A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H are sitting in a straight line with equal gaps.

Conditions:

Question 1

What is the position of A with respect to H?

A) First to the right
B) Second to the right
C) Third to the right
D) Fourth to the right
E) None of these

Question 2

What is the position of F with respect to D?

A) Second to the right
B) Immediate right
C) Third to the left
D) Immediate left
E) None of these

Question 3

How many people are sitting to the left of B?

A) 0
B) 2
C) 1
D) 5
E) None of these

In July, 1947 a UFO crashed in Roswell, New Mexico, and the government tried to cover it up by saying that it was not a flying saucer but an experimental high-altitude surveillance balloon belonging to a classified program named, "Mogul." However, many proponents of the UFO theory claim that a crashed alien aircraft and bodies were recovered and that the military staged an elaborate cover-up because it was a threat to national security. Now, 64 years later, the debate is still going on and the government is no more cooperative about revealing the details than it was then.

Throughout the years, it has been shown time and again that information that was originally classified as confidential because it was a threat to national security, remained classified many decades later even though the crisis had long since passed and no threat remained. It has also been seen that anytime the government needed an excuse for anything, they only had to say that the information was classified.

In the United States we have run into this kind of obfuscation time and again so when President Obama announced to the world that we were going to have transparency in government, I was overjoyed. It meant that we were finally going to see what went on behind the scenes with Congress. It meant that we could turn on CSPAN and be privy to the wheeling and dealing of our legislators as they bargained for earmarks. This has had a so-so effect. Not much has changed. Enter WikiLeaks. At first I was thrilled at the prospect that what I've wanted for years was finally happening. Hundreds of thousands of confidential papers were being aired publicly. The bad guys were being excoriated in the press and the good guys were going to win the war of public opinion and maybe even bring about some good governments. But it isn't turning out that way. There are no clear-cut winners and losers and the head of WikiLeaks has had problems within his own ranks as well as being in trouble with the law of several countries, ours included. Understandably, the guys who have committed the worst offenses want him out of the way and everyone is taking guesses as to how long he will remain alive before someone kills him. The people in OpenLeaks is doing this a little differently; they are leaking the information to the media in bits and pieces and letting them take the blame for the leaks, hence, presumably, no one's life is on the line while this classified information reaches the public in a safer form of whistle-blowing.

I'm one of the people who has been in favor of what WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks are trying to do. I'm tired of all this secrecy and I do want it to stop. And if that was all there was to it, I'd hitch my wagon to it and ride out the storm of controversy.

But now it has taken a much more sinister turn. It is no longer about public officials misusing and abusing power and corrupt and ruthless governments toppling; now it has come to the doorstep of the people; it has come into the lives of all of us.

Hackers, in their rallying cry for transparency and no more secrets, have taken to hacking into the files of banks and financial institutions. Millions of depositors have had their personal information, their identities, and their lives stolen out from under them. People who stood behind the precepts of WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks are now their victims. It's still not clearly understood whether these hackers are part of WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks or are just hanging onto their coattails and operating on their own. It doesn't matter at this point whether they are independent agents or working in unison with WikiLeaks or OpenLeaks. All that matters is that these people who have had their personal information hijacked, had nothing to do with the secrecy in government nor the corruption that ensued as a result.

These hackers have taken it a step too far and it's time for them to reassess their objectives and find a better way to attain them without causing the rest of the world to come toppling down around them . . . Unless, of course, that is their intent.

Question 4

Which of the following can be said to be the author's opinion about Wikileaks?

A) The author is fully appreciative of Wikileaks as well as the methods used by them
B) The author is dismissive of the work done by Wikileaks
C) The author is appreciative of the work done by Wikileaks but thinks it could have used better methods so that it could have avoided landing itself in trouble
D) The author is angry with Wikileaks for the way it has exposed the Government
E) The author is not bothered in any way about Wikileaks

Question 5

Which of the following words is similar in meaning to the word “clear-cut”?

A) Precise
B) Ambiguous
C) Equivocal
D) Indefinite
E) Vague

Question 6

What is the reason that hackers have given for their hacking into the files of banks and financial institutions?

A) To bring down the world
B) To expose the secrecy and corruption of the Government
C) To create havoc in the lives of the general public
D) To mislead Wikileaks and OpenLeaks in their attempts to leak Government documents
E) To help the world rid of anti-social elements

Question 7

What does the author mean by the last sentence of the passage “Unless, of course, that is their intent”?

A) The hackers could be people who are not connected to Wikileaks or OpenLeaks in any way and operating on their own agenda to cause havoc
B) Wikileaks wants to create havoc in the world and hence employed the hackers
C) OpenLeaks wants to expose the Government’s corruption
D) OpenLeaks wants to create havoc in the world by hacking into the bank accounts of people
E) The employees of Wikileaks and OpenLeaks are being threatened by anti-social elements

📚 Serious about improving your CAT VARC score?

I run a free daily newsletter designed specifically for CAT aspirants who want consistent improvement in Verbal Ability & Reading Comprehension.

The newsletter includes:
• High-utility vocabulary, Idioms & phrases
• CAT-level Para Jumbles & Odd Sentence Out
• Reading Comprehension practice
• Fill in the blanks & verbal reasoning questions
• Practical explanations and usage examples

Perfect for students struggling with VARC, first-time CAT takers, and working professionals preparing alongside jobs.

Just 10 minutes of daily focused practice can create a huge difference over time.

Join Here: https://vocabwithease.beehiiv.com/

Question 8

Choose the option which is a SYNONYM for the given word: PARIAH

A) Outcast
B) Outsider
C) Impatient
D) Seer
E) Popular

Question 9

Scientists have been predicting the effects of burning coal and fossil fuels on the temperature of the planet for _____ 100 years.

A) above
B) around
C) across
D) over
E) before

Question 10

ParaSummary

America has become a confusing place for many people who are trying to decipher through the mess of politics that is inherent in a huge country that touts democracy. The Critical Review’s (No. 1 Vol. 19) article Ignorance as a Starting Point: From Modest Epistemology to Realistic Political Theory states that a new elitist political paternalism may be necessary to counter the general ignorance of the population.

Which of the following summarizes the main point of the paragraph?

A) The politics in America has become so confusing that brighter minds need to make decisions for the common people.

B) The democratic system in America is crumbling because of the ignorance of the people.

C) The fact that candidates and parties have become confusing, the average person has become confused as to what the issues really are.

D) Only the political elitist should make political decisions.

E) The politics in America has become so confusing that average minds need to make decisions for the common people.

Question 1,2,3

We have 8 people: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H

There are 8 positions in a straight line:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Step 1: H and G are at the extreme ends

So, H and G must be in positions 1 and 8.

From the final arrangement:

H _ _ _ _ _ _ G

Step 2: B sits third to the left of C

This means there must be exactly 2 people between B and C.

So possible pairs are:

B at 1, C at 4
B at 2, C at 5
B at 3, C at 6
B at 4, C at 7
B at 5, C at 8

Since H and G are at the ends, B and C cannot occupy both extremes freely.

Step 3: D sits next to the right of A

So the pair must be:

A D

They must sit together, with D immediately to the right of A.

Step 4: If A and B exchange positions, B would be third to the left of E

After A and B exchange, B comes to A’s original place.

So, in the original arrangement:

A is third to the left of E

That means:

A _ _ E

Step 5: If F and G exchange positions, F would be third to the right of D

After F and G exchange, F comes to G’s original place.

Since G is at an extreme end, F after exchange will be at G’s position.

So G’s position must be third to the right of D.

That means:

D _ _ G

So D must be 3 places to the left of G.

Step 6: Fix the arrangement

Since G is at the extreme right, G is in position 8.

Then D must be in position 5 because D _ _ G means:

Position 5 = D
Position 8 = G

So:

_ _ _ _ D _ _ G

Since D sits immediately to the right of A:

Position 4 = A
Position 5 = D

So:

_ _ _ A D _ _ G

Now A is third to the left of E:

A _ _ E

A is at position 4, so E is at position 7.

So:

_ _ A D E G

Now B sits third to the left of C.

The remaining positions are 1, 2, 3, 6.

Only possible placement is:

B at position 3 and C at position 6.

So:

_ _ B A D C E G

Now H and G are at extreme ends. Since G is already at position 8:

H is at position 1.

So:

H _ B A D C E G

Only F is left, so F is at position 2.

Final arrangement:

H F B A D C E G

Arrangement:

H F B A D C E G

A is third to the right of H.

Answer: C) Third to the right

Question 4

Answer: C) The author is appreciative of the work done by Wikileaks but thinks it could have used better methods so that it could have avoided landing itself in trouble

Why C is correct:
The author clearly supports the goal of transparency and states that he is in favor of what WikiLeaks and OpenLeaks are trying to do. However, he also criticizes the harmful consequences of hacking and believes a better approach should have been adopted.

Why A is wrong: The author does not fully support all the methods used by WikiLeaks.

Why B is wrong: The author is not dismissive of WikiLeaks' work.

Why D is wrong: The author supports exposing secrecy and corruption in government.

Why E is wrong: The author is deeply involved in the debate and clearly expresses strong opinions.

Question 5

Answer: A) Precise

Why A is correct:
"Clear-cut" means definite, unambiguous, and precise.

Why B is wrong: Ambiguous means unclear or open to multiple interpretations.

Why C is wrong: Equivocal means uncertain or having more than one meaning.

Why D is wrong: Indefinite means not clearly defined.

Why E is wrong: Vague means unclear, the opposite of clear-cut.

Question 6

Answer: B) To expose the secrecy and corruption of the Government

Why B is correct:
The hackers justify their actions using the idea of transparency and opposition to secrecy. Their stated motive is exposing hidden information and corruption.

Why A is wrong: The passage never suggests that bringing down the world is their stated objective.

Why C is wrong: Creating havoc is presented as a consequence, not their stated reason.

Why D is wrong: There is no mention of misleading WikiLeaks or OpenLeaks.

Why E is wrong: The passage does not mention removing anti-social elements as a goal.

Question 7

Answer: A) The hackers could be people who are not connected to Wikileaks or OpenLeaks in any way and operating on their own agenda to cause havoc

Why A is correct:
The author suggests that if hackers continue causing widespread damage while claiming to support transparency, perhaps their real objective is to create chaos rather than promote openness.

Why B is wrong: The author never claims WikiLeaks employed the hackers.

Why C is wrong: This does not explain the meaning of the concluding statement.

Why D is wrong: The statement refers to hackers, not OpenLeaks specifically.

Why E is wrong: The sentence has nothing to do with threats against employees.

Question 8

Answer: A) Outcast

Word Meaning:
Pariah = A person who is rejected, avoided, or despised by society; an outcast.

Question 9

D) over

Why D is correct:
The phrase "for over 100 years" is a standard English expression meaning more than 100 years. It fits naturally and grammatically in the sentence.

Why A is wrong: "Above 100 years" is not commonly used when referring to a duration of time.

Why B is wrong: "Around 100 years" means approximately 100 years, but the sentence requires the more natural expression used with a time period.

Why C is wrong: "Across 100 years" is used to indicate something happening throughout a period, not for expressing duration.

Why E is wrong: "Before 100 years" is grammatically incorrect in this context and does not convey the intended meaning.

Question 10

Answer: A) The politics in America has become so confusing that brighter minds need to make decisions for the common people.

Why A is correct:
The paragraph states that American politics has become confusing and that an "elitist political paternalism" may be necessary to counter the ignorance of the general population. This implies that more knowledgeable or informed people may need to guide decision-making, which is best captured by Option A.

Why B is wrong: The paragraph does not say democracy is crumbling. It only discusses confusion and ignorance among the population.

Why C is wrong: The paragraph mentions political confusion but its central idea is the proposed solution—elitist paternalism—not merely that people are confused.

Why D is wrong: The passage says elitist guidance may be necessary, not that only political elites should make all decisions.

Why E is wrong: This contradicts the passage. The author refers to more knowledgeable elites guiding decisions, not average minds.