📘 What’s Inside This CAT RC Practice Post?
📝 Authentic CAT Reading Comprehension Passage: Practice with a real RC passage from a previous CAT exam.
✅ Detailed Questions with Step-by-Step Solutions: Each question is explained thoroughly for better understanding.
🔍 In-Depth Passage Analysis: Gain insights through line-by-line and paragraph-wise analysis, supplemented with a quick summary table for efficient revision.
📚 Vocabulary Enhancement: Get a separate post explaining all tough words from the passage.
RC Passage
Direction for the questions 13 to 16: The passage below is accompanied by a set of four questions. Choose the best answer to each question.
Critical theory of technology is a political theory of modernity with a normative dimension. It belongs to a tradition extending from Marx to Foucault and Habermas according to which advances in the formal claims of human rights take center stage while in the background centralization of ever more powerful public institutions and private organizations imposes an authoritarian social order.
Marx attributed this trajectory to the capitalist rationalization of production. Today it marks many institutions besides the factory and every modern political system, including so-called socialist systems. This trajectory arose from the problems of command over a disempowered and deskilled labor force; but everywhere [that] masses are organized - whether it be Foucault’s prisons or Habermas’s public sphere - the same pattern prevails. Technological design and development is shaped by this pattern as the material base of a distinctive social order. Marcuse would later point to a “project” as the basis of what he called rather confusingly “technological rationality.” Releasing technology from this project is a democratic political task.
In accordance with this general line of thought, critical theory of technology regards technologies as an environment rather than as a collection of tools. We live today with and even within technologies that determine our way of life. Along with the constant pressures to build centers of power, many other social values and meanings are inscribed in technological design. A hermeneutics of technology must make explicit the meanings implicit in the devices we use and the rituals they script. Social histories of technologies such as the bicycle, artificial lighting or firearms have made important contributions to this type of analysis. Critical theory of technology attempts to build a methodological approach on the lessons of these histories.
As an environment, technologies shape their inhabitants. In this respect, they are comparable to laws and customs. Each of these institutions can be said to represent those who live under their sway through privileging certain dimensions of their human nature. Laws of property represent the interest in ownership and control.
Customs such as parental authority represent the interest of childhood in safety and growth. Similarly, the automobile represents its users in so far as they are interested in mobility. Interests such as these constitute the version of human nature sanctioned by society. This notion of representation does not imply an eternal human nature. The concept of nature as non-identity in the Frankfurt School suggests an alternative. On these terms, nature is what lies at the limit of history, at the point at which society loses the capacity to imprint its meanings on things and control them effectively.
The reference here is, of course, not to the nature of natural science, but to the lived nature in which we find ourselves and which we are. This nature reveals itself as that which cannot be totally encompassed by the machinery of society. For the Frankfurt School, human nature, in all its transcending force, emerges out of a historical context as that context is [depicted] in illicit joys, struggles and pathologies. We can perhaps admit a less romantic . . . conception in which those dimensions of human nature recognized by society are also granted theoretical legitimacy.
RC Line-wise Explanation
Paragraph 1
Original: Critical theory of technology is a political theory of modernity with a normative dimension.
Explanation: This theory critiques modern society from a political standpoint, with an emphasis on values and what should be.
Original: It belongs to a tradition extending from Marx to Foucault and Habermas according to which advances in the formal claims of human rights take center stage while in the background centralization of ever more powerful public institutions and private organizations imposes an authoritarian social order.
Explanation: Though society appears to advance in human rights, thinkers like Marx, Foucault, and Habermas argue that behind the scenes, powerful institutions are becoming more centralized and authoritarian, undermining these freedoms.
Paragraph 2
Original: Marx attributed this trajectory to the capitalist rationalization of production.
Explanation: Marx believed that this authoritarian trend stemmed from capitalism's focus on making production more efficient.
Original: Today it marks many institutions besides the factory and every modern political system, including so-called socialist systems.
Explanation: This trend is now visible not only in factories but also in various modern institutions, even in those labeled socialist.
Original: This trajectory arose from the problems of command over a disempowered and deskilled labor force; but everywhere [that] masses are organized - whether it be Foucault’s prisons or Habermas’s public sphere - the same pattern prevails.
Explanation: The pattern started from needing to control workers who lacked power and skills, but similar control systems are found wherever large groups are organized.
Original: Technological design and development is shaped by this pattern as the material base of a distinctive social order.
Explanation: Technology is developed in ways that reflect and reinforce this controlling social structure.
Original: Marcuse would later point to a 'project' as the basis of what he called rather confusingly 'technological rationality.' Releasing technology from this project is a democratic political task.
Explanation: Marcuse said technology follows a specific agenda or “project,” and freeing technology from this control is essential for democracy.
Paragraph 3
Original: In accordance with this general line of thought, critical theory of technology regards technologies as an environment rather than as a collection of tools.
Explanation: This theory sees technology not just as tools we use, but as an environment that shapes our lives.
Original: We live today with and even within technologies that determine our way of life.
Explanation: Technology is deeply integrated into our lives and influences how we live day to day.
Original: Along with the constant pressures to build centers of power, many other social values and meanings are inscribed in technological design.
Explanation: Besides supporting power structures, technologies also carry embedded values and cultural meanings.
Original: A hermeneutics of technology must make explicit the meanings implicit in the devices we use and the rituals they script.
Explanation: A proper analysis (hermeneutics) should uncover the hidden meanings in how we use technology and the routines it creates.
Original: Social histories of technologies such as the bicycle, artificial lighting or firearms have made important contributions to this type of analysis.
Explanation: Historical studies of everyday technologies reveal how these meanings evolve and influence society.
Original: Critical theory of technology attempts to build a methodological approach on the lessons of these histories.
Explanation: The theory uses these historical insights to develop its own systematic method of analysis.
Paragraph 4
Original: As an environment, technologies shape their inhabitants. In this respect, they are comparable to laws and customs.
Explanation: Like laws and traditions, technology influences people’s behavior and identity.
Original: Each of these institutions can be said to represent those who live under their sway through privileging certain dimensions of their human nature.
Explanation: These systems shape what aspects of human nature are emphasized or valued.
Original: Laws of property represent the interest in ownership and control.
Explanation: Property laws reflect our desire to own and manage things.
Original: Customs such as parental authority represent the interest of childhood in safety and growth.
Explanation: Social customs like parental control show society's focus on protecting and nurturing children.
Original: Similarly, the automobile represents its users in so far as they are interested in mobility.
Explanation: The car supports and expresses people's interest in moving freely and quickly.
Original: Interests such as these constitute the version of human nature sanctioned by society.
Explanation: These examples show how society approves and promotes specific human traits or desires.
Paragraph 5
Original: This notion of representation does not imply an eternal human nature.
Explanation: This idea doesn’t claim that human nature is fixed or unchanging.
Original: The concept of nature as non-identity in the Frankfurt School suggests an alternative.
Explanation: The Frankfurt School offers a different view, where nature is defined by what cannot be controlled or defined.
Original: On these terms, nature is what lies at the limit of history, at the point at which society loses the capacity to imprint its meanings on things and control them effectively.
Explanation: Nature exists at the edge of society’s control—where things resist being shaped by human intentions.
Paragraph 6
Original: The reference here is, of course, not to the nature of natural science, but to the lived nature in which we find ourselves and which we are.
Explanation: This doesn’t mean the scientific view of nature, but the personal, lived experience of being human.
Original: This nature reveals itself as that which cannot be totally encompassed by the machinery of society.
Explanation: Such lived human nature cannot be fully absorbed or controlled by social systems.
Original: For the Frankfurt School, human nature, in all its transcending force, emerges out of a historical context as that context is [depicted] in illicit joys, struggles and pathologies.
Explanation: The Frankfurt School sees true human nature arising through forbidden pleasures, resistance, and social disorders—within history itself.
Original: We can perhaps admit a less romantic . . . conception in which those dimensions of human nature recognized by society are also granted theoretical legitimacy.
Explanation: We might also accept a more practical idea that includes socially accepted aspects of human nature as valid for theory as well.
RC Paragraph Explanation
Paragraph 1 Summary
Critical theory of technology is a politically charged framework that critiques how modern advancements in human rights mask the authoritarian control imposed by growing institutions. It builds on thinkers like Marx, Foucault, and Habermas.
Paragraph 2 Summary
Marx traced this control to capitalist production systems, but similar dynamics occur in all modern institutions. Technology, influenced by this need for control, reinforces these structures, and Marcuse suggested that overcoming this pattern is essential for democracy.
Paragraph 3 Summary
This theory views technologies as immersive environments that shape our lives and embody social values. Analyzing the embedded meanings in technology requires a historical and interpretive approach.
Paragraph 4 Summary
Technologies, like laws and customs, mold human identity by favoring specific traits and interests. The tools we use reflect what society values in human behavior.
Paragraph 5 Summary
The representation of human nature through technology doesn’t imply a fixed essence. Instead, the Frankfurt School suggests nature is what resists being molded by societal influence.
Paragraph 6 Summary
This nature is not the scientific kind but the lived, human experience that escapes total control. While the Frankfurt School sees it in resistance and struggle, a more balanced view might also validate socially approved traits.
RC Quick Table Summary
| Paragraph Number | Main Idea |
|---|---|
| Paragraph 1 | Critical theory of technology critiques modernity's hidden authoritarianism. |
| Paragraph 2 | Technological development reinforces social control across systems. |
| Paragraph 3 | Technologies shape social life and embody values; analysis must uncover these meanings. |
| Paragraph 4 | Technology, like law and custom, shapes and reflects sanctioned human interests. |
| Paragraph 5 | Human nature is not fixed; it emerges where society's influence breaks down. |
| Paragraph 6 | Lived human nature resists societal control, though social norms also define it. |
RC Questions
Ques 13. Which one of the following statements best reflects the main argument of the fourth paragraph of the passage?
Ques 14. Which one of the following statements could be inferred as supporting the arguments of the passage?
Ques 15. Which one of the following statements contradicts the arguments of the passage?
Ques 16. All of the following claims can be inferred from the passage, EXCEPT:
