Time Left - 16:00 mins

RBI Asst./Sbi Clerk Main Exam 2020: Quiz 16 ( 21.03.2020)

Attempt now to get your rank among 1026 students!

Question 1

Direction: Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

That the doctrines connected with the name of Mr Darwin are altering our principles has become a sort of commonplace thing to say. And moral principles are said to share in this general transformation. Now, to pass by other subjects, I do not see why Darwinism need change our ultimate moral ideas. It was not to modify our conception of the end, either for the community, or the individual, unless we have been holding views, which long before Darwin were out of date. As to the principles of ethics I perceive, in short, no sign of revolution.
Darwinism has indeed helped many to truer conception of the end, but I cannot admit that it has either originated or modified that conception.
And yet in ethics Darwinism after all perhaps be revolutionary, it may lead not to another view about the end, but to a different way of regarding the relatively importance of the means. For in the ordinary moral creed those means seem estimated on no rational principle. Our creed appears rather to be an irrational mixture of jarring elements. We have the moral code of Christianity, accepted in part; rejected practically by all save a few fanatics. But we do not realise how in its very principle the Christian ideals is false. And when we reject this code for another and in part a sounder morality, we are in the same condition of blindness and of practical confusion. It is here that Darwinism, with all the tendencies we may group under that name, seems destined to intervene. It will make itself felt, I believe, more and more effectually. It may force on us in some points a correction of our moral views, and a return to a non-Christian and perhaps a Hellenic ideal. I propose to illustrate here these general statements by some remarks on Punishment.
Darwinism, I have said, has not even modified our ideas of the Chief Good. We may take that as — the welfare of the community realised in its members. There is, of course, a question as to meaning to be given to welfare. We may identify that with mere pleasure, or gain with mere system, or may rather view both as inseparable aspects of perfection and individuality. And the extent and nature of the community would once more be a subject for some discussion. But we are forced to enter on these controversies here. We may leave welfare undefined, and for present purpose need not distinguish the community from the state. The welfare of this whole exists, of course, nowhere outside the individuals, and the individuals again have rights and duties only as members in the whole. This is the revived Hellenism — or we may call it in the organic view of things — urged by German Idealism early in the present century.
What is most probably the author's opinion of the existing moral principles of the people?

Question 2

Direction: Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

That the doctrines connected with the name of Mr Darwin are altering our principles has become a sort of commonplace thing to say. And moral principles are said to share in this general transformation. Now, to pass by other subjects, I do not see why Darwinism need change our ultimate moral ideas. It was not to modify our conception of the end, either for the community, or the individual, unless we have been holding views, which long before Darwin were out of date. As to the principles of ethics I perceive, in short, no sign of revolution.
Darwinism has indeed helped many to truer conception of the end, but I cannot admit that it has either originated or modified that conception.
And yet in ethics Darwinism after all perhaps be revolutionary, it may lead not to another view about the end, but to a different way of regarding the relatively importance of the means. For in the ordinary moral creed those means seem estimated on no rational principle. Our creed appears rather to be an irrational mixture of jarring elements. We have the moral code of Christianity, accepted in part; rejected practically by all save a few fanatics. But we do not realise how in its very principle the Christian ideals is false. And when we reject this code for another and in part a sounder morality, we are in the same condition of blindness and of practical confusion. It is here that Darwinism, with all the tendencies we may group under that name, seems destined to intervene. It will make itself felt, I believe, more and more effectually. It may force on us in some points a correction of our moral views, and a return to a non-Christian and perhaps a Hellenic ideal. I propose to illustrate here these general statements by some remarks on Punishment.
Darwinism, I have said, has not even modified our ideas of the Chief Good. We may take that as — the welfare of the community realised in its members. There is, of course, a question as to meaning to be given to welfare. We may identify that with mere pleasure, or gain with mere system, or may rather view both as inseparable aspects of perfection and individuality. And the extent and nature of the community would once more be a subject for some discussion. But we are forced to enter on these controversies here. We may leave welfare undefined, and for present purpose need not distinguish the community from the state. The welfare of this whole exists, of course, nowhere outside the individuals, and the individuals again have rights and duties only as members in the whole. This is the revived Hellenism — or we may call it in the organic view of things — urged by German Idealism early in the present century.

According to the author, the doctrines of Mr Darwin _______.

Question 3

Direction: Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

That the doctrines connected with the name of Mr Darwin are altering our principles has become a sort of commonplace thing to say. And moral principles are said to share in this general transformation. Now, to pass by other subjects, I do not see why Darwinism need change our ultimate moral ideas. It was not to modify our conception of the end, either for the community, or the individual, unless we have been holding views, which long before Darwin were out of date. As to the principles of ethics I perceive, in short, no sign of revolution.
Darwinism has indeed helped many to truer conception of the end, but I cannot admit that it has either originated or modified that conception.
And yet in ethics Darwinism after all perhaps be revolutionary, it may lead not to another view about the end, but to a different way of regarding the relatively importance of the means. For in the ordinary moral creed those means seem estimated on no rational principle. Our creed appears rather to be an irrational mixture of jarring elements. We have the moral code of Christianity, accepted in part; rejected practically by all save a few fanatics. But we do not realise how in its very principle the Christian ideals is false. And when we reject this code for another and in part a sounder morality, we are in the same condition of blindness and of practical confusion. It is here that Darwinism, with all the tendencies we may group under that name, seems destined to intervene. It will make itself felt, I believe, more and more effectually. It may force on us in some points a correction of our moral views, and a return to a non-Christian and perhaps a Hellenic ideal. I propose to illustrate here these general statements by some remarks on Punishment.
Darwinism, I have said, has not even modified our ideas of the Chief Good. We may take that as — the welfare of the community realised in its members. There is, of course, a question as to meaning to be given to welfare. We may identify that with mere pleasure, or gain with mere system, or may rather view both as inseparable aspects of perfection and individuality. And the extent and nature of the community would once more be a subject for some discussion. But we are forced to enter on these controversies here. We may leave welfare undefined, and for present purpose need not distinguish the community from the state. The welfare of this whole exists, of course, nowhere outside the individuals, and the individuals again have rights and duties only as members in the whole. This is the revived Hellenism — or we may call it in the organic view of things — urged by German Idealism early in the present century.
What, according to the passage, is the Chief Good?

Question 4

Direction: Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

That the doctrines connected with the name of Mr Darwin are altering our principles has become a sort of commonplace thing to say. And moral principles are said to share in this general transformation. Now, to pass by other subjects, I do not see why Darwinism need change our ultimate moral ideas. It was not to modify our conception of the end, either for the community, or the individual, unless we have been holding views, which long before Darwin were out of date. As to the principles of ethics I perceive, in short, no sign of revolution.
Darwinism has indeed helped many to truer conception of the end, but I cannot admit that it has either originated or modified that conception.
And yet in ethics Darwinism after all perhaps be revolutionary, it may lead not to another view about the end, but to a different way of regarding the relatively importance of the means. For in the ordinary moral creed those means seem estimated on no rational principle. Our creed appears rather to be an irrational mixture of jarring elements. We have the moral code of Christianity, accepted in part; rejected practically by all save a few fanatics. But we do not realise how in its very principle the Christian ideals is false. And when we reject this code for another and in part a sounder morality, we are in the same condition of blindness and of practical confusion. It is here that Darwinism, with all the tendencies we may group under that name, seems destined to intervene. It will make itself felt, I believe, more and more effectually. It may force on us in some points a correction of our moral views, and a return to a non-Christian and perhaps a Hellenic ideal. I propose to illustrate here these general statements by some remarks on Punishment.
Darwinism, I have said, has not even modified our ideas of the Chief Good. We may take that as — the welfare of the community realised in its members. There is, of course, a question as to meaning to be given to welfare. We may identify that with mere pleasure, or gain with mere system, or may rather view both as inseparable aspects of perfection and individuality. And the extent and nature of the community would once more be a subject for some discussion. But we are forced to enter on these controversies here. We may leave welfare undefined, and for present purpose need not distinguish the community from the state. The welfare of this whole exists, of course, nowhere outside the individuals, and the individuals again have rights and duties only as members in the whole. This is the revived Hellenism — or we may call it in the organic view of things — urged by German Idealism early in the present century.
It is implied in the passage that _______. 

Question 5

Direction: Read the passage given below and answer the questions that follow.

That the doctrines connected with the name of Mr Darwin are altering our principles has become a sort of commonplace thing to say. And moral principles are said to share in this general transformation. Now, to pass by other subjects, I do not see why Darwinism need change our ultimate moral ideas. It was not to modify our conception of the end, either for the community, or the individual, unless we have been holding views, which long before Darwin were out of date. As to the principles of ethics I perceive, in short, no sign of revolution.
Darwinism has indeed helped many to truer conception of the end, but I cannot admit that it has either originated or modified that conception.
And yet in ethics Darwinism after all perhaps be revolutionary, it may lead not to another view about the end, but to a different way of regarding the relatively importance of the means. For in the ordinary moral creed those means seem estimated on no rational principle. Our creed appears rather to be an irrational mixture of jarring elements. We have the moral code of Christianity, accepted in part; rejected practically by all save a few fanatics. But we do not realise how in its very principle the Christian ideals is false. And when we reject this code for another and in part a sounder morality, we are in the same condition of blindness and of practical confusion. It is here that Darwinism, with all the tendencies we may group under that name, seems destined to intervene. It will make itself felt, I believe, more and more effectually. It may force on us in some points a correction of our moral views, and a return to a non-Christian and perhaps a Hellenic ideal. I propose to illustrate here these general statements by some remarks on Punishment.
Darwinism, I have said, has not even modified our ideas of the Chief Good. We may take that as — the welfare of the community realised in its members. There is, of course, a question as to meaning to be given to welfare. We may identify that with mere pleasure, or gain with mere system, or may rather view both as inseparable aspects of perfection and individuality. And the extent and nature of the community would once more be a subject for some discussion. But we are forced to enter on these controversies here. We may leave welfare undefined, and for present purpose need not distinguish the community from the state. The welfare of this whole exists, of course, nowhere outside the individuals, and the individuals again have rights and duties only as members in the whole. This is the revived Hellenism — or we may call it in the organic view of things — urged by German Idealism early in the present century.
According to the author, the moral code of Christianity ________. 

Question 6

Direction:Find out the wrong number in the following number series.
27, 34, 45, 54, 67, 82, 99

Question 7

Direction: The following number series has a wrong number in it. Find out that wrong number and mark your answer accordingly:

11, 19, 36, 67, 131, 259

Question 8

Direction: In the following number series, a wrong number is given. Find out that wrong number.
2500, 1500, 900, 625, 324, 194.4

Question 9

Direction: Find the wrong number in the series
75, 67, 71, 65, 67, 59, 63

Question 10

Direction: Find the wrong term in the given series:
13, 26, 46, 72, 103, 145

Question 11

Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions.

'A % B' means 'A is to the north ­east of B'
'A # B' means 'A is to the north ­west of B'
'A * B' means 'A is to the southeast of B'
'A @ B' means 'A is to the south ­west of B’
'A & B' means 'A is to the south of B'
'A $ B' means 'A is to the west of B'
What is the position of Q with respect to S, if the following information is given:
‘P#Q, R&Q, S*R’

Question 12

Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions.

'A % B' means 'A is to the north ­east of B'
'A # B' means 'A is to the north ­west of B'
'A * B' means 'A is to the southeast of B'
'A @ B' means 'A is to the south ­west of B’
'A & B' means 'A is to the south of B'
'A $ B' means 'A is to the west of B'
Which of the following may be to the south of P in the expression 'T@Q, S$Q, P ­$Q, N#P, T&P’?

Question 13

Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions.

'A % B' means 'A is to the north ­east of B'
'A # B' means 'A is to the north ­west of B'
'A * B' means 'A is to the southeast of B'
'A @ B' means 'A is to the south ­west of B’
'A & B' means 'A is to the south of B'
'A $ B' means 'A is to the west of B'
What may not be the position of F with respect to A, we are given, ‘B#C, D@C, F$D, A$B’?

Question 14

Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions.

'A % B' means 'A is to the north ­east of B'
'A # B' means 'A is to the north ­west of B'
'A * B' means 'A is to the southeast of B'
'A @ B' means 'A is to the south ­west of B’
'A & B' means 'A is to the south of B'
'A $ B' means 'A is to the west of B'
From the following relations, find the distance between Q and S?
P$R, PR= 12 m
Q%P, PQ=15m
S&R, RS= 6m
If Q,R and S are in a straight line. 

Question 15

Direction: Study the following information carefully and answer the questions.

'A % B' means 'A is to the north ­east of B'
'A # B' means 'A is to the north ­west of B'
'A * B' means 'A is to the southeast of B'
'A @ B' means 'A is to the south ­west of B’
'A & B' means 'A is to the south of B'
'A $ B' means 'A is to the west of B'
If Q is the north of Z and, ‘Y$X&Z’, then how is Q’s direction related to Y?

Question 16

Which bank and HIL India have launched a customer payment portal to collect payment through various online modes for collection of dues?

Question 17

Who has been presented with Syama Prasad Mukherjee award 2020 for Politics?

Question 18

What will be GST rate on mobile phone wef 1st April 2020?

Question 19

Which airline has decided to set up warehousing & distribution facility at GAHSL Hyderabad?

Question 20

Which Bank has partnered with BSNL to launch Bharat InstaPay?
  • 1026 attempts
  • 11 upvotes
  • 6 comments
Jun 19PO, Clerk, SO, Insurance