CAT 2025 Slot 1 VARC Question & Solution
Passage
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 1
The last paragraph of the passage refers to “middle-class, white, professional men”. Which one of the following qualities best describes the connection among them?
Solution:
Main Idea of the Paragraph
The last paragraph focuses on the social and professional connections between nineteenth-century physicians and lawyers. It highlights that:
- They belonged to the same elite social group
- They shared similarities in class, race, gender, education, and access to power
- Their interactions took place in courts and intellectual circles
Despite these similarities, their relationship was shaped by a key professional disagreement: how criminal responsibility should be defined and enforced.
Explanation of the Correct Answer
Why Option A Is Correct
Option A best captures the connection described in the paragraph because:
- It directly reflects the passage’s statement that these men were
“divided by contests over the borders of criminal responsibility”
- It shows that debates about criminal responsibility were:
- Central to their professional interactions
- Present both within and between the legal and medical professions
- It explains how shared elite status coexisted with intellectual and professional conflict
This makes Option A the most accurate explanation of how these groups were connected.
Why the Other Options Are Incorrect
-
Option B:
- Refers to an earlier period
- Focuses on family and neighbours judging sanity
- Does not describe elite professional networks or physician–lawyer interactions
-
Option C:
- Mentions traits that alienists sought to medicalise
- Does not explain what linked lawyers and doctors socially or professionally
-
Option D:
- Discusses how jurors infer mental states
- This appears in the first paragraph, not the last
- Does not address elite networks or professional disputes
Final Answer
Correct Answer: Option A
Question 2
According to the passage, who or what was an “alienist”?
or 'aliens' in the nineteenth century.
Solution:
Main Idea of the Passage
The passage clearly explains who alienists were in the nineteenth century. It states that they were:
- Physicians
- Specialized in the study of madness
- Involved in the care of the insane
- Considered the predecessors of modern psychiatrists, neurologists, and psychologists
The term “alienist” refers specifically to a medical professional, not a general observer or a metaphorical label.
Explanation of the Correct Answer
Why Option B Is Correct
Option B matches the passage’s definition precisely because it:
- Identifies alienists as physicians
- Correctly states their focus on madness and the care of the insane
- Aligns with the passage’s description of their professional role in the nineteenth century
This makes Option B a direct restatement of the passage’s explanation.
Why the Other Options Are Incorrect
-
Option A:
- Is too vague
- Does not mention the medical profession, which is central to the definition
-
Option C:
- Incorrectly associates “alienist” with immigrants
- This interpretation is not supported by the passage
-
Option D:
- Misreads the term as relating to extraterrestrials
- This is a literal misinterpretation and completely irrelevant to the context
Final Answer
Correct Answer: Option B
Question 3
Study the following sets of concepts and identify the set that is conceptually closest to the concerns and arguments of the passage.
Solution:
Main Idea of the Passage
The passage examines how mental state is judged in criminal law, focusing on:
- How insanity is defined and evaluated
- How legal systems determine responsibility, understood as liability to punishment
- The difficulty of inferring mental states
- The growing connection between medical expertise and legal judgement in the nineteenth century
A central concern throughout is how ideas from medicine and law come together to shape decisions about responsibility and punishment.
Explanation of the Correct Answer
Why Option D Is Correct
Option D best captures the key concepts running through the passage:
- Judgement: Refers to how jurors, judges, and officials infer mental states
- Insanity: The medical concept examined and formalised by experts
- Punishment: Directly linked to Stephen’s definition of responsibility as “liability to punishment”
- Responsibility: The core idea connecting legal and medical thinking throughout the passage
Together, these terms closely reflect the passage’s main analytical focus.
Why the Other Options Are Less Suitable
-
Option A:
- Includes business, which appears only incidentally in discussions of social ties
- It is not a central analytical concept in the passage
-
Option B:
- Focuses on patronage and belief
- These relate more to background networks than to the main legal–medical argument
-
Option C:
- Includes empathy, which does have some relevance
- However, patriotism appears only in a social context and is not part of the main analysis
Final Answer
Correct Answer: Option D
Question 4
“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?
Solution:
Main Idea of the Sentence
The sentence lists factors that made defendants appear different from the officials judging them, such as disease, gender, race, and confession. These factors highlight how fragile and subjective judgements about mental state could be.
Importantly, all the listed elements function as markers of perceived difference, not as actions taken during a trial.
Explanation of the Correct Answer
Why Option A Is Correct
Option A best explains the meaning of “confession” in this context because:
- Here, confession refers to religious confession or religious affiliation
- Like race or gender, religious identity could culturally and socially distinguish a defendant from legal officials
- In the nineteenth century, religion often marked people as outsiders or “other”
Thus, confession is used as a social identifier, fitting naturally with the other terms in the list.
Why the Other Options Are Incorrect
-
Option B:
- Treats confession as a verb meaning to claim or declare an identity
- This interpretation is not supported by the sentence structure
-
Option C:
- Introduces the idea of a false confession
- This is not mentioned or implied anywhere in the passage
-
Option D:
- Interprets confession as admitting a violent or criminal act
- This does not fit the grammatical grouping or thematic role of the word alongside disease, race, and gender