Jump to content
Urch Forums

mewidyu

1st Level
  • Posts

    291
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by mewidyu

  1. When criticized for his ---- performance, the athlete responded with an angry ---- directed at his coach and his teammates. A disloyal . . speech B disastrous . . panegyric C eccentric . . diatribe D lackluster . . harangue E immutable . . invective it should be E rather than D plz correct me if i am wrong/////
  2. The texts we have them were written down and edited carefully by Christians proud of their ancestors but unstable to bear the thought of their indulging in heathen practices; thus, all references to the ancient religion of the Celts were_______, if not_______. (a) deleted...expunged (b) muddied...suppressed © labored...denigrated (d) aggrieved...overawed (e) obscure...ironic watever christain had written it was totally the inspiration of ancestor even he didnt bear the heaten of their own thought.....that mean he just muddled the content and any referencesis not present in content (if not....) it was suppressed....the reason behind may be he was forgot or didnt thought it is important....so i think it must be (b)
  3. Personally, I hold that knowledge knows no bounds, therefore, on realizing this awkwardness, the only thing man should do is to absorb as much new knowledge as he can for the sake of not lagging behind the pacing steps of our world. Does recognizing the limits of our knowledge and understanding serve us equally well as acquiring new facts and information, as the speaker asserts?While our everyday experience might lend credence to this assertion, further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with our Western view of how we acquire knowledge. Nevertheless,a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two. On the one hand, the speaker's assertion accords with the everyday experience of working professionals. For example, the sort of "book”knowledge that medical, law, and business students acquire, no matter how extensive, is of little use unless these students also learn to accept the uncertainties and risks inherent in professional practice and in the business world.   Any successful doctor, lawyer, or entrepreneur would undoubtedly agree that new precedents and challenges in their fields compel them to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge, and that learning to accommodate these limitations is just as important in their professional success as knowledge itself. Moreover, the additional knowledge we gain by collecting more information often diminishes-sometimes to the point \where\ marginal gains turn to marginal losses. Consider, for instance, the collection of financial- investment information. No amount of knowledge can eliminate the uncertainty and risk inherent in financial investing. Also, information overload can result in confusion, which in turn can diminish one's ability to assimilate information and apply it usefully. Thus, by recognizing the limits of their knowledge, and by accounting for those limits when making decisions, investment advisors can more effectively serve their clients. On the other hand, the speaker's assertion seems self-contradictory, for how can we know the limits of our knowledge until we've thoroughly tested those limits through exhaustive empirical observation--that is, by acquiring facts and information. For example, it would be tempting to concede that we can never understand the basic forces that govern all matter in the universe. Yet due to increasingly precise and extensive fact- finding efforts of scientists, we might now be within striking distance of understanding the key laws by which all physical matter behaves. Put another way, the speaker's assertion flies in the face of the scientific method, whose fundamental tenet is that we humans can truly know only that which we observe. Thus Francis Bacon, who first formulated the method, might assert that the speaker is fundamentally incorrect.  How can we reconcile our experience in everyday endeavors with the basic assumption underlying the scientific method? Perhaps the answer lies in a distinction between two types of knowledge--one which amounts to a mere collection of observations (i.e., facts and information), the other which is deeper and includes a realization of principles and truths underlying those observations. At this deeper level "knowledge" equals "under- standing": how we interpret, make sense of, and find meaning in the information we collect by way of observation. In the final analysis, evaluating the speaker's assertion requires that we define "knowledge,'which in turn requires that we address complex epistemological issues best left to philosophers and theologians. Yet perhaps this is the speaker's point: that we can never truly know either ourselves or the world, and that by recognizing this limitation we set ourselves free to accomplish what no amount of mere information could ever permit.
  4. In this memo, the speaker state that, now a day most of peoples prefer self study rather than attending a university or college. The statement is questionable in many ways. Does self studying could fulfill all the necessary requirement in the development of personal intellectual? Emphatically, No. So here i strong disagree with this extreme assertion. Firstly, we should acknowledge about the basic requirement for the development of intellectual, which is only provide by the pundit of that particular field. Just reading book can't supply you enough knowledge. No one can replace the place of professor. Professor is that who have had specialization on that field and can make you understand better than book. Nobody can get success without any ones guidance. Secondly, even if we study just bookish stuff rather than taking guidance from professor, than its obvious that they would never withstand in now a day competition. for example, in many field practical n assignment tend to kept important place rather than theoretical n bookish knowledge, which could only possible in University. In research field or aviation practical, nobody can expense that much for their individual practice. Thirdly, studying alone is less interesting than getting knowledge with co-partner , university not only provide you best curriculum they also provide you better environment where you could enjoy while studying with your colleague. This environment not only provide you enjoy but they also stimulate you by competition. Fourtly, one great writer had wrote in his book that every student should go through with all his books, before getting his bachelor degree, no matter how tough it is. Everyone prefer easy and interesting subject and try to overcome tough ones. But in University they concentrate in every subject equally regardless of anyone's particular interest, so anyhow all student can cover all curriculum. In sum, the statement is totally question. Rest self studying student cannot withstand in front of university graduate student. University not only provide best curriculum but it also provide enjoyable environment, assignment or practical, which is not possible in case of self study.
  5. According to the statement, each person in society not only obey just laws but also disobey and resist unjust laws. Here I strongly disagree with the author assertion, Is that author having any kind of scale which classify laws into just laws and unjust laws? Emphatically , NO. The whole contention is misleading. Firstly, we should know that what is just laws and which one is unjust. For this we should have acknowledgement about laws, although in certain case it’s easy to classify laws into just and unjust laws. But in some case we could not able to make out exactly what is just and unjust. The fairness of any law it’s all depend on individual view. For example, consider the issue of Gay marriage, in some country it’s trivial thing , but in certain countries it is just out of imagine thing. Secondly, if we took example of individual person then, one certain law would have various make out accord to their personal interest. Let’s have one example for this, Abortion, although it’s a social crime, but in somehow certain people tend to view that it’s not any unjust. If we take look on ever increasing population, then we could say, yeah. definitely it should allow. But if we look the scenario from different view then, in this ever increasing population, the majority of women population is relatively decreasing, just because of mainly girl abortion . So, it’s all personal interest which justify laws into just and unjust. Thirdly, if we are suppose to follow the just laws strictly then it’s too difficult, for example, according to government it’s a crime to emit toxic wastage in nearby river by certain companies. Such laws are designed chiefly to protect public health. But if we strictly complying this laws then, it might bankrupt the companies, and would lay off employees or market price of that product would increase in order to compensate the cost of compliance.So this indicate that classification of law is all depend on personal view. Fourtly, if we disobey the so called unjust laws according to many subjective view then it might jeopardize country. For example, our federal system of income taxation, according to many taxpayer it’s were a unjust law and if we admit it and would start boycotte it then, it would definitely bankrupt the government. In sum, it’s very hard to purely classify laws into just n unjust laws. So the speaker’s statement is here totally questionable. Cause there is no universal criteria to judge justness of laws.
  6. hey dipesh .. thanx for the sharing .. its really a gud material
  7. as it is not mentioned that the figure is not drawn to scale and it seems that it is right angle triangle thats why i opt B... may be i m wrong but what i saw is right angle triangle..
  8. angle will be= 360/no of sides of the polygon=360/8=45
  9. total nos will range between 800-999 so there will be total of 100 evens and 100 odds so the percentage will be 100*100/799=12.5%
  10. 64 cubic meter means 6 faces of 16 sq mtrs.. then it will take 6 litres of enamel
  11. congrats.. its really a great score
  12. area before increment= 80*50=4000 after increment= 5400 so the shorter side will be 5400/80=67.5 the increment in shorter side=67.5-50=17.5 so the increment= 17.5*100/50= 35%
  13. thanx.. its a easy one.. just solve the equation and yu will get the x=4.5 then put the value of x in each options.. yu will get the right answer in 1st attempt only
  14. thats the shortest method to solve this problem... thanx...
  15. and sorry .. donno what does it mean?:):)
  16. area of the large square= 8*8=64 sqr inch area of the rectangular floor= 10*12*12*12=17280 sqr inch so in the rectangular floor there will be total of 17280/64=270 tiles... as in one tile there are 3 L-shaped tiles so there will be total of 270*3=810 tiles
  17. from the first line.... x=y+600 from the second line x-100=3(y-100) after solving this we get y= 400 x=400+600=1000 so the total capacity will be 400+1000=1400 gallon yu can find the same question in the thread below... check the question- 9 and its explanation.. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/gre-math/98559-need-explanation-bb-qs.html
  18. 1st approach... as there are total of 5*5*4 i.e. 100 cubes so the volume if the rectangular solid will be 100 times the volume of the single cube... = 100*4*4*4=6400 cc 2nd approach length of the rectangular solid= 4 cm*5 = 20cm breadth of the rectangular solid = 4 cm*4 = 16cm height of the rectangular solid = 4 cm*5 = 20 cm so the area of the rectangular solid will be 20*16*20=6400 cc
  19. but as i think answer will be 1/3 look it here.. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/gre-math/96613-cube-problem.html
  20. to satisfy the equation we must put value s-1=13 and r-1=11 (11*13=13*11) so s-1=13 then s=14 r-1=11 then r=12 so r+s= 26
  21. w hours and z mins= w hours +z/60 hours= w+z/60 hrs so the speed will be = distance/ time = x / (w+z/60) after solving we get.. = 60x/(60w+z)
×
×
  • Create New...