Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow:
Knowledge is acquired when we succeed in fitting a new experience in the system of concepts based upon our old experiences. Understanding comes when we liberate ourselves from the old and so make possible a direct, unmediated contact with the new, the mystery, moment by moment, of our existence. The new is the given on every level of experience – given perceptions, given emotions and thoughts, given states of unstructured awareness, given relationships with things and persons. The old is our home-made system of ideas and word patterns. It is the stock of finished articles fabricated out of the given mystery by memory and analytical reasoning, by habit and automatic associations of accepted notions. Knowledge is primarily a knowledge of these finished articles. Understanding is primarily direct awareness of the raw material. Knowledge is always in terms of concepts and can be passed on by means of words or other symbols. Understanding is not conceptual and therefore cannot be passed on. It is an immediate experience, and immediate experience can only be talked about (very inadequately), never shared. Nobody can actually feel another’s pain or grief, another’s love or joy, or hunger. And similarly, nobody can experience another’s understanding of a given event or situation. There can, of course, be knowledge of such an understanding, and this knowledge may be passed on in speech or writing, or by means of other symbols. Such communicable knowledge is useful as a reminder that there have been specific understandings in the past, and that understanding is at all times possible. But we must always remember that knowledge of understanding is not the same thing as the understanding which is the raw material of that knowledge. It is as different from understanding as the doctor’s prescription for penicillin is different from penicillin.

1. How is knowledge different from understanding?
Knowledge is defined as fitting of the new experience in the system of concepts which are based upon old experiences. It is in terms of concepts transferable through words or symbols. While Understanding comes into play when one liberates himself from the old system and adapt to the new system of concepts. It is a conceptual and cannot be passed on.

2. Explain why understanding cannot be passed on.
Understanding is not conceptual – like knowledge – and therefore cannot be passed on. It is an immediate experience, and an immediate experience can only be talked about but never shared as no one can actually feel another’s pain, love and struggles. Also, no one can experience another’s understanding of a given event or situation.

3. Is the knowledge of understanding possible? If it is, how may it be passed on?
Yes, the knowledge of understanding is possible and this knowledge of understanding can be passed on by mean of speech, writing, or by means of other symbols. This communication plays a role in understanding that there has been specific understanding about some experience in the past and it has been present at all times.

4. How does the author explain that knowledge of understanding is not the same thing as the understanding?
The author explains that knowledge of understanding is not the same thing as the understanding which is the raw material of that knowledge. In simple words, it means that knowledge of understanding is the data about some experience or any other thing, while one cannot understand that knowledge unless one has not the experienced those events and those struggles.

5. How far do you agree with the author in his definitions of knowledge and understanding? Give reasons for your answer.
The author rightly defined the knowledge and understanding. Knowledge is based upon old experiences which one can keep abreast himself by studying those concepts while on the other hand one cannot understand these old concepts unless he goes through that experience, and also, he keeps on updating his understanding on particular experience as the new concepts replace the old ones.

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow. Use your own language.
Human beings are afraid of death just as children feel afraid of darkness. The fear of darkness of kids increased by the stories of the heard ghosts and thieves. In the same way, the fear of human being is increased by the stories which they heard about the agony of dying man. If a human being regards death as a kind of punishment for his sins he has committed and if he looks upon death as a means of making an entry into another world, he is certainly taking a religious and sacred view of death. But if a human being looks upon death as a law of nature and then feels afraid of it, his attitude is of cowardice. However, even in religious meditations about death there is sometimes a mixture of folly and superstition. Monks have written books in which they have described the painful experiences which they underwent by inflicting physical tortures upon themselves as a form of self-purification. Thus, one may think that the pains of death must be indescribably agonizing. Such books and such thoughts increase a man's fear of death.
Seneca, the Roman Philosopher is of the view that the circumstances and ceremonies of death frighten people more than death itself would do. A dyeing man is heard uttering groans; his body is seen undergoing convulsions; his face appears to be absolutely bloodless and pale; at his death his friends begin to weep, and his relations put on mourning clothes; various rituals are performed. All such facts make death appear more horrible than it would be otherwise.

1. What is the difference between human beings' fear of death and children's fear of darkness?
The difference between human beings’ fear of death and children’s fear of darkness is that children’s fear of darkness is based on the stories of ghosts and thieves, while human beings’ fear of death is based on the stories of the agony of the dying man.

2. What is a religious and sacred view of death?
Regarding death as a kind of punishment for one’s committed sin and seeing death as beginning of new life and not as an end, are religious and sacred view of death.

3. What are the painful experiences described by the Monks in their books?
Monks, in their books, have written about the painful experience of physical torture which they inflected upon themselves. The purpose of this torture is to purify oneself. The experience of unbearable pain of squeezing and pressing increases Man’s fear of death.

4. What are the views of Seneca about death?
Seneca, a Roman Philosopher, believed that the circumstances and ceremonies of death frighten people more than death itself would do.

5. What are the facts that make death appear more horrible than it would be otherwise?
The groaning of dying man, the physical convulsions of his body, and physical changes on his face as well as the rituals, and crying and mourning by his loved ones are the facts that make death appear more horrible than it would be otherwise.

Read the following passage and answer the question that follow. Use your own language.
The civilization of China, as everyone knows, is based upon the teaching of Confucius, who flourished five hundred years before Christ. Like the Greeks and Romans, he did not think of human society as naturally progressive; on the contrary, he believed that in remote antiquity rulers had been wise, and the people had been happy to a degree which the degenerate present could admire but hardly achieve. This, of course, was a delusion. But the practical result was that Confucius, like other teachers of antiquity, aimed at creating a stable society, maintaining a certain level of excellence, but not always striving after new successes. In this he was more successful than any other men who ever lived. His personality has been stamped on Chinese civilization from his day to our own. During his lifetime the Chinese occupied only a small part of present-day China and were divided into a number of warring states. During the next three hundred years they established themselves throughout what is now China proper and founded an empire exceeding in territory and population any other that existed until the last fifty years. In spite of barbarian invasions, Mongol and Manchu dynasties, and occasional longer or shorter periods of chaos and civil war, the Confucian system survived, bringing with it art and literature and a civilized way of life. A system which has had this extra ordinary power of survival must have great merits, and certainly deserves our respect and consideration. It is not a religion, as we understand the word, because it is not associated with the supernatural or with mystical beliefs. It is a purely ethical system, but its ethics, unlike those of Christianity, are not too exalted for ordinary men to practice. In essence, what Confucius teaches is something very like the old-fashioned ideal of a ‘gentleman’ as it existed in the eighteenth century. One of his sayings will illustrate this: 'The true gentleman is never contentious ... he courteously salutes his opponents before taking up his position ... so that even when competing he remains a true gentleman'.

1. Why do you think the author calls Confucius' belief about the progress of human society as a delusion?
The author believes Confucius’ belief as delusions because of his estimation of human society being non-progressive naturally, and his conviction of modern man’s inability to achieve the level of happiness enjoyed by those in antiquity. Another reason about the author’s belief can be Confucius claim about the ancient rulers being wise.

2. How did Confucius' though affect China to develop into a stable and 'Proper' China?
Confucius thoughts affected China to develop into a stable country by aiming for the formation of a stable society. A certain level of excellence was always called for in Confucius teachings, and this helped China survive through adverse times to emerge into a ‘Proper’ China.

3. Why does the author think that Confucian system deserves respect and admiration?
The author thinks that Confucian system deserves respect and admiration because not only has it survived various invasions and wars, but has also nurtured a civilized way of life replete with art and literature. The author is of the view that a system with such incredible power of survival is never without inherent merits, and deserves reverence.

4. Why does the author call Confucian system a purely ethical system and not a religion?
The author calls Confucian system an ethical system and not a religion because it does not compromise the defining features of organized religion. It does not associate itself with any mythological and supernatural beliefs, and rather focuses only on the ethical aspects.

5. Briefly argue whether you agree or disagree to Confucius' ideal of a gentleman?
Ideal of a gentleman, presented by Confucius, seems to be someone like a chivalrous person. He always controls his emotions and never let his guard down even when competing with his rival. Naturally, a person has both light and dark triad of personality, but the one, who can overcome the latter, really deserves to be called a gentleman. The agreement with the Confucius’ ideal of a gentleman also stems from the fact that this ideal helped China to be more stable, peaceful, and civilized and prevented her from striving after new successes.

Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow. Use your own language.
In the height of the Enlightenment, men influenced by the new political theories of the era launched two of the largest revolutions in history. These two conflicts, on two separate continents, were both initially successful in forming new forms of government. And yet, the two conflicts, though merely a decade apart, had radically different conclusions. How do two wars inspired by more or less the same ideals end up so completely different? Why was the American Revolution largely a success and the French Revolution largely a failure? Historians have pointed to myriad reasons—far too various to be listed here. However, the most frequently cited are worth mentioning. For one, the American Revolution was far removed from the Old World; that is, since it was on a different continent, other European nations did not attempt to interfere with it.
However, in the French Revolution, there were immediate cries for war from neighboring nations. Early on, for instance, the ousted king attempted to flee to neighboring Austria and the army waiting there. The newly formed French Republic also warred with Belgium, and a conflict with Britain loomed. Thus, the French had the burden not only of winning a revolution but also defending it from outside. The Americans simply had to win a revolution.
Secondly, the American Revolution seemed to have a better chance for success from the get-go, due to the fact that Americans already saw themselves as something other than British subjects. Thus, there was already a uniquely American character, so, there was not as loud a cry to preserve the British way of life. In France, several thousands of people still supported the king, largely because the king was seen as an essential part of French life. And when the king was first ousted and then killed, some believed that character itself was corrupted. Remember, the Americans did not oust a king or kill him—they merely separated from him.
Finally, there is a general agreement that the French were not as unified as the Americans, who, for the most part, put aside their political differences until after they had already formed a new nation. The French, despite their Tennis Court Oath, could not do so. Infighting led to inner turmoil, civil war, and eventually the Reign of Terror, in which political dissidents were executed in large numbers. Additionally, the French people themselves were not unified. The nation had so much stratification that it was impossible to unite all of them—the workers, the peasants, the middle-class, the nobles, the clergy—into one cause. And the attempts to do so under a new religion, the Divine Cult of Reason, certainly did not help. The Americans, remember, never attempted to change the society at large; rather, they merely attempted to change the government.

1. Why and how did the Reign of Terror happen?
After the French Revolution, the social strata were so diverse, so it was difficult to unite people under one cause. This polarization led to civil unrest and ultimately to the reign of terror – in which political dissidents were executed in large numbers.

2. In what ways does the author suggest that the American Revolution was easier to complete than the French Revolution?
The American Revolution was easier to complete than the French Revolution was due to many factors, the major one was that American Revolution was happened on a different continent and no European nation had attempted to interfere with it. Secondly, Americans saw themselves something other than British subjects. They have no interest in preserving their British way of life. Most importantly, they were not polarized in their objective as they do not want to kill a king but they only want to separate themselves for him.

3. Of the challenges mentioned facing the French revolutionaries, which do you thing had the greatest impact on their inability to complete a successful revolution? Why?
The author suggests that the greatest challenge facing the French revolutionaries was the inability to unite all segments of society. The nation had so much stratification that it was impossible to unite all of them—the workers, the peasants, the middle-class, the nobles, the clergy—into one cause. Additionally, the attempts to do so under a new religion, the Divine Cult of Reason, certainly did not help.

4. Of the strengths mentioned aiding the American revolutionaries, which do you thing had the greatest impact on their inability to complete a successful revolution? Why?
The author suggests that the greatest strength aiding the American revolutionaries was their unity and their ability to put aside their political differences until after they had already formed a new nation. Additionally, the fact that they did not attempt to change society at large and only attempted to change the government also helped their cause.

Read the following text carefully and answer the questions below:
Experience has quite definitely shown that some reasons for holding a belief are much more likely to be justified by the event than others. It might naturally be supposed, for instance, that the best of all reasons for a belief was a strong conviction of certainty accompanying the belief. Experience, however, shows that this is not so, and that as a matter of fact, conviction by itself is more likely to mislead than it is to guarantee truth. On the other hand, lack of assurance and persistent hesitation to come to any belief whatever are an equally poor guarantee that the few beliefs which are arrived at are sound. Experience also shows that assertion, however long continued, although it is unfortunately with many people an effective enough means of inducing belief, is not an any way a ground for holding it.
The method which has proved effective, as a matter of actual fact, in providing of firm foundation for belief wherever it has been capable of application, is what is usually called the scientific method. I firmly believe that the scientific method, although slow and never claiming to lead to complete truth, is the only method which in the long run will give satisfactory foundations for beliefs. It consists in demanding facts as the only basis for conclusions, and inconsistently and continuously testing any conclusions which may have been reached, against the test of new facts and, wherever possible, by the crucial test of experiment. It consists also in full publication of the evidence on which conclusions are based, so that other workers may be assisted in new researchers, or enabled to develop their own interpretations and arrive at possibly very different conclusions.
There are, however, all sorts of occasions on which the scientific method is not applicable. That method involves slow testing, frequent suspension of judgment, restricted conclusions. The exigencies of everyday life, on the other hand, often make it necessary to act on a hasty balancing of admittedly incomplete evidence, to take immediate action, and to draw conclusions in advance of evidence. It is also true that such action will always be necessary, and necessary in respect of ever larger issues; and this inspite of the fact that one of the most important trends of civilization is to remove sphere after sphere of life out of the domain of such intuitive judgment into the domain of rigid calculation based on science. It is here that belief pays its most important role. When we cannot be certain, we must proceed in part by faith-faith not only in the validity of our own capacity of making judgments, but also in the existence of certain other realities, pre-eminently moral and spiritual realities. It has been said that faith consists in acting always on the nobler hypothesis; and though this definition is a trifle rhetorical, it embodies a seed of real truth.

1. Give the meaning of the underlined phrases as they are used in the passage.

• justified by the event – means that certain reasons for holding a belief are more likely to be proven true by the outcome or event.
• an effective enough means of inducing belief – refers to the idea that simply asserting a belief for a long period of time does not necessarily make it true.
• trends of civilization – refers to the tendency of society to move away from relying on intuition and towards using scientific methods to make decisions.
• the nobler hypothesis – refers to the idea of choosing the best possible explanation or belief, even if it is uncertain.

2. What justification does the author claim for his belief in the scientific method?
The author gives the justification for his belief in scientific method is that scientific method only makes conclusions by basing them on some solid facts, which can be repeatedly tested by experiments at any time. Scientific method also guides other researchers – assist them in developing their own interpretation and arriving at very different conclusions – when they refer the publications of previous studies.

3. Do you gather from the passage that conclusions reached by the scientific method should we considered final? Give reasons for your answer.
The conclusions reached by scientific method should not be considered final because it is the beauty of scientific method that it never claims complete truth. It is always subjected to testing and experimentation and can be modified based on new findings and interpretations.

4. In what circumstances, according to the author, is it necessary to abandon the scientific method?
As the scientific method involves slow testing, repeated suspension of judgement and restricted conclusions it is better to abandon scientific method in the intricacies of the daily life where the immediate action is the utmost requirement of the time.

5. How does the basis of “intuitive judgment” differ from the scientific decision?
The intuitive judgement differs from the scientific method because intuitive judgement is based on faith rather than on experiments and conclusions. Faith helps in decision making when one is unsure while scientific decision helps when one wanted to take a pragmatic decision by consulting past studies and findings.

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
The New Year is the time for resolution. Mentally, at least most of us could compile formidable lists of 'do's and `don'ts'. The same old favorites recur year in and year out with the children, do a thousand and one job about the house, be nice to people we don't like, drive carefully, and take the dog for a walk every day. Past experience has taught us that certain accomplishments are beyond attainment. If we remain deep rooted liars, it is only because we have so often experienced the frustration that results from failure.
Most of us fail in our efforts at self-improvement because our schemes are too ambitious and we never have time to carry them out. We also make the fundamental error of announcing our resolution to everybody so that we look even more foolish when we slip back into our bad old ways. Aware of these pitfalls, this year I attempted to keep my resolution to myself. I limited myself to two modest ambitions, to do physical exercise every morning and to read more in the evening. An overnight party on New Year's Eve provided as with a good excuse for not carrying out either of these new resolutions on the first day of the year, but on the second, I applied myself assiduously to the task.
The daily exercise lasted only eleven minutes and I proposed to do them early in the morning before anyone had got up. The self-discipline required to drag myself out of bed eleven minutes earlier than usual was considerable. Nevertheless, I managed to creep down into the living room for two days before anyone found me out. After jumping about in the carpet and twisted the human frame into uncomfortable positions. I sat down at the breakfast table in an exhausted condition. It was this that betrayed me. The next morning the whole family trooped into watch the performance. That was really unsettling but I fended off the taunts and jibes of the family good humoredly and soon everybody got used to the idea. However, my enthusiasm waned, the time I spent at exercises gradually diminished. Little by little the eleven minutes fell to zero. By January 10th I was back to where I had started from. I argued that if I spent less time exhausting myself at exercises in the morning. I would keep my mind fresh for reading when I got home from work. Resisting the hypnotizing effect of television, I sat in my room for a few evenings with my eyes glued to a book. One night, however, feeling cold and lonely. I went downstairs and sat in front of the television pretending to read. That proved to be my undoing, for I soon got back to the old bad habit of dozing off in front of the screen. I still haven't given up my resolution to do more reading. In fact, I have just bought a book entitled 'How to Read a Thousand Words a Minute'. Perhaps it will solve my problem, but I just have not had time to read it.

1. Why most of us fail in our efforts for self-improvement?
Most people fail in their efforts at self-improvement because their plans are either too ambitious (set unrealistic goals for themselves) or they don’t have enough time to take feasible actions in order to accomplish their goals.

2. Why is it a basic mistake to announce a resolution to everybody?
This is fundamental error that one can make. Usually, resolution is only known to person who makes it but by announcing it to everybody one opens the path of self-humiliation, when he fails to accomplish or deviate from the stated goals.

3. Why did the writer not carry out his resolution on New Year's Day?
Owing to the overnight party which writer attended, provided him with a good excuse for not carrying out either of his two resolutions on the first day of the year.

4. Find out the words in the above passage which convey the similar meaning to the following:

• Intimidating - Formidable
• Peril - Pitfall
• Dwindle - Waned, Diminish
• Repel - Fend(ed) off
• Barb - Taunts and jibes

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
Education ought to teach us how to be in love and what to be in love with. The great things of history have been done by the great lovers, by the saints and men of science, and artists, and the problem of civilization is to give every man a chance of being a saint, a man of science, or an artist. But this problem cannot be attempted, much less solved, unless men desire to be saints, men of science, and artists. And if they are to desire that continuously and consciously, they must be taught what it means to be these. We think of the man of science or the artist, if not of the saint, as a being with peculiar gifts, not as one who exercises, more precisely and incessantly perhaps, activities which we all ought to exercise. It is a commonplace now that art has ebbed away out of our ordinary life, out of all the things which we use, and that it is practiced no longer by workmen but only by a few painters and sculptors. That has happened because we no longer recognize the aesthetic activity of the spirit, so common to all men. We do not know that when a man makes anything he ought to make it beautiful for the sake of doing so, and that when a man buys anything he ought to demand beauty in it, for the sake of beauty. We think of beauty if we think of it at all as a mere source of pleasure, and therefore it means to us ornament, added to things for which we can pay extra as we choose. But beauty is not an ornament to life, or to the things made by man. It is an essential part of both. The aesthetic activity, when it reveals itself in things made by men, reveals itself in design, just as it reveals itself in the design of all natural things. It shapes objects as the moral activity shapes actions, and we ought to recognize it in the objects and value it, as we recognize and value moral activity in actions. And as actions empty of the moral activity are distasteful to us, so should objects be that are empty of the aesthetic activity. But this is not so with most of us. We do not value it; do not even recognize it, or the lack of it, in the work of others. The artist, of whatever kind, is a man so much aware of the beauty of the universe that he must impart the same beauty to whatever he makes. He has exercised his aesthetic activity in the discovery of the beauty in the universe before he exercises it in imparting beauty to that which he makes. He has seen things in that relation in his own work, whatever it may be. And just as he sees that relation for its own sake, so he produces it for its own sake and satisfies the desire of his spirit in doing so. And we should value his work; we should desire that relation in all things made by man, if we too have the habit of seeing that relation in the universe, and if we knew that, when we see it, we are exercising an activity of the spirit and satisfying a spiritual desire. And we should also know that work without beauty means unsatisfied spiritual desire in the worker; that it is waste of life and common evil and danger, like thought without truth, or action without righteousness.

1. What has been lamented in the text?
The text laments the fact that art has ebbed away from ordinary life, and is no longer practiced by workmen but only by a few painters and sculptors. It is suggested that this has happened because men no longer recognize the aesthetic activity of the spirit.

2. What is the difference between ordinary man and an artist?
The main difference is that an artist is gifted with talent of recognition and creation of something of aesthetic value which satisfies his spiritual desire. While, on the other hand, the common man is devoid of this talent of recognition and creation, thus, he cannot satisfy his spirit.

3. How can we make our lives beautiful and charming?
The text suggests that recognizing and valuing the aesthetic activity of the spirit, and demanding beauty in the things we buy and make, can make our lives more beautiful and charming.

4. What does the writer actually mean when he says, “Beauty is not an ornament to life”?
Beauty is merely taken as a source of pleasure or as an add-on but, in reality, beauty is not an ornament to life. It is the aesthetic activity of the spirit which shapes objects as morality shapes actions.

5. Do art and beauty affect our practical life and morals? Justify whether you agree or disagree.
Art and beauty affect the practical lives and morals of men because they guide men to see the aesthetic beauty of the universe and objects, and in this way, they help them exercise the activity of their spirits in order to satisfy their spiritual desires.

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
The third great defect of our civilization is that it does not know what to do with its knowledge. Science has given us powers fit for the gods, yet we use them like small children. For example, we do not know how to manage our machines. Machines were made to be man’s servants; yet he has grown so dependent on them that they are in a fair way to become his master. Already most men spend most of their lives looking after and waiting upon machines. And the machines are very stern masters. They must be fed with coal, and given petrol to drink, and oil to wash with, and they must be kept at the right temperature. And if they do not get their meals when they expect them, they grow sulky and refuse to work, or burst with rage, and blow up, and spread ruin and destruction all around them. So, we have to wait upon them very attentively and do all that we can to keep them in a good temper. Already we find it difficult either to work or play without the machines, and a time may come when they will rule us altogether, just as we rule the animals.
And this brings me to the point at which I asked, “What do we do with all the time which the machines have saved for us, and the new energy they have given us?” On the whole, it must be admitted, we do very little. For the most part we use our time and energy to make more and better machines; but more and better machines will only give us still more time and still more energy, and what are we to do with them? The answer, I think, is that we should try to become mere civilized. For the machines themselves, and the power which the machines have given us, are not civilization but aids to civilization. But you will remember that we agreed at the beginning that being civilized meant making and linking beautiful things. Thinking freely and living rightly and maintaining justice equally between man and man. Man has a better chance today to do these things than he ever had before; he has more time, more energy, less to fear and less to fight against. If he will give his time and energy which his machines have won for him to making more beautiful things, to finding out more and more about the universe, to removing the causes of quarrels between nations, to discovering how to prevent poverty, then I think our civilization would undoubtedly be the greater, as it would be the most lasting that there has ever been.

1. Instead of making machines our servants the author says they have become our masters. In what sense has this come about?
The author states that machines were meant to be servants to humans, but instead humans have become dependent on them and are now serving the machines by constantly maintaining and looking after them. The machines have also become strict masters as they need to be fed and cared for constantly, and if they don't get their needs met they can become malfunctional.

2. The use of machines has brought us more leisure and more energy. But the author says that this has been a curse rather than a blessing. Why?
The author argues that the increased leisure and energy brought by machines has not been a blessing because people have not used it to improve their lives or the world around them. Instead, people are primarily using the extra time and energy to make more machines, creating a cycle of dependency.

3. What exactly is the meaning of ‘civilization’? Do you agree with the author’s views?
A civilization is any complex society characterized by the development of a state, social stratification, urbanization, and symbolic systems of communication beyond natural spoken language. I agree with the author's assertion that civilization entails the creation and fusion of lovely things. Some other characteristics of civilization include ensuring equality of justice between mankind and safeguarding one's freedom of thought and expression.

4. ‘Making more beautiful things’ – what does this expression mean? Make a list of the beautiful things that you would like to make and how you would make them.
The expression "making more beautiful things" means creating things that can be beneficial for mankind as a whole and that can also help him to become more civilized. The list of beautiful things that I would like to make by working on my creative expression would include art and literature.

5. Mention some plans you may have to prevent poverty in the world. Who would receive your most particular attention, and why?
Equitable distribution of wealth, ending indirect taxes, raise in pay with respect to inflation, and most importantly taxing the rich in accordance with their wealth are some of the plans through which poverty can be eliminated in the world. The recipient of this particular attention will be the incredibly rich who are not paying their due share in taxes, legislatures of the different countries to end indirect taxes and make laws for taxing the rich, and the researchers to increase productivity by increasing crop yield.

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
When I returned to the common the sun was setting. The crowd about the pit had increased, and stood out black against the lemon yellow of the sky-a couple of hundred people, perhaps. There were raised voices, and some sort of struggle appeared to be going on about the pit. Strange imaginings passed through my mind. As I drew nearer I heard Stent's voice: "Keep back! Keep back!" A boy came running towards me. "It's movin'," he said to me as he passed; "it’s screwin' and screwin' out. I don't like it. I'm goin' home, I am." I went on to the crowd. There were really, I should think, two or three hundred people elbowing and jostling one another, the one or two ladies there being by no means the least active. "He's fallen in the pit!" cried someone. "Keep back!" said several. The crowd swayed a little, and I elbowed my way through. Everyone seemed greatly excited. I heard a peculiar humming sound from the pit. "I say!" said Ogilvy. "Help keep these idiots back. We don't know what's in the confounded thing, you know!" I saw a young man, a shop assistant in Woking I believe he was, standing on the cylinder and trying to scramble out of the hole again. The crowd had pushed him in. The end of the cylinder was being screwed out from within. Nearly two feet of shining screw projected. Somebody blundered against me, and I narrowly missed being pitched onto the top of the screw. I turned, and as I did so the screw must have come out, for the lid of the cylinder fell upon the gravel with a ringing concussion. I stuck my elbow into the person behind me, and turned my head towards the Thing again. For a moment that circular cavity seemed perfectly black. I had the sunset in my eyes. I think everyone expected to see a man emerge-possibly something a little unlike us terrestrial men, but in all essentials a man. I know I did. But, looking, I presently saw something stirring within the shadow: greyish billowy movements, one above another, and then two luminous
disks-like eyes. Then something resembling a little grey snake, about the thickness of a walking stick, coiled up out of the writhing middle, and wriggled in the air towards me-and then another. A sudden chill came over me. There was a loud shriek from a woman behind. I half turned, keeping my eyes fixed upon the cylinder still, from which other tentacles were now projecting, and began pushing my way back from the edge of the pit. I saw astonishment giving place to horror on the faces of the people about me. I heard inarticulate exclamations on all sides. There was a general movement backwards. I saw the shopman struggling still on the edge of the pit. I found myself alone, and saw the people on the other side of the pit running off, Stent among them. I looked again at the cylinder and ungovernable terror gripped me. I stood petrified and staring. A big greyish rounded bulk, the size, perhaps, of a bear, was rising slowly and painfully out of the cylinder. As it bulged up and caught the light, it glistened like wet leather. Two large dark-coloured eyes were regarding me steadfastly. The mass that framed them, the head of the thing, was rounded, and had, one might say, a face. There was a mouth under the eyes, the lipless brim of which quivered and panted, and dropped saliva. The whole creature heaved and pulsated convulsively. A lank tentacular appendage gripped the edge of the cylinder, another swayed in the air. Those who have never seen a living Martian can scarcely imagine the strange horror of its appearance. The peculiar V-shaped mouth with its pointed upper lip, the absence of brow ridges, the absence of a chin beneath the wedge like lower lip, the incessant quivering of this mouth, the Gorgon groups of tentacles, the tumultuous breathing of the lungs in a strange atmosphere, the evident heaviness and painfulness of movement due to the greater gravitational energy of the earthabove all, the extraordinary intensity of the immense eyes-were at once vital, intense, inhuman, crippled and monstrous. There was something fungoid in the oily brown skin, something in the clumsy deliberation of the tedious movements unspeakably nasty. Even at this first encounter, this first glimpse, I was overcome with disgust and dread.

1. What leads us to believe that this passage is from a science fiction story?
The narration and nature of the passage, as well as its atmosphere, indicate that the passage is from a science fiction story. The imagined scenery of the passage, the large pit, and the physical characteristics of the creature named "The Thing" by the narrator, without a doubt fulfil the criteria of being a science fiction story.

2. How was the crowd behaving?
The crowd is described as excited and jostling one another, with raised voices and some sort of struggle taking place.

3. Why did the mood of the crowd alter?
The mood of the crowd alters when they realize that the creature emerging from the cylinder is not human, but instead a strange and terrifying being.

4. What was the narrator’s initial reaction to the “Thing”?
When he saw the thing, a sudden chill came over the narrator, and he began pushing his way back from the edge of the pit. When he looked at the cylinder, an uncontrollable terror came over him, and he stood still and was petrified.

5. Why did the writer feel disgusted?
The writer felt disgusted as he observed his slow, lethargic, nasty movement and also when he found something slimy that had a close resemblance to the fungus on the oily brown skin of the creature.

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given at the end.
Globalization is viewed by its proponents as a process of cementing economic, cultural and political bonds between peoples of different countries of the world. One may regard it as a process by which they are welded into a single world society, to be termed as global society. It means internationalization of production and labour leading to integration of economies of developing and developed countries into global economy. To quote Rosaberth M.Kanter, “The world is becoming a global shopping mall in which ideas and products are available everywhere at the same time.” Globalization is a natural outcome of computer networking and electronic mass communication. Information technology has made it possible for nations of the world to contact one another beyond their national borders. Besides, globalization is also promoted through the growth and proliferation of multinational companies and corporations that operate as transporter networks. Anyhow the flow of capital technology and labour across the borders of countries has accentuated the process of globalization. Deregulation, liberalism and privatization being assiduously pursued in the developing countries are some other manifestations of globalization. These countries are opening their economies to follow these trends. The size of the public sector is shrinking for the private sector to assume an increasingly important role in the economic development of the Third World countries. The downsizing of the public sector is in line with the spirit of market economy. This is suggested as a measure to cover up their fiscal deficit.

1. Define globalization.
Globalization is a process of cementing economic, cultural and political bonds between peoples of different countries of the world forming a single world society. In other words, it is internationalization of production and labour leading to integration of economies of developing and developed countries into global economy.

2. What is electronic mass communication?
Electronic mass communication refers to the use of technology, such as computers and the internet, to communicate and exchange information between different nations and cultures.

3. What does the term Third World denote?
The term Third World denotes the developing countries who are pursuing the trend of globalization through privatization and liberalism to assume an increasingly important role for their economic development.

4. What is privatization?
Privatization refers to the transfer of ownership and control of a state-owned enterprise or asset from the government to the private sector.

5. Explain ‘liberalism’ in the above context.
Liberalism in the context of the passage refers to the economic policy of deregulation, which involves removing or reducing government regulations and restrictions in order to promote free market competition and private enterprise. It also refers to the downsizing of the public sector and the increasing role of the private sector in the economic development of Third World countries.