Daily Reading Comprehensions For CAT 30 June 2026

No matter how hard they try, brain scientists and cognitive psychologists will never find a copy of Beethoven’s 5th Symphony in the brain – or copies of words, pictures, grammatical rules or any other kinds of environmental stimuli. The human brain isn’t really empty, of course. But it does not contain most of the things people think it does – not even simple things such as ‘memories’.

Our shoddy thinking about the brain has deep historical roots, but the invention of computers in the 1940s got us especially confused. For more than half a century now, psychologists, linguists, neuroscientists and other experts on human behaviour have been asserting that the human brain works like a computer.

To see how vacuous this idea is, consider the brains of babies. Thanks to evolution, human neonates, like the newborns of all other mammalian species, enter the world prepared to interact with it effectively. A baby’s vision is blurry, but it pays special attention to faces, and is quickly able to identify its mother’s. It prefers the sound of voices to non-speech sounds, and can distinguish one basic speech sound from another. We are, without doubt, built to make social connections.

A healthy newborn is also equipped with more than a dozen reflexes – ready-made reactions to certain stimuli that are important for its survival. It turns its head in the direction of something that brushes its cheek and then sucks whatever enters its mouth. It holds its breath when submerged in water. It grasps things placed in its hands so strongly it can nearly support its own weight. Perhaps most important, newborns come equipped with powerful learning mechanisms that allow them to change rapidly so they can interact increasingly effectively with their world, even if that world is unlike the one their distant ancestors faced.

Senses, reflexes and learning mechanisms – this is what we start with, and it is quite a lot, when you think about it. If we lacked any of these capabilities at birth, we would probably have trouble surviving.

But here is what we are not born with: information, data, rules, software, knowledge, lexicons, representations, algorithms, programs, models, memories, images, processors, subroutines, encoders, decoders, symbols, or buffers – design elements that allow digital computers to behave somewhat intelligently. Not only are we not born with such things, we also don’t develop them – ever.

We don’t store words or the rules that tell us how to manipulate them. We don’t create representations of visual stimuli, store them in a short-term memory buffer, and then transfer the representation into a long-term memory device. We don’t retrieve information or images or words from memory registers. Computers do all of these things, but organisms do not.

Q. Based on the author's critique of the computer metaphor for human cognition, which of the following real-world scientific developments best mirrors the author's perspective on how the brain interacts with its environment? Correct Option 2 … Explanation: The author argues that the brain does not operate via "information, data, rules, software, or memory registers." Instead, it is equipped with learning mechanisms that allow it to "change rapidly so [it] can interact increasingly effectively with the world." The organism changes physically to adapt, rather than storing representations. Option 2 perfectly captures this — the muscle alters its physical state directly due to interaction with environmental stimuli without storing data or consulting a code. Options 1, 3, and 4 are textbook examples of information-processing computer models, which the author explicitly rejects. Hence, option 2. Q. Given the author's argument in the final paragraph, which of the following sentences would serve as the most logical continuation of the passage? Correct Option 2 … Explanation: The passage concludes by asserting that organisms do not store words, create visual representations in buffers, or retrieve data from memory registers. Option 2 flows perfectly from this reasoning — it takes the opening example (Beethoven's 5th) and explains it through the author's lens of structural adaptation rather than the computer model of data retrieval. Option 1 directly contradicts the paragraph it follows. Options 3 and 4 reuse the very computer metaphors that the author spends the text trying to dismantle. Hence, option 2. Q. Which of the following statements, if true, identifies the most significant vulnerability or oversight in the author's rejection of the computer metaphor for human brains? Correct Option 3 … Explanation: The author's primary argument is that the brain completely lacks "information, data, rules, processors, or design elements that allow digital computers to behave intelligently." If option 3 is true — that the brain physically processes sensory inputs through chemical pathways functionally identical to binary logic gates and rule-based mathematical pathways — it demonstrates that the brain does possess the structural equivalent of computational elements, directly invalidating the author's claim. Option 1 is a minor observational detail. Option 2 focuses on computer design rather than human brain design. Option 4 merely confirms the popular usage of the metaphor, which the author already acknowledges as a historical root. Hence, option 3. Q. The structural layout of the author's argument across the text is best characterized by which of the following progressions? Correct Option 1 … Explanation: Paragraph 1 debunks the consensus that a copy of a symphony, words, or memories exist in the brain. Paragraph 2 traces the origin of this thinking to the invention of computers in the 1940s. Paragraphs 3 and 4 contrast this with evolutionary biology by exploring what a newborn actually enters the world with. Paragraphs 5 and 6 explicitly list the boundaries of what the system lacks. Option 1 captures this exact macro-flow. Options 2, 3, and 4 misstate the author's stance, introducing elements that completely run counter to the text. Hence, option 1.