BackALL MODULES
CAT 2025 Lesson : Summary - Essence or Key Message
6. Essence or Key Message
Now we have understood how to identify the key points, tone as well as context. We can use this to identify the key message or the essence. We can also use any data or examples to make sure that our understanding is correct. Try and summarise the key message in your own words or in your mother tongue. This will ensure that you are getting the gist. Do this before you read the options, this will help you to not only identify the correct one, but also help you eliminate incomplete or incorrect options (especially those which are logically inconsistent).Please note that some summary questions might not have the complete essence in any of the options. They might have three options which are factually or logically inconsistent. In such cases, the correct option would be one which has the incomplete essence but is correct and in line with the paragraph. Even in such cases, summarising the key points and key message will help you to eliminate the incorrect options better. You can also understand which facts are the significant.
For instance,
Bacteria can live in extreme conditions and are capable of doing incredible things beneficial to humanity and the planet. Scientists have been uncovering fascinating abilities of bacteria. There are those that have the ability to generate biofuels, to purify water, to break down plastic, transform CO2 into proteins suitable for human consumption and those that can ‘eat’ CO2 and thereby reduce greenhouse gas effects. Now, scientists have shown how Geobacter bacteria could not only survive exposure to toxic cobalt but also coat themselves with the metal - like the Iron Man putting on the suit. Scientists believe that this superpower could open the door for Geobacter’s application in environmental remediation.
In this paragraph, the author describes multiple capabilities of bacteria, namely
- they can live in extreme conditions
- they can generate biofuel
- they can purify water, breakdown plastic, transform CO2 (helps the Earth)
- they can survive exposure to and even coat themselves with toxic cobalt
Of all these capabilities, the key message would only include the last one (Geobacter bacteria surviving exposure to and using cobalt). The others are just examples of bacterial capabilities in the same context (beneficial for humans and Earth).
The key message would be – Bacteria have incredible capabilities, and have recently been found to even cover themselves with cobalt, much like the Iron Man suit.
For instance,
Some instances of correlation are quite whimsical, thus cats with blue eyes are invariably deaf. Colour and constitutional peculiarities go together, of which many remarkable cases could be given amongst animals and plants. If man goes on selecting, and thus augmenting, [genes to address] any peculiarity, he will almost certainly modify other parts of the structure, owing to the mysterious laws of the correlation of growth. The result of the various, quite unknown, or dimly seen laws of variation is infinitely complex and diversified. It appears that white sheep and pigs are injured by certain plants, whereas dark-coloured animals escape.
This is a scientific account of the multiple impacts of a single gene or group of genes in plants and animals, often on unrelated aspects. The key points are
- genes have impact on multiple characteristics
- some of these characteristics seem unrelated (e.g. colour of eyes and deafness)
- if humans try to change or improve something, other characteristics will also be affected
Here the key message is in this last point – Genes impact multiple, often unrelated characteristics and humans can change multiple characteristics in animals if they seek certain changes.
For instance,
One can construct what would be, from a News of the World reader’s point of view, the “perfect” murder. The murderer should be a little man of the professional class – a dentist or a solicitor, say – living an intensely respectable life somewhere in the suburbs, and preferably in a semi-detached house, which will allow the neighbours to hear suspicious sounds through the wall. He should go astray through cherishing a guilty passion for his secretary or the wife of a rival professional man, and should only bring himself to the point of murder after long and terrible wrestles with his conscience. Having decided on murder, he should plan it all with the utmost cunning, and only slip up over some tiny unforeseeable detail. The means chosen should, of course, be poison. With this kind of background, a crime can have dramatic and even tragic qualities which make it memorable and excite pity for both victim and murderer.
In this paragraph, the author describes the sort of murderer a news reader would want. We can infer that this paragraph is humourous (or tongue-in-cheek), because the general populace does not actively want people to murder each other. We should not spend a lot of time on the different points describing the murderer, we should just ensure if any options are factually incorrect.
The key message would be – Readers of 'News of the World' prefer to read about murderers who are respectable yet cunning, as this leads to dramatic murders.
Example 15
The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best summarises the author's position.
Socialist thought has to deal in prediction, but only in broad terms. One often has to aim at objectives which one can only very dimly see. At this moment, for instance, the world is at war and wants peace. Yet the world has no experience of peace, and never has had. The world wants something which it is dimly aware could exist, but cannot accurately define. This week, thousands of men will be bleeding to death in the snows, or drowning in icy waters, or blowing one another to pieces on swampy islands; homeless children will be scrabbling for food among the wreckage of cities. To make that kind of thing impossible is a good objective. But to say in detail what a peaceful world would be like is a different matter.
(1) Socialism is more predictive as compared to other types of economic ideologies.
(2) Socialists have to define peace or other objectives without having experienced it.
(3) Socialists want peace for all, but the world is violent and intent on killing one another.
(4) The world has always been at war, so socialists are unable to explain what peace would be like.
Let us consider the options.
Option (1) is factually incorrect, and can be eliminated. The author has not spoken about other socioeconomic ideologies at all.
Option (2) is capturing the key message.
Option (3) also has the key message, but is unnecessarily harsh – not all of the world is violent. Remember that these examples only prove that people are fighting in many parts of the world.
Option (4) has a factual inaccuracy – socialists will find it difficult to predict or define peace, but they will not be unable to do so. Hence, we can eliminate this option as well. Therefore, option (2) is the correct choice.
Answer: (2) Socialists have to define peace or other objectives without having experienced it.
Socialist thought has to deal in prediction, but only in broad terms. One often has to aim at objectives which one can only very dimly see. At this moment, for instance, the world is at war and wants peace. Yet the world has no experience of peace, and never has had. The world wants something which it is dimly aware could exist, but cannot accurately define. This week, thousands of men will be bleeding to death in the snows, or drowning in icy waters, or blowing one another to pieces on swampy islands; homeless children will be scrabbling for food among the wreckage of cities. To make that kind of thing impossible is a good objective. But to say in detail what a peaceful world would be like is a different matter.
(1) Socialism is more predictive as compared to other types of economic ideologies.
(2) Socialists have to define peace or other objectives without having experienced it.
(3) Socialists want peace for all, but the world is violent and intent on killing one another.
(4) The world has always been at war, so socialists are unable to explain what peace would be like.
Solution
In this paragraph, the author speaks about socialism – socialists have to define what a peaceful world looks like. However, we have not experienced peace, and hence it will be difficult to explain or define such a world (But to say in detail what a peaceful world would be like is a different matter). The author has mentioned a lot of examples to prove that people are fighting and killing each other (these need not be captured in the summary).Let us consider the options.
Option (1) is factually incorrect, and can be eliminated. The author has not spoken about other socioeconomic ideologies at all.
Option (2) is capturing the key message.
Option (3) also has the key message, but is unnecessarily harsh – not all of the world is violent. Remember that these examples only prove that people are fighting in many parts of the world.
Option (4) has a factual inaccuracy – socialists will find it difficult to predict or define peace, but they will not be unable to do so. Hence, we can eliminate this option as well. Therefore, option (2) is the correct choice.
Answer: (2) Socialists have to define peace or other objectives without having experienced it.
Example 16
The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best summarises the author's position.
Poker does have an element of chance, to be sure—but what doesn’t? Are poker professionals “gamblers” any more than the man signing away his life on a professional football contract, who may or may not be injured the next week, or find himself summarily dropped from the team in a year because he failed to live up to his promise? We judge the poker player for gambling; we respect the stockbroker for doing the same thing with far less information. In some ways, poker players gamble less than most. After all, even if they lose an arm, they can still play.
(1) Poker players are judged for 'gambling', but aren't we all gamblers?
(2) Poker players are termed 'gamblers', but a football player gambles much more.
(3) Many professions are akin to gambling, none more so that professional footballers.
(4) Poker players have a lot more information than football players and stockbrokers.
Option (1) summarises the key message. The latter part of the sentence (aren't we all gamblers) can be derived from the first sentence in the paragraph (but what doesn’t). Options (2) and (3) are contrasting poker with football, whereas the author's key message is to explain some gambling is there in many professions (football and broking are just examples). Therefore, these two options can be eliminated.
Option (4) is speaking about information and not gambling – and hence, can be eliminated. Thus, option (1) is the correct choice.
Answer: (1) Poker players are judged for 'gambling', but aren't we all gamblers?
Poker does have an element of chance, to be sure—but what doesn’t? Are poker professionals “gamblers” any more than the man signing away his life on a professional football contract, who may or may not be injured the next week, or find himself summarily dropped from the team in a year because he failed to live up to his promise? We judge the poker player for gambling; we respect the stockbroker for doing the same thing with far less information. In some ways, poker players gamble less than most. After all, even if they lose an arm, they can still play.
(1) Poker players are judged for 'gambling', but aren't we all gamblers?
(2) Poker players are termed 'gamblers', but a football player gambles much more.
(3) Many professions are akin to gambling, none more so that professional footballers.
(4) Poker players have a lot more information than football players and stockbrokers.
Solution
In this paragraph, the author seeks to prove that it is okay to gamble at poker (as a profession). The author cites examples of football players and stockbrokers to showcase that there are other respectable professions with a higher degree of chance. Such professionals are not judged, whereas poker players are.Option (1) summarises the key message. The latter part of the sentence (aren't we all gamblers) can be derived from the first sentence in the paragraph (but what doesn’t). Options (2) and (3) are contrasting poker with football, whereas the author's key message is to explain some gambling is there in many professions (football and broking are just examples). Therefore, these two options can be eliminated.
Option (4) is speaking about information and not gambling – and hence, can be eliminated. Thus, option (1) is the correct choice.
Answer: (1) Poker players are judged for 'gambling', but aren't we all gamblers?
Example 17
The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best summarises the author's position.
[CAT 2018]
The early optimism about sport's deterrent effects on delinquency was premature as researchers failed to find any consistent relationships between sports participation and deviance. As the initial studies were based upon cross-sectional data and the effects captured were short-term, it was problematic to test and verify the temporal sequencing of events suggested by the deterrence theory. The correlation between sport and delinquency could not be disentangled from class and cultural variables known. Choosing individuals to play sports in the first place was problematic, which became more acute in the subsequent decades as researchers began to document just how closely sports participation was linked to social class indicators.
(1) Contradicting the previous optimism, latter researchers have proved that there is no consistent relationship between sports participation and deviance.
(2) Statistical and empirical weaknesses stand in the way of inferring any relationship between sports participation and deviance.
(3) Sports participation is linked to class and cultural variables such as education, income, and social capital.
(4) There is a direct relationship between sport participation and delinquency but it needs more empirical evidence.
This is the key message, and it is captured in option (2).
Option (1) states that there is no relationship between sports and crime, and option (4) mentions that there is a relationship. Both options are factually incorrect, as we do not know if there is a correlation.
Option (3) is unrelated to the key message, and can be eliminated.
Answer: (2) Statistical and empirical weaknesses stand in the way of inferring any relationship between sports participation and deviance.
[CAT 2018]
The early optimism about sport's deterrent effects on delinquency was premature as researchers failed to find any consistent relationships between sports participation and deviance. As the initial studies were based upon cross-sectional data and the effects captured were short-term, it was problematic to test and verify the temporal sequencing of events suggested by the deterrence theory. The correlation between sport and delinquency could not be disentangled from class and cultural variables known. Choosing individuals to play sports in the first place was problematic, which became more acute in the subsequent decades as researchers began to document just how closely sports participation was linked to social class indicators.
(1) Contradicting the previous optimism, latter researchers have proved that there is no consistent relationship between sports participation and deviance.
(2) Statistical and empirical weaknesses stand in the way of inferring any relationship between sports participation and deviance.
(3) Sports participation is linked to class and cultural variables such as education, income, and social capital.
(4) There is a direct relationship between sport participation and delinquency but it needs more empirical evidence.
Solution
In this paragraph, we learn that people were initially optimistic at the prospect of reduced crime through sports (sport's deterrent effects on delinquency). Delinquency means minor crimes, or crimes committed by young people. We also understand that optimism was premature, as no such correlation was found. Note that this wasn't disproved either, it was merely difficult to study the effect of sports (short-term studies, difficult to test, correlation...could not be disentangled from...variables, choosing...was problematic).This is the key message, and it is captured in option (2).
Option (1) states that there is no relationship between sports and crime, and option (4) mentions that there is a relationship. Both options are factually incorrect, as we do not know if there is a correlation.
Option (3) is unrelated to the key message, and can be eliminated.
Answer: (2) Statistical and empirical weaknesses stand in the way of inferring any relationship between sports participation and deviance.
Want to read the full content
Unlock this content & enjoy all the features of the platform
Subscribe Now
