โณ Enroll Now for PGDBA โ€“ Special Offer Available


CAT 2025 Question Paper | VARC Slot 1

CAT Previous Year Paper | CAT VARC Questions | Question 22

The only way to master VARC during your CAT Preparation is by practicing actual CAT question paper. Practice RCs with detailed video and text solutions from Previous CAT Question Papers.

The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.

How can we know what someone else is thinking or feeling, let alone prove it in court? In his 1863 book, A General View of the Criminal Law of England, James Fitzjames Stephen, among the most celebrated legal thinkers of his generation, was of the opinion that the assessment of a person’s mental state was an inference made with “little consciousness.” In a criminal case, jurors, doctors, and lawyers could watch defendants—scrutinizing clothing, mannerisms, tone of voice—but the best they could hope for were clues. . . . Rounding these clues up to a judgment about a defendant’s guilt, or a defendant’s life, was an act of empathy and imagination. . . . The closer the resemblance between defendants and their judges, the easier it was to overlook the gap that inference filled. Conversely, when a defendant struck officials as unlike themselves, whether by dint of disease, gender, confession, or race, the precariousness of judgments about mental state was exposed.

In the nineteenth century, physicians who specialized in the study of madness and the care of the insane held themselves out as experts in the new field of mental science. Often called alienists or mad doctors, they were the predecessors of modern psychiatrists, neurologists, and psychologists. . . . The opinions of family and neighbors had once been sufficient to sift the sane from the insane, but a growing belief that insanity was a subtle condition that required expert, medical diagnosis pushed physicians into the witness box. . . . Lawyers for both prosecution and defense began to recruit alienists to assess defendants’ sanity and to testify to it in court.

Irresponsibility and insanity were not identical, however. Criminal responsibility was a legal concept and not, fundamentally, a medical one. Stephen explained: “The question ‘What are the mental elements of responsibility?’ is, and must be, a legal question. It cannot be anything else, for the meaning of responsibility is liability to punishment.” . . . Nonetheless, medical and legal accounts of what it meant to be mentally sound became entangled and mutually referential throughout the nineteenth century. Lawyers relied on medical knowledge to inform their opinions and arguments about the sanity of their clients. Doctors commented on the legal responsibility of their patients. Ultimately, the fields of criminal law and mental science were both invested in constructing an image of the broken and damaged psyche that could be contrasted with the whole and healthy one. This shared interest, and the shared space of the criminal courtroom, made it nearly impossible to consider responsibility without medicine, or insanity without law. . . .

Physicians and lawyers shared more than just concern for the mind. Class, race, and gender bound these middle-class, white, professional men together, as did family ties, patriotism, Protestantism, business ventures, the alumni networks of elite schools and universities, and structures of political patronage. But for all their affinities, men of medicine and law were divided by contests over the borders of criminal responsibility, as much within each profession as between them. Alienists steadily pushed the boundaries of their field, developing increasingly complex and capacious definitions of insanity. Eccentricity and aggression came to be classified as symptoms of mental disease, at least by some.

Question 22 : “Conversely, when a defendant struck officials as unlike themselves, whether by dint of disease, gender, confession, or race, the precariousness of judgments about mental state was exposed.” Which one of the following best describes the use of the word “confession” in this sentence?

  1. The defendants struck out at the officials and then confessed to the act.
  2. Referring to the practice of ‘confession’ in some faiths, here it is a metaphor for the religion of the defendant.
  3. Referring to the defendant’s confession of his or her crime as false, because ‘dint’ is an archaic form of ‘didn’t’ or ‘did not’.
  4. Referring to the gender, race or disease claimed as a defence by the defendant, here it is a synonym for ‘professing’ a gender, race, or disease.

โณ Enroll Now for PGDBA โ€“ Special Offer Available


2IIM : Best Online CAT Coaching.

Best CAT Online Coaching
Try upto 40 hours for free
Learn from the best!


2IIM : Best Online CAT Coaching.


Best CAT Coaching in Chennai


CAT Coaching in Chennai - CAT 2022
Limited Seats Available - Register Now!


Explanatory Answer

One of the meanings of 'confession' is declaration of faith. Option 2 is the correct choice. Note that this answer can be found also but eliminating the other choices and looking at the context. Clearly, the word does not relate to the act of confessing in the sense of admitting to guilt, as 'confession' is one of the many categories such as disease, gender and race by which the defendants and officials differ. So, option 2 is, by elimination, the right choice.


The answer is 'Referring to the practice of ‘confession’ in some faiths, here it is a metaphor for the religion of the defendant.'

Choice 2 is the correct answer.

CAT Questions | CAT Quantitative Aptitude

CAT Questions | Verbal Ability for CAT


Where is 2IIM located?

2IIM Online CAT Coaching
A Fermat Education Initiative,
19/43, Chakrapani St,
Sathya Garden, Saligramam, Chennai 600 093

How to reach 2IIM?

Mobile: (91) 99626 48484 / 94459 38484
WhatsApp: WhatsApp Now
Email: info@2iim.com