Verbal Ability

RC-Basics innovation

Assignment 02
 RC Practice Assignment 02
DIRECTIONS for questions: Read the passage and, in
your own words, put down the idea of the paragraph.

Passage-1
People have been debating the causes of happiness for a
really long time, in fact for thousands of years, but it
seems like many of those debates remain
unresolved. Well, as with many other domains in life, I
think the scientific method has the potential to answer
this question. In fact, in the last few years, there's been
an explosion in research on happiness. For example,
we've learned a lot about its demographics, how things
like income and education, gender and marriage relate to
it. But one of the puzzles this has revealed is that factors
like these don't seem to have a particularly strong
effect. Yes, it's better to make more money rather than
less, or to graduate from college instead of dropping
out, but the differences in happiness tend to be small.

Which leaves the question, what are the big causes of

happiness? I think that's a question we haven't really

1
answered yet, but I think something that has the
potential to be an answer is that maybe happiness has
an awful lot to do with the contents of our moment-to-
moment experiences. It certainly seems that we're going
about our lives, that what we're doing, who we're with,
what we're thinking about, have a big influence on our
happiness, and yet these are the very factors that have
been very difficult, in fact almost impossible, for
scientists to study.

A few years ago, I came up with a way to study people's

happiness moment to moment as they're going about
their daily lives on a massive scale all over the world,
something we'd never been able to do before. Called
trackyourhappiness.org, it uses the iPhone to monitor
people's happiness in real time. How does this work?
Basically, I send people signals at random points
throughout the day, and then I ask them a bunch of
questions about their moment-to-moment experience at
the instant just before the signal. The idea is that, if we
can watch how people's happiness goes up and down
over the course of the day, minute to minute in some
cases, and try to understand how what people are
doing, who they're with, what they're thinking about, and
all the other factors that describe our day, how those

2
might relate to those changes in happiness, we might be
able to discover some of the things that really have a big
influence on happiness. We've been fortunate with this
project to collect quite a lot of data, a lot more data of
this kind than I think has ever been collected before, over
650,000 real-time reports from over 15,000 people. And
it's not just a lot of people, it's a really diverse
group, people from a wide range of ages, from 18 to late
80s, a wide range of incomes, education levels, people
who are married, divorced, widowed, etc. They
collectively represent every one of 86 occupational
categories and hail from over 80 countries.

What I'd like to do with the rest of my time with you

today is talk a little bit about one of the areas that we've
been investigating, and that's mind-wandering. As human
beings, we have this unique ability to have our minds
stray away from the present. This ability to focus our
attention on something other than the present is really
amazing. It allows us to learn and plan and reason in
ways that no other species of animal can. And yet it's not
clear what the relationship is between our use of this
ability and our happiness. You've probably heard people

3
suggest that you should stay focused on the present. "Be
here now," you've probably heard a hundred
times. Maybe, to really be happy, we need to stay
completely immersed and focused on our experience in
the moment. Maybe these people are right. Maybe mind-
wandering is a bad thing. On the other hand, when our
minds wander, they're unconstrained. We can't change
the physical reality in front of us, but we can go
anywhere in our minds. Since we know people want to be
happy, maybe when our minds wander, they're going to
someplace happier than the place that they're leaving. It
would make a lot of sense. In other words, maybe the
pleasures of the mind allow us to increase our happiness
with mind-wandering.

So how could this be happening? I think part of the

reason, a big part of the reason, is that when our minds
wander, we often think about unpleasant things, and they
are enormously less happy when they do that, our
worries, our anxieties, our regrets, and yet even when
people are thinking about something neutral, they're still
considerably less happy than when they're not mind-
wandering at all.

4
Excerpted from a TED talk by Matt Killingsworth

Passage-2

Every single person knows what they do. Some know

how they do it. But very, very few people know why they
do what they do. And by "why" I don't mean "to make a
profit." That's a result. It's always a result. By "why," I
mean: What's your purpose? What's your cause? What's
your belief? Why does your organization exist? Why do
you get out of bed in the morning? And why should
anyone care? Well, as a result, the way we think, the way
we act, the way we communicate is from the outside in.
But inspired leaders all think, act and communicate from
the inside out communicate from the inside out.

When we communicate from the outside in, people can

understand vast amounts of complicated information
like features and benefits and facts and figures. It just
doesn't drive behavior. When we can communicate from
the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the
brain that controls behavior, and then we allow people to
rationalize it with the tangible things we say and do.

5
In the summer of 1963, 250,000 people showed up on the
mall in Washington to hear Dr. King speak. They sent out
no invitations, and there was no website to check the
date. How do you do that? Well, Dr. King wasn't the only
man in America who was a great orator. He wasn't the
only man in America who suffered in a pre-civil rights
America. But he had a gift. He didn't go around telling
people what needed to change in America. He went
around and told people what he believed. "I believe, I
believe, I believe," he told people. And people who
believed what he believed took his cause, and they made
it their own, and they told people. And lo and behold,
250,000 people showed up on the right day at the right
time to hear him speak.

How many of them showed up for him? Zero. They

showed up for themselves. We followed, not for him, but
for ourselves. And, by the way, he gave the "I have a
dream" speech, not the "I have a plan" speech. Listen to
politicians now, with their comprehensive 12-point plans.
They're not inspiring anybody. Leaders hold a position of

6
power or authority, but those who lead inspire us.
Whether they're individuals or organizations, we follow
those who lead, not because we have to, but because we
want to. We follow those who lead, not for them, but for
ourselves. And it's those who start with "why" that have
the ability to inspire those around them or find others
who inspire them.

Excerpted from TED Talk by Simon Sinek

Passage-3
It may not surprise you to learn that healthy, well-fed
people in affluent countries are often unhappy and
anxious. But it did startle ZbigniewLipowski when he
came to a full realization of this fact. Lipowski was born
in Poland and, in 1944, took part in the Warsaw Uprising,
a mass revolt against the German Army that left more
than two hundred thousand civilians dead. Lipowski,
masquerading as a French refugee returning to France,
was one of the fortunate few who escaped. “We were
bombed and shelled daily, food was very scarce, and
water had to be obtained at night from a well some

7
distance away. I was so hungry as to almost hallucinate
food.”

North America, however, greeted him with constant

abundance and leisure. As he pondered the contrast,
Lipowski thought of Buridan’s ass: an apocryphal donkey
that finds itself standing between two equally appealing
stacks of hay. Unable to decide which to consume, it
starves to death. For Lipowski, this scenario helped to
explain the type of anxiety that he was witnessing
around him. He called it an approach-approach conflict:
faced with enticing options, you find yourself unable to
commit to any of them quickly. And even when you do
choose, you remain anxious about the opportunities that
you may have lost: maybe that other stack of hay tasted
sweeter.

In a series of imaging studies, Shenhav and Randy

Buckner, a cognitive neuroscientist at Harvard, observed
students making various choices. One to three days
before the actual study began,Shenhav and Buckner had

8
all of the participants evaluate more than three hundred
different products, ranging from iPods and digital
cameras to water bottles and T-shirts. When the
experiment started, participants were put inside an fMRI
scanner, shown pictures of the objects, and then asked
to indicate which ones they preferred: Would they, for
example, like to choose a digital camera or a camcorder?
(The participants were told that, at the end of the study,
they would randomly receive their object of choice from
one of the trials.) Each choice was between either two
similarly ranked items—both relatively low-value or both
relatively high-value—or two items that were on opposite
ends of the spectrum.

Unsurprisingly, when people were asked to decide

between something like an iPod and a bag of pretzels,
they didn’t feel particularly anxious: the choice was clear
and life was good. When both choices were low in value,
the emotions were similarly clear-cut. No one was
particularly happy, but neither were they anxious. But
when multiple highly positive options were available—a
digital camera and a camcorder, say—anxiety
skyrocketed, just as Lipowski had predicted. The choices

9
between those objects that they valued most highly were
both the most positive and the most anxiety-filled. The
more choices they had—the study was repeated with up
to six items per choice—the more anxious they felt.
“When you have more good choices, you don’t feel
better,” Shenhav says. “You just feel more anxious.”

Excerpted from ‘When It’s Bad to Have Good Choices’ by

Maria Konnikova in The New Yorker Aug 14

Passage-4
Is depression a chemical problem or a psychological
problem? And does it need a chemical cure or a
philosophical cure? Actually, we aren't advanced enough
in either area for it to explain things fully. The chemical
cure and the psychological cure both have a role to play,
and depression is braided so deep into us that there was
no separating it from our character and personality.

10
There are three things people tend to confuse:
depression, grief and sadness. Grief is explicitly reactive.
If you have a loss and you feel incredibly unhappy, and
then, six months later, you are still deeply sad, but you're
functioning a little better, it's probably grief, and it will
probably ultimately resolve itself in some measure. If you
experience a catastrophic loss, and you feel terrible, and
six months later you can barely function at all, then it's
probably a depression that was triggered by the
catastrophic circumstances. The trajectory tells us a
great deal. People think of depression as being just
sadness. It's too much sadness, too much grief at far too
slight a cause.

You don't think in depression that you've put on a gray

veil and are seeing the world through the haze of a bad
mood. You think that the veil has been taken away, the
veil of happiness, and that now you're seeing truly. It's
easier to help schizophrenics who perceive that there's
something foreign inside of them that needs to be
exorcised, but it's difficult with depressives, because we
believe we are seeing the truth.

11
But the truth lies. People will say, "No one loves me." And
you say, "I love you, your wife loves you, your mother
loves you." But people who are depressed will say, "No
matter what we do, we're all just going to die in the end."
Or they'll say, "There can be no true communion between
two human beings. Each of us is trapped in his own
body." To which you have to say, "That's true, but I think
we should focus right now on what to have for
breakfast."

A lot of the time, what they are expressing is not illness,

but insight, and one comes to think what's really
extraordinary is that most of us know about those
existential questions and they don't distract us very
much. There was a study I particularly liked in which a
group of depressed and a group of non-depressed people
were asked to play a video game for an hour, and at the
end of the hour, they were asked how many little
monsters they thought they had killed. The depressive
group was usually accurate to within about 10 percent,
and the non-depressed people guessed between 15 and

12
20 times as many little monsters as they had actually
killed.

I went to Rwanda and I happened to meet someone who

described his experience in east Africa. He said, "but
we've had a lot of trouble with Western mental health
workers, especially the ones who came right after the
genocide." And I said, "What kind of trouble did you
have?" And he said, "Well, they would do this bizarre
thing. They didn't take people out in the sunshine where
you begin to feel better. They didn't include drumming or
music to get people's blood going. They didn't involve the
whole community. They didn't externalize the depression
as an invasive spirit. Instead what they did was they took
people one at a time into dingy little rooms and had them
talk for an hour about bad things that had happened to
them." He said, "We had to ask them to leave the
country."

Excerpted from TED Talk by Andrew Solomon

13
 Passage-5
If you think about it, if you want to live in a world in the
future where there are fewer material goods, you
basically have two choices. You can either live in a world
which is poorer, which people in general don't like. Or you
can live in a world where actually intangible value
constitutes a greater part of overall value, that actually
intangible value, in many ways is a very, very fine
substitute for using up labor or limited resources in the
creation of things.

Here is one example. This is a train which goes from

London to Paris. The question was given to a bunch of
engineers, about 15 years ago, "How do we make the
journey to Paris better?" And they came up with a very
good engineering solution, which was to spend six billion
pounds building completely new tracks from London to
the coast, and knocking about 40 minutes off a three-
and-half-hour journey time. Here is my naive advertising
man's suggestion. What you should in fact do is employ
all of the world's top male and female supermodels, pay
them to walk the length of the train, handing out free
Chateau Petrus for the entire duration of the journey.
Now, you'll still have about three billion pounds left in

14
change, and people will ask for the trains to be slowed
down.

How many problems of life can be solved actually by

tinkering with perception, rather than that tedious,
hardworking and messy business of actually trying to
change reality? Here's a great example from history.
Fredrick the Great of Prussia was very keen for the
Germans to adopt the potato and to eat it, because he
realized that if you had two sources of carbohydrate,
wheat and potatoes, you get less price volatility in bread.
And you get a far lower risk of famine, because you
actually had two crops to fall back on, not one. The only
problem is: potatoes, if you think about it, look pretty
disgusting. And also, 18th century Prussians ate very,
very few vegetables. So, actually, he tried making it
compulsory. The Prussian peasantry said, "We can't even
get the dogs to eat these damn things. They are
absolutely disgusting and they're good for nothing." So
he tried plan B. He tried the marketing solution, which is
he declared the potato as a royal vegetable, and none but
the royal family could consume it. And he planted it in a
royal potato patch, with guards who had instructions to
guard over it, night and day, but with secret instructions
not to guard it very well. Now, 18th century peasants

15
know that there is one pretty safe rule in life, which is if
something is worth guarding, it's worth stealing. Before
long, there was a massive underground potato-growing
operation in Germany. What he'd effectively done is he'd
re-branded the potato.

Another example is of Ataturk who was very keen to

discourage the wearing of a veil, in Turkey, to modernize
it. Now, boring people would have just simply banned the
veil. But that would have ended up with a lot of awful
kickback and a hell of a lot of resistance. Ataturk was a
lateral thinker. He made it compulsory for prostitutes to
wear the veil. What Ataturk realized actually is two very
fundamental things. Which is that, actually, first one, all
value is actually relative. All value is perceived value. All
value is subjective. Second point is that persuasion is
often better than compulsion.

Marketing has done a very, very good job of creating

opportunities for impulse buying. Yet we've never created
the opportunity for impulse saving. If you did this, more
people would save more. It's simply a question of
changing the interface by which people make decisions,
and the very nature of the decisions changes. But if
anybody did want to do that, that's the kind of thing we

16
need to be thinking about, actually: fundamental
opportunities to change human behaviour. I think an
important philosophical point, which is, going forward,
we need more of this kind of value. We need to spend
more time appreciating what already exists, and less
time agonizing over what else we can do.

Extracted from a TED talk by Rory Sutherland

1. As used in the first paragraph, please give an

example of intangible value.

2. What is the pun used in the second paragraph?

3. What ideas would you suggest in order to

encourage people to go about doing the impulse
saving (referred to in the last paragraph)?

Passage-6

The so-called 'creative' industries, like gaming and

Hollywood, often churn out safe, relatively uninspiring
sequels that consume huge budgets. In contrast, frugal
artists are now making games and films that are truly
creative and cost much less to develop.

17
Consider the case of Jason Rohrer, a game developer.
Rohrer lives with his wife and three kids on a modest
ranch in Las Cruces in the middle of the New Mexico
desert where he creates ingenious, meaningful games
with high experiential value that he gives away for free
(or charges a modest fee for downloading). Rohrer and
his family do not own a car; they ride bicycles. They have
no insurance or mortgage; they do have a fridge, but turn
it off during winters. This family of five has voluntarily
capped its yearly expenses at $14,500 – which
represents the family's total annual budget.

Rohrer's fans love his games because they feel ‘real’ –

not because of hyper realistic graphics (which would
typically cost a fortune to develop) but because their
stories ring true and feel genuine. Rohrer infuses his
games with his own life experiences and this in turn
gives his characters and storylines authenticity. His
creations deal with complex socio cultural topics such
as marriage, the desire to become an artist or balancing
personal aspirations with family commitments. Whereas
in commercial games superhuman heroes mindlessly
shoot down monsters, aliens and criminals, Rohrer's

18
thoughtful characters struggle to overcome their inner
demons and cope with personal dilemmas.

The sophistication of the stories in Rohrer's games

stands in striking contrast to the frugal simplicity of their
user interface: the interface is typically minimalist, even
slightly 'retro', with no whiz-bang special effects like 3D.
His games are rendered in low-resolution graphics—the
same ones found in arcade-style games—with characters
that look like pixilated gnomes. The frugal look and feel
of Rohrer's games hasn't stopped them from rapidly
achieving cult status among users worldwide. Says Clint
Hocking, creative director at Ubisoft, the world's fourth-
largest game developer: 'These games have used what is
innate to games—their interactivity—to make a
statement about the human condition. And we in the
industry seem not to be able to do that.

Excerpted from ‘Jugaad Innovation’ by Radjou, Prabhu

and Ahuja Pages-255-257

4. What is the central idea that the passage conveys?

5. What makes Rohrer's games achieve cult status?

19
6. What set of words would characterise Rohrer?

Passage - 7
The good thing about the transistor was that by the late
1950s it was becoming smaller and smaller as well as
more and more reliable. The bad thing was that an
electrical circuit containing thousands of tiny transistors,
along with other elements such as resistors and
capacitors, had to be interconnected with thousands of
tiny wires. As Ian Ross describes it, “as you built more
and more complicated devices, like switching systems,
like computers, you got into millions of devices and
millions of interconnections. So what should you do?” At
Bell Labs, Jack Morton, the vice president of device
development, had coined a name for the dilemma: “the
tyranny of numbers.” Morton believed that one way to
tackle the tyranny of numbers was simply to reduce the
number of components (transistors, resistors,
capacitors, and so forth) in a circuit. Fewer components
meant fewer interconnections. One way to do this,
Morton thought, was to harness the physical properties
of special semiconductors so that they might be made to
perform multiple electronic tasks—turning them into a
kind of electronic Swiss Army knife. Therefore “a simple
thing” within a circuit could replace multiple

20
components. Morton called these “functional devices,”
but they were proving exceedingly difficult to engineer.

Jack Kilby at Texas Instruments and Robert Noyce at

Fairchild had different, better ideas. Both men, nearly
simultaneously, came up with the idea of constructing all
of the components in a circuit out of silicon, so that a
complete circuit could exist within one piece—one chip—
of semiconductor material. By eliminating the tyranny of
interconnections, the method seemed to suggest
substantial advantages in manufacturing and
operational speed. Their innovation could, in short, be
better and cheaper. In the early days, the product that
Kilby and Noyce designed was known as a “solid circuit.”

But it was the received wisdom under Jack Morton that

such devices could never be reliable. Even though the
quality of manufactured transistors was improving, there
was still a significant failure rate. And on a chip with
hundreds or thousands of components? Some of those
components would inevitably fail, thus rendering the
entire device useless. Kilby and Noyce opted to believe,
correctly, that the manufacturing challenges could be
worked out later.

21
Excerpted from ‘The Idea Factory’ – by Jon Gertner,
pages 252-254

7. What was the difference in approach to build

complex circuits between Morton and Noyce?

8. What was the biggest technical hurdle that the

initial ICs faced?

9. What was meant by the 'tyranny of numbers'?

Passage – 8

Not until the tenth century CE did cotton become an

important Chinese cash crop. However, from the
beginning, silk, used by the royal elite, remained China’s
principal export. Indians, in contrast, developed
technologies like vegetable dyes with fast color and print
designs with wood blocks to produce exportable cotton
fabrics. They also mastered the art of ginning the cotton,
spinning the fibres into thread, and weaving cloth on
handlooms made of bamboo and wood.

Although Indian textiles had been a coveted item of trade

in the Red sea, Arabian sea and Indian ocean trade since

22
Roman times, Europeans discovered Indian cotton only
after Vasco da Gama blazed the trail for shipping trade
with Asia in 1498. Europeans, who for centuries had been
clad entirely in linen and wool, at last, discovered cotton.
Indian cotton manufacturing boomed, even though its
spinning and weaving technology had remained
essentially the same for centuries. It boomed simply
because more and more workers were pressed into
growing cotton and producing cloth.

The proto-capitalist production system, developed in

India, could be scaled up to meet growing demand. So
high was the demand for Indian textiles that Britain had a
constant trade deficit with India. Of the estimated 17,000
tonnes of silver mined in the new World in the 16th
century, some 6,000 tonnes ended up in India to pay for
European imports. Indian domination of textile alarmed
Britain’s silk and wool weavers. In Roman times moral
reasons had been invoked to ban the import of silk.
Centuries later, some Britons found religious piety to be a
good reason for banning import of cotton. Protests and
worker riots eventually lead Britain to impose the Calico
Act of 1701, a partial ban on the import and wearing of
Indian textiles. In 1721 Britain passed a second Calico

23
Act banning cotton textiles of all kinds, but this only fired
up smuggling.

The obvious answer to the popularity of Indian calico

was to begin producing locally, but European wages were
six times higher than Indian wages. The search for
technology to reduce the need for labor led to the
opening of a water-powered cotton spinning mill in
Cromford in 1771. The Industrial Revolution was
launched. Although many workers were still needed to
work with the machines, the speed and the volume of
production eliminated the cheap labor advantage so far
enjoyed by India. In just 14 years (1814-1828) India’s
cotton piece goods exports to Britain dropped by two-
thirds, and mass-produced British textile imports to India,
backed by tariff policy, rose more than five times. For the
first time in its history, India was importing what the
mass of its citizenry wore.
Excerpted from ‘Bound Together: How traders, preachers,
adventurers and warriors shaped globalisation’ by
NayanChanda.

10. The governor general of India, William Bentinck

wrote in a confidential report in 1835, ‘The bones of

24
 the cotton weavers are bleaching the plains of
India.’ What can you infer from this?

11. Referring to the third paragraph first line, what can

you infer about the proto-capitalist system?

12. ‘Centuries later, some Britons found religious piety

to be a good reason for banning import of cotton.’
If you were a preacher, what would be an argument
you would make to support the ban?

Passage - 9
It has been a long journey for us. It began in 1976 with
lending of $27 to 42 poor people in a village next to the
university campus where I was teaching economics. I
had no intention of making a wave. Nor was I planning to
create a bank for the poor. I had a very modest goal. I
was trying to free 42 people from the clutches of
moneylenders by giving them money they owed to
moneylenders, in order to repay them and become free
from exploitation.
I was teaching in ChittagongUniversity while a famine
raged in Bangladesh in 1974. It was uncomfortable to
teach elegant theories of economics when people were
dying of hunger. I felt totally irrelevant. I tried to make

25
myself in some way relevant by going out to the poor
people living in the village next to the university campus.
Initially I looked for any little thing that I could do to
make the life of a poor individual slightly tolerable. One
thing led to another. I kept seeing how people suffered
because they could not find tiny amounts of money to
carry on with their livelihood activities. To solve this
problem, they went to moneylenders. Moneylenders
turned them into slave-labour with unbelievable loan
conditions. I wanted to see how many people there were
in the village in this situation. I made a list. The list
contained 42 names, the total amount they needed was
$27.

Imagine the shock to an economics professor who

teaches his students about the national five-year plan
and the rationale for investing billions of dollars to
overcome poverty. The professor did not know that
people go through misery because they do not have
access to pennies, let alone a whole dollar. Even if you
invest those billions of dollars in big projects, this need
of the poor will still not be addressed. I tried to address
this problem by way of an emotional response, I gave the
money from my pocket. I did not know that it would
create an emotional counter response from the people

26
who got the money. They thought it was nothing less
than a miracle. I thought if you could make so many
people so happy with such a small amount of money,
why not do more of the same. I decided to link the poor
people in the village with the bank located in the campus,
but the bank refused to get involved. They argued that
the poor are not creditworthy. I pleaded with them to give
me a chance to try. They refused. Ultimately, when I
offered to become the guarantor for these loans, they
reluctantly agreed. I started giving loans to poor people
in Jobra and was pleasantly surprised to see that it was
working perfectly. I continued to expand the programme.
Several stages later we converted the project into a
formal bank, named, Grameen Bank, in 1983.

13. A suitable title for this passage is

14. Banks considered the poor creditworthy, yet

Grameen Bank makes money lending to the poor.
What practice do you think, Grameen Bank adopts,
which helps it recover its loans?

27
RC Basics Practice Assignment 02 – Answer Key

Passage Q. No. Explanation

Passage-1 Para 1 Mystery – what causes
happiness?
Para 2 The sum of small joys is greater
than the whole of riches et al
Para 3 Research involving phones to
track happiness and check the
state of the environment at that
time for the person being
tracked..
Para 4 Mind wandering – is it good or
bad?
Para 5 To be happy you need to stop
mind wandering, concentrate on
what you are doing.
Passage-2 Para 1 We seldom think of deeper
questions about our purpose.
Agar marna hi tha to
paidakyohuen? If we know our
purpose, life becomes simple
and meaningful. Or if we know
the purpose of anything that we

28
 do, we do it better..
Para 2 When I communicate “the what”
you ignore; When I communicate
“the why” you listen,
Para 3 People turned up to hear Dr King
because they believed in what he
believed.
Para 4 Inspiration always comes from
the Why
Passage-3 Para 1 Food and shelter are basic
necessities and in times of
plenty people tend to forget this
fact and take it for granted.
Para 2 Choice anxiety – whatever you
end up choosing, you still worry..
Para 3 Study of choices: Hi-Hi, Lo-Lo
and Lo-Hi..
Para 4 The anxiety peaked in Hi-HI –
and increased with number of
choices given.
Passage-4 Para 1 How is our thinking influenced by
chemistry?
Para 2 To be sad is natural, but when it
persists it is depression…
Para 3 Do depressives see more of the

29
 truth than normal people?
Para 4 Probably depressives are sad
because they focus too much on
the truth!
Para 5 Confirmation that depressives
actually are closer to the truth
than the normal..
Para 6 The cure for depression is to get
people more involved..make
them take part in activities..
Passage-5 1. Iphone, Samsung S60
Anything that is a premium
product or connotes status..
2. left in change – the change
refers to small denomination
money, as also transition from
one state to another.
3. A mobile phone app, where you
can forego a coffee at CCD or
Barista – and divert the sum they
would have spent into a
designated savings account.
Passage-6 4. Simple living, high thinking.
5. They tell a story based on life
experiences.

30
 6. Frugal, Minimalist
Passage-7 7. Morton wanted to have devices
which had fewer more powerful
components – Noyce wanted to
build devices which used
existing components – but many
more of them.
8. The interconnections.
9. The more the components, the
more the interconnections.
Passage-8 10. The new policy created so much
unemployment amongst weavers
in India, that a lot of them started
dying.
11. It had the capital but lacked the
machinery, which was
substituted by home looms
spread across thousands of
homes in villages.
12. If this ban leads to more
employment of Christians, the
Lord would be happy. Anyway
the people who would lose jobs
and livelihood do not follow our
Lord’s word.

31
Passage-9 13. Banker to the Poor
14. Lending in groups – the group
has to make up shortfalls that
any individual defaulter in the
group has.

32