the discovery of nuclear fission was inevitable. To stop it, you would have had to stop physics. If German scientists hadn’t made the discovery when they did, French, American, Russian, Italian, or Danish scientists would have done so, almost certainly within days or weeks. They were all working at the same cutting edge, trying to understand the strange results of a simple experiment bombarding uranium with neutrons. Here was no Faustian bargain, as movie directors and other naifs still find it intellectually challenging to imagine. Here was no evil machinery that the noble scientists might hide from the problems and the generals. To the contrary, there was a high insight into how the world works, an energetic reaction, older than the earth, that science had finally devised the instruments and arrangements to coart forth. “Make it seem inevitable,” Louis Pasteur used to advise his students when they prepared to write up their discoveries. But it was. To wish that it might have been ignored or suppressed is barbarous. “Knowledge,” Niels Bohr once noted, “is itself the basis for civilization.” You cannot have the one without the other; the one depends upon the other. Nor can you have only benevolent knowledge; the scientific method doesn’t filter for benevolence. Knowledge has consequences, not always intended, not always comfortable, but always welcome. The earth revolves around the sun, not the sun around the earth. “It is a profound and necessary truth,” Robert Oppenheimer would say, “that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them.”
...Bohr proposed once that the goal of science is not universal truth. Rather, he argued, the modest but relentless goal of science is “the gradual removal of prejudices.” The discovery that the earth revolves around the sun has gradually removed the prejudice that the earth is the center of the universe. The discovery of microbes is gradually removing the prejudice that disease is a punishment from God. The discovery of evolution is gradually removing the prejudice that Homo sapiens is a separate and special creation.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
As the post–World War II generation of liberal democratic leaders forged new, highly successful domestic and international institutions and policies throughout the West, the weaknesses of liberal democracy that dominated the two decades after World War II faded from view. But they did not go away.
First, because liberal democracy restrains majorities, it slows the achievement of goals that majorities support. This generates frustration with institutional restraints, and an unacknowledged envy of authoritarian systems that can act quickly and decisively. China can build huge cities in the time it takes the United States to review the environmental impact of small highway projects. Liberal democracy requires more patience than many possess. Second, liberal democracy requires tolerance for minority views and ways of life to which many citizens are deeply opposed. It is natural to feel that if we consider certain views or ways of life to be odious, we should use public power to suppress them. In many such cases, liberal democracy restrains this impulse, a psychological burden that some will find unbearable.
This leads directly to the third inherent problem of liberal democracy—the distinction it requires us to make between civic identity and personal or group identity. For example, although we may consider certain religious views false and even dangerous, we must, for civic purposes, accept those who hold these views as our equals. They may freely express these views; they may organize to promote them; they may vote, and their votes are given the same weight as ours. The same goes for race, ethnicity, gender, and all the particularities that distinguish us from one another.
This requirement often goes against the grain of natural sentiments. We want the public sphere to reflect what we find most valuable about our private commitments. Liberal democracy prevents us from fully translating our personal identities into our public lives as citizens. This too is not always easy to bear. The quest for wholeness—for a political community, or even a world, that reflects our most important commitments—is a deep yearning to which liberal leaders can always appeal.
Nor is the fourth inherent difficulty of liberal democracy—the necessity of compromise—easy to bear. If what I want is good and true, why should I agree that public decisions must incorporate competing views? James Madison gives us the answer: in circumstances of liberty, diversity of views is inevitable, and unless those who agree with us form a majority so large as to be irresistible, the alternative to compromise is inaction, which is often more damaging, or oppression, which always is.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Beware of the old newspapers
stacked
on that little three legged stool over there.
Don’t disturb them.
I know it for a fact
that snakes have spawned in between these sheets.
Don’t even look in that direction.
It’s not because of breeze
that their corners are fluttering.
It’s alive, that nest of newspapers.
new born snakes, coiling and uncurling,
are turning their heads to look at you.
That white corner has spread its hood.
A forked tongue
shoots out of its mouth.
Keep your eyes closed.
Get rid of the whole goddamn pile if you
want to
in the morning.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Questions Asked in XAT exam
- Arrange the following generations from the oldest to the youngest:
1. Generation X
2. Silent Generation
3. Generation Alpha
4. Baby Boomers
5. Millennials
- XAT - 2026
- Current Affairs
- Read the following scenario and answer the THREE questions that follow.
Brijbhushan, a microfinancier, lends money at the rate of Rs.10 per square meter to small farmers at a village. He charges an annual interest rate of 10%. All the farming plots in that village are rectangular, with areas varying between a minimum of 1000 square meters and a maximum of 10,000 square meters.
This year, Brijbhushan has lent money only to five farmers: Aditya, Binod, Chhuttan, Dabloo and Govind. The perimeter of Chhuttan’s plot is 250 meters, with the length and width being at a ratio of 4:1. Aditya’s plot has an area three times the area of Govind’s plot. The area of Aditya’s plot is also the average of the areas of Govind’s plot and Dabloo’s plot. The plots belonging to Aditya, Binod and Dabloo are of the same width, but of different lengths. Moreover, the length of Binod’s plot is the sum of the lengths of Aditya’s plot and Dabloo’s plot.- XAT - 2026
- Mensuration
Light Chemicals is an industrial paint supplier with presence in three locations: Mumbai, Hyderabad and Bengaluru. The sunburst chart below shows the distribution of the number of employees of different departments of Light Chemicals. There are four departments: Finance, IT, HR and Sales. The employees are deployed in four ranks: junior, mid, senior and executive. The chart shows four levels: location, department, rank and gender (M: male, F: female). At every level, the number of employees at a location/department/rank/gender are proportional to the corresponding area of the region represented in the chart.
Due to some issues with the software, the data on junior female employees have gone missing. Notice that there are junior female employees in Mumbai HR, Sales and IT departments, Hyderabad HR department, and Bengaluru IT and Finance departments. The corresponding missing numbers are marked u, v, w, x, y and z in the diagram, respectively.
It is also known that:
a) Light Chemicals has a total of 210 junior employees.
b) Light Chemicals has a total of 146 employees in the IT department.
c) Light Chemicals has a total of 777 employees in the Hyderabad office.
d) In the Mumbai office, the number of female employees is 55.
- XAT - 2026
- Pie Charts
An investment company, Win Lose, recruit's employees to trade in the share market. For newcomers, they have a one-year probation period. During this period, the employees are given Rs. 1 lakh per month to invest the way they see fit. They are evaluated at the end of every month, using the following criteria:
1. If the total loss in any span of three consecutive months exceeds Rs. 20,000, their services are terminated at the end of that 3-month period,
2. If the total loss in any span of six consecutive months exceeds Rs. 10,000, their services are terminated at the end of that 6-month period.
Further, at the end of the 12-month probation period, if there are losses on their overall investment, their services are terminated.
Ratan, Shri, Tamal and Upanshu started working for Win Lose in January. Ratan was terminated after 4 months, Shri was terminated after 7 months, Tamal was terminated after 10 months, while Upanshu was not terminated even after 12 months. The table below, partially, lists their monthly profits (in Rs. ‘000’) over the 12-month period, where x, y and z are masked information.
Note:
• A negative profit value indicates a loss.
• The value in any cell is an integer.
Illustration: As Upanshu is continuing after March, that means his total profit during January-March (2z +2z +0) ≥
Rs.20,000. Similarly, as he is continuing after June, his total profit during January − June ≥
Rs.10,000, as well as his total profit during April-June ≥ Rs.10,000.
- XAT - 2026
- Logical and Analytical Reasoning Skills
Business schools’ (B schools) curriculums are filled with group assignments and case competitions. Even when students have just joined the B schools, corporate houses try 38 to catch good talent early by promising them internships based on case competitions. These competitions involve solving the problems presented by the organizations, analyzing the challenges they currently face, and presenting solutions in a manner that convinces the organizations’ representatives.
For students who are just joining a B school, the capability to actually solve such problems is quite limited. Because of that, the corporate houses generally are more focused on the presentations made by groups. Hence, the groups that communicate better, most often, win these competitions.
Abirami joins MBS, a B school. As a fresher, she believes she needs to learn a lot about how organizations work and wants to work with others who have joined MBS and have work experience.- XAT - 2026
- Statements and Assumptions