Comprehension
The call of self-expression turned the village of the internet into a city, which expanded at time-lapse speed, social connections bristling like neurons in every direction. At twelve, I was writing five hundred words a day on a public LiveJournal. By twenty-five, my job was to write things that would attract, ideally, a hundred thousand strangers per post. Now I’m thirty, and most of my life is inextricable from the internet, and its mazes of incessant forced connection—this feverish, electric, unliveable hell.
The curdling of the social internet happened slowly and then all at once. The tipping point, I’d guess, was around 2012. People were losing excitement about the internet, starting to articulate a set of new truisms. Facebook had become tedious, trivial, exhausting. Instagram seemed better, but would soon reveal its underlying function as a three-ring circus of happiness and popularity and success. Twitter, for all its discursive promise, was where everyone tweeted complaints at airlines and moaned about articles that had been commissioned to make people moan. The dream of a better, truer self on the internet was slipping away. Where we had once been free to be ourselves online, we were now chained to ourselves online, and this made us self-conscious. Platforms that promised connection began inducing mass alienation. The freedom promised by the internet started to seem like something whose greatest potential lay in the realm of misuse.
Even as we became increasingly sad and ugly on the internet, the mirage of the better online self continued to glimmer. As a medium, the internet is defined by a built-in performance incentive. In real life, you can walk around living life and be visible to other people. But on the internet—for anyone to see you, you have to act. You have to communicate in order to maintain an internet presence. And, because the internet’s central platforms are built around personal profiles, it can seem—first at a mechanical level, and later on as an encoded instinct—like the main purpose of this communication is to make yourself look good. Online reward mechanisms beg to substitute for offline ones, and then overtake them. This is why everyone tries to look so hot and well-travelled on Instagram; why everyone seems so smug and triumphant on Facebook; and why, on Twitter, making a righteous political statement has come to seem, for many people, like a political good in itself. The everyday madness perpetuated by the internet lay in the madness of this architecture, which positions personal identity as the centre of the universe. It’s as if we’ve been placed on a lookout tower and Facebook’s the one who’s given a pair of binoculars that makes everything look like our own reflection.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Trick Mirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion, by Jia Tolentino, Random House, 2019.]
The curdling of the social internet happened slowly and then all at once. The tipping point, I’d guess, was around 2012. People were losing excitement about the internet, starting to articulate a set of new truisms. Facebook had become tedious, trivial, exhausting. Instagram seemed better, but would soon reveal its underlying function as a three-ring circus of happiness and popularity and success. Twitter, for all its discursive promise, was where everyone tweeted complaints at airlines and moaned about articles that had been commissioned to make people moan. The dream of a better, truer self on the internet was slipping away. Where we had once been free to be ourselves online, we were now chained to ourselves online, and this made us self-conscious. Platforms that promised connection began inducing mass alienation. The freedom promised by the internet started to seem like something whose greatest potential lay in the realm of misuse.
Even as we became increasingly sad and ugly on the internet, the mirage of the better online self continued to glimmer. As a medium, the internet is defined by a built-in performance incentive. In real life, you can walk around living life and be visible to other people. But on the internet—for anyone to see you, you have to act. You have to communicate in order to maintain an internet presence. And, because the internet’s central platforms are built around personal profiles, it can seem—first at a mechanical level, and later on as an encoded instinct—like the main purpose of this communication is to make yourself look good. Online reward mechanisms beg to substitute for offline ones, and then overtake them. This is why everyone tries to look so hot and well-travelled on Instagram; why everyone seems so smug and triumphant on Facebook; and why, on Twitter, making a righteous political statement has come to seem, for many people, like a political good in itself. The everyday madness perpetuated by the internet lay in the madness of this architecture, which positions personal identity as the centre of the universe. It’s as if we’ve been placed on a lookout tower and Facebook’s the one who’s given a pair of binoculars that makes everything look like our own reflection.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from Trick Mirror: Reflections on Self-Delusion, by Jia Tolentino, Random House, 2019.]
Question: 1
Which of the following statements can be inferred from the above passage?
Which of the following statements can be inferred from the above passage?
Show Hint
When inferring from a passage, focus on the direct implications of the author’s statements rather than adding your own assumptions.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- The internet expanded very slowly.
- The internet can be used to cause harm.
- The internet is addictive.
- The main purpose of social media platforms is to dissuade people from showing off.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
Changpeng Zhao
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which statement can be inferred from the passage about the social internet's decline from a hopeful, self-expressive space into what the author calls a "feverish, electric, unliveable hell." Let's check each option.
- Option A: The passage actually says the internet "expanded at time-lapse speed," which is the opposite of slow expansion. This option directly contradicts the text.
- Option B: The passage describes platforms built around a "performance incentive" that pushes people to look good online, and states plainly that "the freedom promised by the internet started to seem like something whose greatest potential lay in the realm of misuse." That is a direct statement that the same tools that enabled connection could be, and were, misused, which supports the inference that the internet can be used to cause harm.
- Option C: While the passage describes intense, almost constant engagement with the internet ("most of my life is inextricable from the internet"), it never frames this as addiction in a clinical sense, nor does it build an argument specifically about addictiveness. This reads more into the text than it states.
- Option D: The passage says the opposite: platforms are structured around a "performance incentive" that encourages people to make themselves look good, essentially encouraging rather than dissuading a kind of showing off.
Only option B is directly supported by the passage's own words about the internet's potential for misuse.
Therefore, the correct answer is Option B.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
All the following statements are ‘truisms’, except:
All the following statements are ‘truisms’, except:
Show Hint
Truisms are universal statements—look for the option that sounds opinion-based or specific.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- The internet has changed the way the world works.
- A preference for cat videos can reveal a lot about your personality.
- Like with any tool, digital technology has both advantages and disadvantages.
- Only time can tell what the future holds.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
Step 1: Understand what a truism is.
A truism is a statement that is obviously true and requires no further proof.
Step 2: Analyse each option.
- (A) is an obvious truth in modern times.
- (C) is a general truth about technology.
- (D) is a universally accepted statement.
- (B) is specific, subjective, and not universally true — it is not a truism.
Step 3: Identify the exception.
Option (B) stands out as it is an opinion rather than a widely accepted truth.
\[ \boxed{\text{(B) A preference for cat videos can reveal a lot about your personality}} \]
A truism is a statement that is obviously true and requires no further proof.
Step 2: Analyse each option.
- (A) is an obvious truth in modern times.
- (C) is a general truth about technology.
- (D) is a universally accepted statement.
- (B) is specific, subjective, and not universally true — it is not a truism.
Step 3: Identify the exception.
Option (B) stands out as it is an opinion rather than a widely accepted truth.
\[ \boxed{\text{(B) A preference for cat videos can reveal a lot about your personality}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which statement is NOT a truism, given that the passage describes people in 2012 starting to voice a set of new "truisms" about the internet. A truism is a statement so obviously true that it barely needs proving. Let's test each option against that definition.
- Option A: "The internet has changed the way the world works" is a broad, self-evidently true statement that almost no one would dispute; it fits the pattern of an obvious, general truth, which is what a truism is.
- Option B: "A preference for cat videos can reveal a lot about your personality" is a specific, debatable claim, not an obvious universal truth. It's the kind of pop-psychology generalisation that people might agree or disagree with, rather than something self-evidently true, which makes it stand apart from the other options.
- Option C: "Like with any tool, digital technology has both advantages and disadvantages" is a classic, uncontroversial truism, the kind of balanced, safe statement people commonly repeat about any technology.
- Option D: "Only time can tell what the future holds" is a well-worn, obviously true statement, another example of the kind of vague, safe truism people fall back on.
Options A, C, and D are all broad, self-evident statements that fit the definition of a truism, while option B is a specific and debatable claim rather than an obvious truth.
Therefore, the correct answer is Option B.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
Which of the following comes closest to the underlined sentence in the passage?
Which of the following comes closest to the underlined sentence in the passage?
Show Hint
Look for metaphors and match them to options that preserve the figurative meaning, not just literal details.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- The way we use the internet says a lot about who we are.
- The internet has reduced the distance between people living across the world.
- The internet has the ability to customise what we access based on our identity.
- The internet only shows us what we don’t want to see.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
Step 1: Recall the underlined sentence meaning.
The sentence compares Facebook to giving binoculars that make everything look like our own reflection — implying self-centred perception online.
Step 2: Match with the closest option.
Option (A) matches because it reflects that the internet mirrors our own identity and personality back to us.
Step 3: Eliminate wrong answers.
- (B) talks about reducing distance, not the reflection idea.
- (C) is about customization but not the metaphorical “self-reflection.”
- (D) is unrelated to the context.
\[ \boxed{\text{(A) The way we use the internet says a lot about who we are}} \]
The sentence compares Facebook to giving binoculars that make everything look like our own reflection — implying self-centred perception online.
Step 2: Match with the closest option.
Option (A) matches because it reflects that the internet mirrors our own identity and personality back to us.
Step 3: Eliminate wrong answers.
- (B) talks about reducing distance, not the reflection idea.
- (C) is about customization but not the metaphorical “self-reflection.”
- (D) is unrelated to the context.
\[ \boxed{\text{(A) The way we use the internet says a lot about who we are}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which option comes closest to the underlined sentence: that we've been placed on a lookout tower and given binoculars that make everything look like our own reflection. Let's break that image down and test it against each option.
- Option A: The image describes binoculars that turn everything you look at into a reflection of yourself. In other words, however you engage with the platform ends up mirroring back your own identity and personality. That is essentially saying that the way you use the internet reveals who you are, which matches the metaphor closely.
- Option B: This is about the internet shrinking physical distance between people. The underlined sentence isn't about distance or connection across geography; it's about self-reflection, so this option addresses an entirely different idea.
- Option C: This is about the internet customising content based on identity, closer to an algorithmic personalisation idea. The sentence is a metaphor about self-obsession and self-image, not about a platform's technical filtering or recommendation system, so this doesn't match either.
- Option D: This claims the internet only shows what we don't want to see, which is essentially the opposite of the sentence's meaning: the binoculars show us ourselves, not something unwanted.
Only option A accurately captures the metaphor: the way people use the internet reflects who they are, exactly like binoculars that turn everything into your own reflection.
Therefore, the correct answer is Option A.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Which of the following is a metaphor?
Which of the following is a metaphor?
Show Hint
If all options involve figurative language, choose “all of the above” only when each clearly matches the definition.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- the village of the internet
- this feverish, electric, unliveable hell
- three-ring circus of happiness and popularity and success
- all the above
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Approach Solution - 1
Step 1: Understand metaphor.
A metaphor is a figure of speech where a word or phrase is applied to something it does not literally denote, suggesting similarity.
Step 2: Evaluate options.
- (A) compares the internet to a village — metaphorical.
- (B) describes the internet as an “unliveable hell” — metaphorical.
- (C) compares social media to a “three-ring circus” — metaphorical.
Step 3: Conclusion.
All three are metaphors; hence option (D) is correct.
\[ \boxed{\text{(D) all the above}} \]
A metaphor is a figure of speech where a word or phrase is applied to something it does not literally denote, suggesting similarity.
Step 2: Evaluate options.
- (A) compares the internet to a village — metaphorical.
- (B) describes the internet as an “unliveable hell” — metaphorical.
- (C) compares social media to a “three-ring circus” — metaphorical.
Step 3: Conclusion.
All three are metaphors; hence option (D) is correct.
\[ \boxed{\text{(D) all the above}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which of the given phrases is a metaphor. A metaphor directly calls one thing another thing to suggest a similarity, without using "like" or "as." Let's test each phrase.
- Option A: "The village of the internet" directly calls the internet a village, comparing its early, small, close-knit feel to a village community, without using "like" or "as." That is a metaphor.
- Option B: "This feverish, electric, unliveable hell" directly labels the current state of the internet as "hell," using vivid, non-literal language to describe an unbearable, chaotic experience. This is also a metaphor, since the internet is literally not hell; the word is used to suggest a quality of unbearable intensity.
- Option C: "Three-ring circus of happiness and popularity and success" directly calls a platform a circus, again without "like" or "as," to suggest its exaggerated, performative spectacle. This too is a metaphor.
- Option D: Since A, B, and C are each individually confirmed to be metaphors, the option that says all of them are metaphors is the accurate one.
All three phrases directly rename something as something else to suggest a shared quality, which is exactly what a metaphor does, so the complete answer has to include all three.
Therefore, the correct answer is Option D.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
Which of the following categories best describes this piece of writing?
Which of the following categories best describes this piece of writing?
Show Hint
When determining genre, check if the passage is factual, personal, and reflective — these traits often indicate a non-fiction essay.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Non-fiction essay
- Fiction
- Academic paper
- Poem
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
Step 1: Identify writing style.
The passage is reflective, analytical, and based on the author’s personal experiences and observations about the internet.
Step 2: Match to categories.
- Fiction is ruled out — no imaginary story.
- Academic paper is ruled out — lacks formal research structure.
- Poem is ruled out — no poetic structure or rhythm.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct match is non-fiction essay, as it is personal yet analytical.
\[ \boxed{\text{(A) Non-fiction essay}} \]
The passage is reflective, analytical, and based on the author’s personal experiences and observations about the internet.
Step 2: Match to categories.
- Fiction is ruled out — no imaginary story.
- Academic paper is ruled out — lacks formal research structure.
- Poem is ruled out — no poetic structure or rhythm.
Step 3: Conclusion.
The correct match is non-fiction essay, as it is personal yet analytical.
\[ \boxed{\text{(A) Non-fiction essay}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which category best describes the given piece of writing, a personal, reflective account of the author's relationship with the internet. Let's test each option.
- Option A: The passage is written in the first person, drawing on the author's own real experiences, such as writing a LiveJournal at twelve and working online at twenty-five, while also making broader, analytical observations about internet culture. That combination of personal narrative and reflective analysis, presented as real and factual rather than invented, is the defining shape of a non-fiction essay.
- Option B: Fiction involves invented characters, events, or a constructed story. The passage presents the author's own life and observations as fact, with no invented plot or characters, so this doesn't fit.
- Option C: An academic paper generally follows a formal research structure, with citations, a thesis, and a structured argument built on evidence. The passage is written in a personal, essayistic voice without that kind of formal scholarly apparatus, so it does not match this category either.
- Option D: A poem uses verse, rhythm, or a compressed, often figurative structure distinct from prose paragraphs. The passage is written in flowing prose paragraphs, not verse, so it isn't a poem.
The passage's first-person, reflective, real-experience style is the clearest match for a non-fiction essay, ruling out fiction, an academic paper, and a poem.
Therefore, the correct answer is Option A.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions