Directions: The questions in this section are based on the reasoning contained in brief statements
or passages. Some questions, more than one of the choices could conceivably answer the question. However,
you are to choose the best answer; that is, the response that most accurately and completely answers the
question. You should make assumptions that are by commonsense standards implausible, superfluous, or
incompatible with the passage.
In an in Vitro study, 160 white cats were injected with Salt X. 160 other white cats were injected
with placebo. In two weeks, 39% of the white cats, who were injected with Salt Xshowed symptoms of Kay
fever. Hence it can be concluded that Kay fever is caused by some elements similar to the elements in
Which of the following statements would most seriously weaken the above discussion?
- People suffering from Kay fever are the victims of the golden viper of Sindh.
- One among the 160 white cats had already showed symptoms of Kay fever prior to the experiment.
- The natural habitats of white cats does not contain any of the elements found in Salt X.
- The 160 white cats used in the experiment were kept isolated from each other.
- The scientists administered the injections being ignorant of the contents of the salt used.
(B). If anyone of the cat under experiment had symptoms of Kay fever then the conclusion is based on faulty
assumption. The best response is B.
Which of the following would most strengthen the argument above?
- Some of the elements in Salt X are extracted from the root of a certain poisonous herb of Hunza.
- The blood test of the victims of Kay fever revealed the presence of a toxic element in their blood,
normally found in salt X.
- All most all the white cats died within two days after the firstsymptom appeared.
- Normally the rate of Kay fever among white cats is less than 0.01%.
- Within two weeks, about 40% of the white cats, who were injected with placebo, also contracted Kay
(B). If the some element of the salt X is found in the blood of the victims, then it is directly related to
the Kay fever. The best response is B.
Wall chalking on public property should be outlawed. Radicals and fanatics have no right to use public
property whem promoting their unsavory views. The argument above is based on the idea:
- The general public has an interest in the free exchange of different political views.
- Every person who uses wall chalking for the promotion of ideas is a radical or fanatic.
- Radicals and fanatics prefer the use of public property while propagating their viewpoint.
- Legal constraints should be equal for all.
- Any promotional activity, which is against public interest, should be protected by law.
(B). The first sentence and the second sentence are connected in a way that fanatics and radicals refer to
the hidden object of the first sentence. The best response is B.
One's ability to adjust in environment successfully leads to happiness. War at a universal level
destroys the weaker people, who are the most unable to adjust to their environment. Thus, war at the
universal level puts weaklings out of their misery and allows more space for their predators to enjoy
life in a better manner. As those actions have to be performed, which maximize the level of happiness
of the greatest number, war at a universal level should take place.
The author's discussion would be greately weakened, if he agreed to which of the following?
- Technology could change the environment.
- War at the universal level would be an integral part of the environment.
- It is possible for the srtrong to survive without suppressing the weak.
- I only
- II only
- III only
- I and III only
- I, II and III only
(A). If technology can change the environment then the weaker people can be adjusted in the environment by
the use of technology. The best response is A.
What response would the author of the above discussion come up with, in the case of
objection that the weaklings far exceed strong people?
- He would respond with the statement that the person making the objection is a weakling.
- He would respond by saying that weakling will be miserable no matter what happens.
- He would respond with the statement that the strong would be frustrated if the weakling s are
- I only
- II only
- III only
- I and II only
- II and III only
(E). Point II is parallel to the statement of the author. Happiness is relative so if all weaklings are
destroyed then strong will have no comparison. The best response is E.
If Rubina was born in Balochistan, then she is a citizen of Pakistan. The statement above can be deduced
from which of the following statements?
- Every citizen of the Pakistan is resident either of one of the province or of one of the tribal area.
- Rubina was born either in Punjab or in Sindh.
- Some people born in Punjab are citizens of pakistan.
- Everyone born in pakistan is a citizen of pakistan.
- Rubina is a citizen either of pakistan or of any other country.
(E). The first part of the statement raises an issue, whether Rubina was born in Punjab or not. The best
response is E.