2. Inferential questions

As the name suggests, we will get the correct answer to such questions by inferring (concluding) the answer based on the information given in the passage. We will not get the answer directly from the passage. Instead, we need to understand the author's viewpoint and answer based on logical reasoning.

Some common types of inferential questions are:

(1) What is the author's intent/purpose/type of argument?
(2) Which of the following is implied/not implied by the author?
(3) Which of the following will the author agree/disagree with?
(4) Which of the following, if true, will strengthen/weaken the author's hypothesis?
(5) Which of the following actions/solutions will the author support the most?
(6) Which of the following assumptions is inherent in the passage?

Most of the questions will be of this type, leading to the name of this question. You need to understand the paragraph(s) and the author's PoV, and then use logical reasoning to solve the question. The examiners will use different words in the question as well (e.g. the same question can be asked as – which of the following is a logical argument, which of the following is not a logical fallacy, which of the following approaches would be the best). Let us solve some examples.

Example 6

The following paragraph appears to be an attempt at

In 1989, recently elected to the Supreme Soviet, Yeltsin came to America, in part to see Johnson Space Center in Houston. On an unscheduled jaunt, the Soviet delegation visited a local supermarket. Photos from the Houston Chronicle capture the day: Yeltsin, overcome by a display of Jell-O Pudding Pops; Yeltsin inspecting the onions; Yeltsin staring down a full display of shiny produce like a line of enemy soldiers. Planning could never master the countless variables that capitalism calculated using the tireless machine of self-interest. According to the story, the overflowing shelves filled Yeltsin with despair for the Soviet system, turned him into an economic reformer, and spelled the end for state socialism as a global force.

(1) explaining why capitalism is better than socialism.
(2) describing Yeltsin's visit to America.
(3) explaining why Russian President Yeltsin chose capitalism over socialism.
(4) highlighting how capitalism provides the free market with a multitude of options.

Solution

This paragraph is about Yeltsin's visit to America and its impact. The author tells us that Soviet Russia was socialist (centralised or governmental economic planning to ensure adequate resources for all), whereas America was capitalist (free market conditions to drive production, innovation and wealth creation).

The author describes how Yeltsin saw how capitalism was better than socialism, and the last sentence tells us how he gave up socialism and embraced capitalism. Based on this, we can infer that option (3) is the correct choice.

Answer: (3) explaining why Russian President Yeltsin chose capitalism over socialism.

Example 7

Read the following paragraph and answer the question that follows:

Evolution is the changing of species over time. With the way ecosystems work on Earth, many species have close and important relationships to each other to ensure their survival. These symbiotic relationships keep the biosphere running properly and keep species from going extinct. This means as one species evolves, it will affect the other species in some way. This co-evolution of the species is like an evolutionary arms race that insists that the other species in the relationship must also evolve in order to survive. The “Red Queen” hypothesis states that species must constantly adapt and evolve to pass on genes to the next generation and also to keep from going extinct when other species within a symbiotic relationship are evolving. For instance, if a prey species evolves to become faster over a period of time, the predator needs to adapt and evolve in order to keep using the prey as a reliable food source. Otherwise, the now faster prey will escape and the predator will lose a food source and potentially go extinct. However, if the predator becomes faster itself, or evolves in another way like becoming stealthier or a better hunter, then the relationship can continue and the predators will survive.

Which of the following is an example of the Red Queen hypothesis in evolution?

(1) Cuckoos lay their eggs in other birds’ nests, but some birds now recognise that these eggs are not their own.
(2) Giraffes have long necks to reach the tall trees.
(3) Zebra have developed stripes for camouflage as predators have become faster and stealthier.
(4) Plants have evolved to create shells over their fruits to protect it from animals who would eat it.

Solution

The author explains the Red Queen hypothesis - that species will continuously evolve over time. If a particular species does not, it will lose in the evolutionary race (akin to an arms race).

Let us consider the options. While option (1) shows an example of how the other birds have evolved, it does not include any development or evolution of the cuckoo bird. Therefore, it can be eliminated. Similarly, option (2) does not show the trees evolving (for instance, the trees could become even taller over time to compete with the giraffes), and hence, can be eliminated.

Option (3), however, shows the evolution of both predators (speed and stealth) and prey (zebras’ camouflage). Thus, it is an appropriate example of the Red Queen hypothesis.

Option (4) also only shows evolution of the plants, not that of the creatures who eat it as well. Thus, we can select option (3) and eliminate all the other options.

Answer: (3) Zebra have developed camouflage as predators have become faster and stealthier.

Example 8

Read the following passage and answer the question that follows.
[XAT 2016]

This season will pass. The Prime Minister may not win Lok Sabha elections, or she may; she may not continue as Prime Minister, or she may. The country will survive whatever the texture of politics in this decade or the next.

Which of the following, IF TRUE, will BEST reinforce the author’s view?

(1) The survival of any Prime Minister is dependent on the country’s economic growth.
(2) The country has a vibrant young working population.
(3) The survival of the country depends on a dynamic, growth-oriented Prime Minister, not on the texture of politics.
(4) The previous season had also witnessed similar political uncertainty.
(5) The survival of the Prime Minister is dependent on the political texture of the country.

Solution

The passage tells us that the country will survive irrespective of the political situation. Therefore, we must look for an option which showcases such a situation, where the country survived despite political issues.

Option (4) is the most suitable situation – this tells us that the country survived in the previous season despite political issues. Note that we are assuming here that the country survived this uncertainty.

Option (2) seeks to establish a reason for the country's survival. However, it does not negate the country's dependence on politics as strongly as option (4), which is a direct argument in favour of the passage. Therefore, we can eliminate this option.

Option (3) weakens the argument in the passage, as the passage seeks to establish that the country will survive even if the Prime Minster does not win the elections.

Option (1) is irrelevant as it speaks about the country's impact on the politician.

Option (5) only speaks about the Prime Minister and politics and not about the country's survival.

Therefore, we can eliminate these two options as well, and select option (4) as the correct choice.

Answer: (4) The previous season had also witnessed similar political uncertainty.

Example 9

Go through the paragraph below and answer the questions that follow

Carbon emissions from the operation of buildings hit their highest-ever level in 2019, moving the sector further away from fulfilling its huge potential to slow climate change and contribute significantly to the goals of the Paris Agreement, according to a new report released today. However, pandemic recovery packages provide an opportunity to push deep building renovation and performance standards for newly constructed buildings, and rapidly cut emissions. The forthcoming updating of climate pledges under the Paris Agreement – known as nationally determined contributions or NDCs – also offer an opportunity to sharpen existing measures and include new commitments on the buildings and construction sector..

Which of the following statements is the author most likely to agree with?

(1) Construction and real estate sectors are making significant contribution to climate change reduction efforts.
(2) There is a lot of construction happening, leading to carbon emissions.
(3) One positive result of the pandemic can be a reduction in carbon emissions.
(4) The Paris Agreement has not done enough to control the emissions from buildings.

Solution

In this paragraph, we learn that operating buildings is resulting in a lot of carbon emissions, and there is a lot of scope to reduce emissions. The author suggests that the pandemic recovery packages and updated climate pledges can prioritise this. The first option is incorrect, as we know that these sectors are not contributing towards controlling emissions. Instead emissions are at the highest levels.

Option (2) is also incorrect, as the author tells us about high carbon emissions from the operation of buildings. We do not know if there was a lot of construction as well. Construction has only been mentioned for future scope.

Option (3) is correct, as the author suggests that climate change recovery packages can push for new standards.

Option (4) may or may not be correct, because we do not know if the Paris Agreement is about overall emissions for countries, or looks at sectors. Therefore, we can eliminate this option and select option (3) as the correct choice.

Answer: (3) One positive result of the pandemic can be a reduction in carbon emissions.

Example 10

Read the following paragraph and answer the question that follows:

Perhaps this war will pass like the others which divided us,
leaving us dead, killing us along with the killers
but the shame of this time puts its burning fingers to our faces.
Who will erase the ruthlessness hidden in innocent blood?
Which of the following is certainly not implied in the above verse?
[XAT 2011]

(1) Killers also get killed in war.
(2) Humanity gets divided by war and reunites afterwards in peace.
(3) This war is especially ruthless.
(4) This war is shameful to the entire humanity.
(5) None can obliterate the ruthlessness of this war.

Solution

Let us consider the options.

Option (1) is present in the verse (killing us along with the killers). The poet is stating that the killers and the innocent both die in wars.

The poet states but the shame of this time .to contrast the war negatively with earlier ones (essentially, the poet states that this war will pass, but the shame of this time puts its burning fingers to our faces).. With the use of ruthlessness, we can infer that this was especially ruthless and shameful. Thus, we can infer options (3) and (4).

Option (5) can be inferred from the rhetorical verse - tWho will erase the ruthlessness hidden in innocent blood?

Option (2), on the other hand, is not implied, as the poet has not stated that humanity is reunited by peace. The poet simply states that wars divide humanity (this war ... like the others which divided us). Therefore, option (2) is the correct choice.

Answer: (2) Humanity gets divided by war and reunites afterwards in peace.

Example 11

Read the following paragraph and answer the question that follows:

As we look at the world today, it is easy for women and girls to feel discouraged by the lack of progress that has been made towards creating a culture where men and women compete on equal footing. And when it comes to the corporate world, the facts are perfectly clear. Of all Fortune 500 companies, only 32 CEOs are female. The picture is even gloomier when it comes to women of colour CEOs. There are just two – PepsiCo’s Indra Nooyi and PG&E’s Geisha Williams. When you consider that women are graduating from college at higher rates than men, and they represent close to half of all entry-level professionals, it’s clear that there are barriers keeping women from climbing the ladder and reaching their full potential. Increasingly, CEOs are viewing diversity as a competitive strength. Why? Because there is a strong business case for having a balanced leadership team.

Which of the following would disprove the CEOs’ opinion that diversity is a competitive strength?

(1) Most of the successful companies in the Fortune 500 are predominantly white men led.
(2) The companies with women CEOs have predominantly men in the second rung of leadership.
(3) Most Fortune 500 companies are doing better than Pepsi and PG&E.
(4) No university or research company has studied whether a diverse leadership team improves competitiveness.

Solution

In order to disprove the opinion that diversity is a competitive strength, we must find events that either prove that companies with a lot of diversity are not very successful, or that companies with no diversity are very successful. This is mentioned in option (1).br>
Option (2) can be eliminated, as the CEOs believe in a diverse leadership team (which means that the CEO and the next rung of leadership should be diverse). Also, note that the men reporting to the CEO can also be diverse (e.g. in terms of race). Similarly, we can eliminate option (3), as we do not know if Pepsi and PG&E have a diverse team.br>
Option (4) can also be eliminated, as a hypothesis need not be untrue just because it has not been proved or researched.br>
Thus, option (1) is the correct choice.br>
Answer: (1) Most of the successful companies in the Fortune 500 are predominantly white men led.br>

Example 12

Study the text given below and answer the question that follows it:
[XAT 2019]

Dense, dirty air laced with grease best describes the atmosphere of most Lagos streets. Drive from one corner of this great West African city to another and in no time you will find surfaces lightly dusted, like a soft sprinkling of icing on cakes. Under the half-moons of fingernails, thick grime settles. It’s a scene taken as typically African: polluted, bedraggled, unhealthy. This has only ever been made possible by the exploitation of Africa’s people. This week five West African countries, Nigeria included, announced plans to end the practice of European oil companies and traders exporting “African quality” diesel. “Dirty fuel” has earned the name because it is imported diesel with sulphur levels as high as 3,000 parts per million when the European maximum is 10ppm. To be clear, “African quality” fuel, is fuel not fit for European humans.

Which of the options is not necessarily the underlying assumption of the author in the paragraph above?

(1) Economic exploitation, until challenged runs smoothly.
(2) European oil companies dump their fuel on African countries.
(3) Typically, African cities today are not fit for human habitation.
(4) African nations had accepted ‘dirty fuel’ as the norm.
(5) Racism makes it easy for Europeans to justify the exploitation of inferior races.

Solution

We learn that African exploitation has resulted in unhealthy, polluted lives for Africans. While there are colonial undertones, the author blames European companies for this, showcasing the difference between quality standards in Europe and Africa.

We need to find an assumption which is not apparent. Let us consider the options.

Option (1) can be inferred, as the European oil companies are only being challenged after they have made Africa and Africans polluted, bedraggled, unhealthy. Therefore, we can eliminate this option.

Option (2) is also clear from the passage, given that African quality fuel is nothing but fuel not pure enough for European countries. Thus, we can eliminate this option as well.

Option (3) is also evident from the description of Lagos (Nigeria) and other parts of Africa. Therefore, we can eliminate this option.

Option (4) could also be assumed, as only five African countries are trying to ban the 'dirty fuel', and that too, after the massive impact on their countries and people. Therefore, we can eliminate this option.

There has not been any mention of race in this paragraph, and as such, we cannot state that race is a factor (this may actually be the case, but this paragraph does not make it apparent). Thus, option (5) is the correct choice.

Answer: (5) Racism makes it easy for Europeans to justify the exploitation of inferior races.