List of top Questions asked in XAT

“Indigestion? Acidity? Unable to sleep?... Don’t spend the time tossing and turning! Take Magix for a sound, restful sleep … you’ll soon fall asleep, and wake up refreshed and energized. Remember … Magix when you are suffering from acidity and need that sleep!”
All of the following are claims of Magix except:

Filmmakers tend to highlight their emotional points with visuals, rather than dialogue. Words tend to be the tools of playwrights. Images are the stuff that films are made of. Nevertheless, many successful films have been made from stage plays and contain little else than one location or one stage set. The option most opposite to the idea in the paragraph is:

Classify the following sentences into Fact (F), Judgment (J) and Inference (I) and choose the most suitable sequence: Fact (F): Known matter of direct observation, existing reality, verifiable truth.
Judgment (J): Opinion/estimate/anticipation of common sense or intention.
Inference (I): Logical deduction based on knowledge of facts.
(i) Proper allocation of resources is required for overall development of economy.
(ii) Government has decided to allocate the gas from KG basin to power fertiliser sector.
(iii) A court decision against the declared policy guidelines can result in government intervention in the form of an appeal.
(iv) Some section of society may consider this decision a deliberate attempt to protect private interest.

The boss called to inform that he _________ be coming to office that day. However the employees did not take it easy as they knew it was his _________ to give them a surprise by coming in and checking who was at work. Any employee, once caught not working, would then be required to _________ on the reasons for not working and if the boss was not satisfied the employee had to work on Sunday to _________ the wrong. The option that best fills the blanks in the above paragraph would be:

Gourmet is to gourmand as

Social roles may either conflict or cooperate within any given person, depending upon the circumstances. They conflict when the behaviour patterns demanded by one role cannot be performed while performing the second role. Thus, one cannot easily be a saintly rake or a feminine brute, but given an understanding husband, a woman can be both a loving wife and a loving mother with no conflict between the roles.
Which of the following methods is used by the author to make his or her point?

While no one made any _________ the financial scandal while he was in the room, there was a feeling of awe to the _________ created by the broker that had snared many unsuspecting investors under the _________ that everyone would end up rich and the fact that he had been celebrating his _________ of the legal authorities by attending parties. The option that best fills the blanks in the above paragraph would be:

“So you want me to proscribe Ceecee…” The most suitable inference about Ceecee can be:

Read the sentences and choose the option that best arranges them in a logical order. 1. Well, it may mean various things; but one very likely thinks first of all that a picture of the object comes before the child’s mind when it hears the word.
2. But what does this mean?
3. I will call it “ostensive teaching of words.” I say that it will form an important part of the training, because it is so with human beings; not because it could not be imagined otherwise.
4. But now, if this does happen – is it the purpose of the word? Yes, it may be the purpose. I can imagine such a use of words (of series of sounds).
5. This ostensive teaching of words can be said to establish an association between the word and the thing.

Read the sentences and choose the option that best arranges them in a logical order. 1. He might make the opposite mistake; when I want to assign a name to this group of nuts, he might understand it as a numeral.
2. Now, one can ostensibly define a proper name, the name of a colour, the name of a material, a numeral, the name of a point of the compass and so on.
3. The definition of the number two. "That is called 'two'." Pointing to two nuts is perfectly exact. But how can two be defined like that?
4. He may suppose this; but perhaps he does not.
5. The person one gives the definition to doesn’t know what one wants to call “two”; he will suppose that “two” is the name given to this group of nuts!

Which sports has been included in 2022 Asian Games?

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow.
Piers Steel defines procrastination as willingly deferring something even though you expect the delay to make you worse off. In other words, if you’re simply saying “Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die,” you’re not really procrastinating. Knowingly delaying because you think that’s the most efficient use of your time doesn’t count, either. The essence of procrastination lies in not doing what you think you should be doing, a mental contortion that surely accounts for the great psychic toll the habit takes on people. This is the perplexing thing about procrastination: although it seems to involve avoiding unpleasant tasks, indulging in it generally doesn’t make people happy. Most agree that this peculiar irrationality stems from our relationship to time—in particular, from a tendency that economists call “hyperbolic discounting.” A two-stage experiment provides a classic illustration: In the first stage, people are offered the choice between a hundred dollars today or a hundred and ten dollars tomorrow; in the second stage, they choose between a hundred dollars a month from now or a hundred and ten dollars a month and a day from now. In substance, the two choices are identical: wait an extra day, get an extra ten bucks. Yet, in the first stage many people choose to take the smaller sum immediately, whereas in the second they prefer to wait one more day and get the extra ten bucks. In other words, hyperbolic discounters are able to make the rational choice when they’re thinking about the future, but, as the present gets closer, short-term considerations overwhelm their long-term goals. The lesson of this experiment is not that people are shortsighted or shallow but that their preferences aren’t consistent over time. We want to watch the Bergman masterpiece, to give ourselves enough time to write the report properly, to set aside money for retirement. But our desires shift as the long run becomes the short run.
According to the passage, what could be the plausible meaning of ‘hyperbolic discounting?’

Two cards are drawn from a deck of cards in which one card is missing. It is known that the drawn cards are both club cards. Find the probability that the missing card is a club card.

In an examination, Akhil scored 11.11% less than the pass marks and Akshay scored 12.5% more than the pass marks. Find the percentage of pass marks if the sum of the scores of Akhil and Akshay is 25% more than the total marks.

Solve for the number of integral values of \(x: \frac{(x^2-15x+47)(x-13)}{(x-8)}<0\).

The ratio of paint and oil in Tank A is 3: 4, whereas in Tank B, the respective ratio is 4: 5 . Then, 96 liters of a mixture consisting of paint and oil in the ratio of 5: 1 is added to Tank A, such that the respective ratio in Tank A becomes exactly the reverse of that in Tank B. Find the amount (in liters) of the mixture from Tank B that is poured into Tank A such that the amount of paint and water in Tank A become equal.

Ashok, a maths teacher in the school, asked his students to guess his date of birth by giving the following hints.
Hint 1: He was born in 1995
Hint 2: The sum of the products of his birth date multiplied by 24 and his birthday month multiplied by 60 is 1284.
Find the sum of Ashok’s birth date, birth month, and birth year.

The points (–4, 3) and (–1, –4) are two end points of a diagonal of a parallelogram. If the other diagonal has the equation 7y + 3x + c = 0, then find the value of c.

"Is the net itself profoundly robust and immortal or is it the most ephemeral digital artefact of all?" Today, with so much more of our lives online, the question hits us more forcefully. Sometimes the internet has the memory of an elephant, and sometimes it's an amnesiac. I once went to an online archive and dug up a dispatch from my first-grade class that had appeared as a newspaper filler item in 1977. But there are comments posted to Facebook less than a year ago that have already melted into the ether. The same goes for music and motion pictures.

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow.
As the biggest companies strive to trumpet their environmental activism, the need to match words with deeds is becoming increasingly important. Household names like Costco and Netflix have not provided emissions reduction targets despite saying they want to reduce their impact on climate change. Others, like the agricultural giant Cargill and the clothing company Levi Strauss, have made commitments but have struggled to cut emissions. Technology companies like Google and Microsoft, which run power-hungry data centers, have slashed emissions, but even they are finding that the technology often doesn’t yet exist to carry out their “moonshot” objectives. You can look at a company’s website and see their sustainability report and it will look great, But then when you look at what is behind it, you’ll see there is not a lot of substance behind those commitments or the commitments are not comprehensive enough. To realize the necessary emission reductions, more ambitious targets urgently need to be set. Otherwise, we project emissions for S&P 500 companies will end up being triple of what they should be in 2050 . Slashing emissions is difficult. Businesses must reliably measure how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases they are responsible for. Then companies have to find cleaner energy sources without hurting their operations. Where they can’t find cleaner substitutes, businesses often pay others to reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere. The task gets even harder when companies begin the process of reducing so-called Scope 3 emissions — pollution caused by suppliers and customers. At oil companies, for example, Scope 3 would include emissions from cars that use gasoline. Other companies that have pledged to cut emissions face different challenges, including coordinating with suppliers and partners. Consider the apparel industry. Much of its contribution to climate change comes from its supply chain. The clothes that Levi Strauss and others put their labels on are often made in factories in places like China, Pakistan and India that remain reliant on coal-fired power plants. The clothes are transported on ships and planes that burn diesel and jet fuel. If we are going to achieve a net-zero carbon economy for real, we will need everyone to act,” said Lucas Joppa, Microsoft’s chief environmental officer. “And that means action can’t be voluntary. We need requirements and standards that everyone is expected to meet.
According to the passage, what would be closest to the idea of a “moonshot” objective?

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow. As the biggest companies strive to trumpet their environmental activism, the need to match words with deeds is becoming increasingly important. Household names like Costco and Netflix have not provided emissions reduction targets despite saying they want to reduce their impact on climate change. Others, like the agricultural giant Cargill and the clothing company Levi Strauss, have made commitments but have struggled to cut emissions. Technology companies like Google and Microsoft, which run power-hungry data centers, have slashed emissions, but even they are finding that the technology often doesn’t yet exist to carry out their “moonshot” objectives. You can look at a company’s website and see their sustainability report and it will look great, But then when you look at what is behind it, you’ll see there is not a lot of substance behind those commitments or the commitments are not comprehensive enough. To realize the necessary emission reductions, more ambitious targets urgently need to be set. Otherwise, we project emissions for S&P 500 companies will end up being triple of what they should be in 2050 . Slashing emissions is difficult. Businesses must reliably measure how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases they are responsible for. Then companies have to find cleaner energy sources without hurting their operations. Where they can’t find cleaner substitutes, businesses often pay others to reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere. The task gets even harder when companies begin the process of reducing so-called Scope 3 emissions — pollution caused by suppliers and customers. At oil companies, for example, Scope 3 would include emissions from cars that use gasoline. Other companies that have pledged to cut emissions face different challenges, including coordinating with suppliers and partners. Consider the apparel industry. Much of its contribution to climate change comes from its supply chain. The clothes that Levi Strauss and others put their labels on are often made in factories in places like China, Pakistan and India that remain reliant on coal-fired power plants. The clothes are transported on ships and planes that burn diesel and jet fuel. If we are going to achieve a net-zero carbon economy for real, we will need everyone to act,” said Lucas Joppa, Microsoft’s chief environmental officer. “And that means action can’t be voluntary. We need requirements and standards that everyone is expected to meet.
Based on the passage, which of the following is NOT an example of environmental activism?

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow. As the biggest companies strive to trumpet their environmental activism, the need to match words with deeds is becoming increasingly important. Household names like Costco and Netflix have not provided emissions reduction targets despite saying they want to reduce their impact on climate change. Others, like the agricultural giant Cargill and the clothing company Levi Strauss, have made commitments but have struggled to cut emissions. Technology companies like Google and Microsoft, which run power-hungry data centers, have slashed emissions, but even they are finding that the technology often doesn’t yet exist to carry out their “moonshot” objectives. You can look at a company’s website and see their sustainability report and it will look great, But then when you look at what is behind it, you’ll see there is not a lot of substance behind those commitments or the commitments are not comprehensive enough. To realize the necessary emission reductions, more ambitious targets urgently need to be set. Otherwise, we project emissions for S&P 500 companies will end up being triple of what they should be in 2050 . Slashing emissions is difficult. Businesses must reliably measure how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases they are responsible for. Then companies have to find cleaner energy sources without hurting their operations. Where they can’t find cleaner substitutes, businesses often pay others to reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere. The task gets even harder when companies begin the process of reducing so-called Scope 3 emissions — pollution caused by suppliers and customers. At oil companies, for example, Scope 3 would include emissions from cars that use gasoline. Other companies that have pledged to cut emissions face different challenges, including coordinating with suppliers and partners. Consider the apparel industry. Much of its contribution to climate change comes from its supply chain. The clothes that Levi Strauss and others put their labels on are often made in factories in places like China, Pakistan and India that remain reliant on coal-fired power plants. The clothes are transported on ships and planes that burn diesel and jet fuel. If we are going to achieve a net-zero carbon economy for real, we will need everyone to act,” said Lucas Joppa, Microsoft’s chief environmental officer. “And that means action can’t be voluntary. We need requirements and standards that everyone is expected to meet.
Which of the following statement(s) is NOT in consonance with the author’s views, as expressed in the passage?

Today is such a time, when the project of interpretation is largely reactionary, stifling. Like the fumes of the automobile and of heavy industry which befoul the urban atmosphere, the effusion of interpretations of art today poisons our sensibilities. In a culture whose already classical dilemma is the hypertrophy of the intellect at the expense of energy and sensual capability, interpretation is the revenge of the intellect upon art. Even more. It is the revenge of the intellect upon the world. To interpret is to impoverish, to deplete the world – in order to set up a shadow world of “meanings.” It is to turn the world into this world. ("This world"! As if there were any other.) The world, our world is depleted, impoverished enough. Away with all duplicates of it, until we again experience more immediately what we have. In most modern instances, interpretation amounts to the philistine refusal to leave the work of art alone. Real Art has the capacity to make us nervous. By reducing the work of art to its content and then interpreting that, one tames the work of art. Interpretation makes art manageable, conformable. This philistinism of interpretation is more rife in literature than in any other art. For decades now, literary critics have understood it to be their task to translate the elements of the poem or play or novel or story into something else. Sometimes a writer will be so uneasy before the naked power of his art that he will install within the work itself - albeit with a little shyness, a touch of the good taste of irony - the clear and explicit interpretation of it. Thomas Mann is an example of such an over cooperative author. In the case of more stubborn authors, the critic is only too happy to perform the job.
What does the author mean by, ‘In a culture whose already classical dilemma is the hypertrophy of the intellect at the expense of energy and sensual capability…?’

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow. Today is such a time, when the project of interpretation is largely reactionary, stifling. Like the fumes of the automobile and of heavy industry which befoul the urban atmosphere, the effusion of interpretations of art today poisons our sensibilities. In a culture whose already classical dilemma is the hypertrophy of the intellect at the expense of energy and sensual capability, interpretation is the revenge of the intellect upon art. Even more. It is the revenge of the intellect upon the world. To interpret is to impoverish, to deplete the world – in order to set up a shadow world of “meanings.” It is to turn the world into this world. ("This world"! As if there were any other.) The world, our world is depleted, impoverished enough. Away with all duplicates of it, until we again experience more immediately what we have. In most modern instances, interpretation amounts to the philistine refusal to leave the work of art alone. Real Art has the capacity to make us nervous. By reducing the work of art to its content and then interpreting that, one tames the work of art. Interpretation makes art manageable, conformable. This philistinism of interpretation is more rife in literature than in any other art. For decades now, literary critics have understood it to be their task to translate the elements of the poem or play or novel or story into something else. Sometimes a writer will be so uneasy before the naked power of his art that he will install within the work itself - albeit with a little shyness, a touch of the good taste of irony - the clear and explicit interpretation of it. Thomas Mann is an example of such an over cooperative author. In the case of more stubborn authors, the critic is only too happy to perform the job.
According to the passage, which of the following is NOT an act of interpretation?

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow. Today is such a time, when the project of interpretation is largely reactionary, stifling. Like the fumes of the automobile and of heavy industry which befoul the urban atmosphere, the effusion of interpretations of art today poisons our sensibilities. In a culture whose already classical dilemma is the hypertrophy of the intellect at the expense of energy and sensual capability, interpretation is the revenge of the intellect upon art. Even more. It is the revenge of the intellect upon the world. To interpret is to impoverish, to deplete the world – in order to set up a shadow world of “meanings.” It is to turn the world into this world. ("This world"! As if there were any other.) The world, our world is depleted, impoverished enough. Away with all duplicates of it, until we again experience more immediately what we have. In most modern instances, interpretation amounts to the philistine refusal to leave the work of art alone. Real Art has the capacity to make us nervous. By reducing the work of art to its content and then interpreting that, one tames the work of art. Interpretation makes art manageable, conformable. This philistinism of interpretation is more rife in literature than in any other art. For decades now, literary critics have understood it to be their task to translate the elements of the poem or play or novel or story into something else. Sometimes a writer will be so uneasy before the naked power of his art that he will install within the work itself - albeit with a little shyness, a touch of the good taste of irony - the clear and explicit interpretation of it. Thomas Mann is an example of such an over cooperative author. In the case of more stubborn authors, the critic is only too happy to perform the job.
Which of the following BEST explains as to why art is interpreted?