Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

The modern desire for wealth is not inherent in human nature, and varies with social values. If, by law, we all had exactly the same income, we should have to find some other way of being superior to our peers, as most of our craving for material possessions would cease. Thus a general increase of wealth gives no competitive advantage to an individual and therefore brings him no competitive happiness. [Identify the most logical conclusion.]

The modern desire for wealth is not inherent in human nature, and varies with social values. If, by law, we all had exactly the same income, we should have to find some other way of being superior to our peers, as most of our craving for material possessions would cease. Thus a general increase of wealth gives no competitive advantage to an individual and therefore brings him no competitive happiness. [Identify the most logical conclusion.] Correct Answer There is no competitive advantage to an individual in getting a general increase of wealth

Related Questions

Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives.
What is Gandhian philosophy? It is the religious and social ideas adopted and developed by Gandhi, first during his period in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, and later of course in India. These ideas have been further developed by later "Gandhians", most notably, in India by, Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Outside of India some of the work of, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. can also be viewed in this light. Understanding the universe to be an organic whole, the philosophy exists on several planes - the spiritual or religious, moral, political, economic, social, individual and collective. The spiritual or religious element, and God, is at its core. Human nature is regarded as fundamentally virtuous. All individuals are believed to be capable of high moral development, and of reform. The twin cardinal principles of Gandhi's thought are truth and nonviolence. It should be remembered that the English word "truth" is an imperfect translation of the Sanskrit, "satya", and "non-violence", an even more imperfect translation of "ahimsa". Derived from "sat" - "that which exists" - "satya" contains a dimension of meaning not usually associated by English speakers with the word "truth". There are other variations, too, which we need not go into here. For Gandhi, truth is the relative truth of truthfulness in word and deed, and the absolute truth - the Ultimate Reality. This ultimate truth is God (as God is also Truth) and morality - the moral laws and code - its basis. Ahimsa, far from meaning mere peacefulness or the absence of overt violence, is understood by Gandhi to denote active love - the pole opposite of violence, or "Himsa", in every sense. The ultimate station Gandhi assigns non violence stems from two main points. First, if according to the Divine Reality all life is one, then all violence committed towards another is violence towards oneself, towards the collective, whole self, and thus "self"-destructive and counter to the universal law of life, which is love. Second, Gandhi believed that ahimsa is the most powerful force in existence. Had himsa been superior to ahimsa, humankind would long ago have succeeded in destroying itself. The human race certainly could not have progressed as far as it has, even if universal justice remains far off the horizon. From both viewpoints, non violence or love is regarded as the highest law of humankind.
According to Gandhiji, what is the most powerful force in existence?
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives.
What is Gandhian philosophy? It is the religious and social ideas adopted and developed by Gandhi, first during his period in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, and later of course in India. These ideas have been further developed by later "Gandhians", most notably, in India by, Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Outside of India some of the work of, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. can also be viewed in this light. Understanding the universe to be an organic whole, the philosophy exists on several planes - the spiritual or religious, moral, political, economic, social, individual and collective. The spiritual or religious element, and God, is at its core. Human nature is regarded as fundamentally virtuous. All individuals are believed to be capable of high moral development, and of reform. The twin cardinal principles of Gandhi's thought are truth and nonviolence. It should be remembered that the English word "truth" is an imperfect translation of the Sanskrit, "satya", and "non-violence", an even more imperfect translation of "ahimsa". Derived from "sat" - "that which exists" - "satya" contains a dimension of meaning not usually associated by English speakers with the word "truth". There are other variations, too, which we need not go into here. For Gandhi, truth is the relative truth of truthfulness in word and deed, and the absolute truth - the Ultimate Reality. This ultimate truth is God (as God is also Truth) and morality - the moral laws and code - its basis. Ahimsa, far from meaning mere peacefulness or the absence of overt violence, is understood by Gandhi to denote active love - the pole opposite of violence, or "Himsa", in every sense. The ultimate station Gandhi assigns non violence stems from two main points. First, if according to the Divine Reality all life is one, then all violence committed towards another is violence towards oneself, towards the collective, whole self, and thus "self"-destructive and counter to the universal law of life, which is love. Second, Gandhi believed that ahimsa is the most powerful force in existence. Had himsa been superior to ahimsa, humankind would long ago have succeeded in destroying itself. The human race certainly could not have progressed as far as it has, even if universal justice remains far off the horizon. From both viewpoints, non violence or love is regarded as the highest law of humankind.
According to the passage, which of the following statement is not true?
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives.
What is Gandhian philosophy? It is the religious and social ideas adopted and developed by Gandhi, first during his period in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, and later of course in India. These ideas have been further developed by later "Gandhians", most notably, in India by, Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Outside of India some of the work of, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. can also be viewed in this light. Understanding the universe to be an organic whole, the philosophy exists on several planes - the spiritual or religious, moral, political, economic, social, individual and collective. The spiritual or religious element, and God, is at its core. Human nature is regarded as fundamentally virtuous. All individuals are believed to be capable of high moral development, and of reform. The twin cardinal principles of Gandhi's thought are truth and nonviolence. It should be remembered that the English word "truth" is an imperfect translation of the Sanskrit, "satya", and "non-violence", an even more imperfect translation of "ahimsa". Derived from "sat" - "that which exists" - "satya" contains a dimension of meaning not usually associated by English speakers with the word "truth". There are other variations, too, which we need not go into here. For Gandhi, truth is the relative truth of truthfulness in word and deed, and the absolute truth - the Ultimate Reality. This ultimate truth is God (as God is also Truth) and morality - the moral laws and code - its basis. Ahimsa, far from meaning mere peacefulness or the absence of overt violence, is understood by Gandhi to denote active love - the pole opposite of violence, or "Himsa", in every sense. The ultimate station Gandhi assigns non violence stems from two main points. First, if according to the Divine Reality all life is one, then all violence committed towards another is violence towards oneself, towards the collective, whole self, and thus "self"-destructive and counter to the universal law of life, which is love. Second, Gandhi believed that ahimsa is the most powerful force in existence. Had himsa been superior to ahimsa, humankind would long ago have succeeded in destroying itself. The human race certainly could not have progressed as far as it has, even if universal justice remains far off the horizon. From both viewpoints, non violence or love is regarded as the highest law of humankind.
What are the twin cardinal principles of Gandhis thought?
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives.
What is Gandhian philosophy? It is the religious and social ideas adopted and developed by Gandhi, first during his period in South Africa from 1893 to 1914, and later of course in India. These ideas have been further developed by later "Gandhians", most notably, in India by, Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan. Outside of India some of the work of, for example, Martin Luther King Jr. can also be viewed in this light. Understanding the universe to be an organic whole, the philosophy exists on several planes - the spiritual or religious, moral, political, economic, social, individual and collective. The spiritual or religious element, and God, is at its core. Human nature is regarded as fundamentally virtuous. All individuals are believed to be capable of high moral development, and of reform. The twin cardinal principles of Gandhi's thought are truth and nonviolence. It should be remembered that the English word "truth" is an imperfect translation of the Sanskrit, "satya", and "non-violence", an even more imperfect translation of "ahimsa". Derived from "sat" - "that which exists" - "satya" contains a dimension of meaning not usually associated by English speakers with the word "truth". There are other variations, too, which we need not go into here. For Gandhi, truth is the relative truth of truthfulness in word and deed, and the absolute truth - the Ultimate Reality. This ultimate truth is God (as God is also Truth) and morality - the moral laws and code - its basis. Ahimsa, far from meaning mere peacefulness or the absence of overt violence, is understood by Gandhi to denote active love - the pole opposite of violence, or "Himsa", in every sense. The ultimate station Gandhi assigns non violence stems from two main points. First, if according to the Divine Reality all life is one, then all violence committed towards another is violence towards oneself, towards the collective, whole self, and thus "self"-destructive and counter to the universal law of life, which is love. Second, Gandhi believed that ahimsa is the most powerful force in existence. Had himsa been superior to ahimsa, humankind would long ago have succeeded in destroying itself. The human race certainly could not have progressed as far as it has, even if universal justice remains far off the horizon. From both viewpoints, non violence or love is regarded as the highest law of humankind.
According to Gandhiji, truth complies to which of the following?
Read the following passage and answer the item that follows. Your answers to this item should be based on the passage only. The greatest blessing that technological progress has in store for mankind is not, of course, an accumulation of material possessions. The amount of these that can be effectively enjoyed by one individual in one lifetime is not great. But there is not the same narrow limit to the possibilities of the enjoyment of leisure. The gift of leisure may be abused by people who have had no experience of making use of it. Yet the creative use of leisure by a minority in societies has been the mainspring of all human progress beyond the primitive level. With reference to the above passage, the following assumptions have been made: 1. People always see the leisure time as a gift and use it for acquiring more material possessions. 2. Use of leisure by some people to produce new and original things has been the chief source of human progress. Which of these assumptions is/are valid?
S1: The right way to get people do things the way you want is not to compel them, drive them or for that matter even beg them or entreat them.
P: The sure way to antagonise an individual is to give him the impression that you are out to force or compel him to do something.
Q: The correct way is, therefore, to arouse a want in them and make them do, whatever you want them to do willingly, happily and eagerly.
R: It is the most difficult thing in the world to make an individual do anything against his will.
S: Even young, innocent children resent being made to do things.
S6: The secret of motivation, therefore, lies in your ability to arouse the right kind of want or thirst in the other people.

The Proper sequence should be:
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives. By practicing mindfulness and other principles, we become more aware of and present to our fears and others fears, bearing witness as a way of healing andempowering. We see the spiritual path as intertwined with the path of social action, with contemplation and action parts of the same whole, each nourishing andguiding the other. Acknowledging that our well-being depends on others makes caring for others well-being a moral responsibility.
Through a “mindful citizen” exercise, we create a story articulating who we are as individuals who are also part of communities. This exercise helps us move beyond cynicism, complacency, and despair, instead infusing us with a sense of purpose. We embrace our gifts, resolving to do our part to promote a sense of common humanity as a means toward social justice.
With this exercise, I believe we can help students bridge their divides and replace anger and distrust with compassionate connections – just as I witnessed betweenShirley and Tiffany.
Shirley returned to class after a brief hiatus, keeping a cool distance from Tiffany. But over the weeks spent together they gradually came to know each other. They practiced seeing and listening, sharing stories so different that they felt bewildered as to how they could overcome the gap. But they found that acknowledging their
differences led them to discover a place of deep connection in commonalities, such as being raised by grandmothers, and even wounds, including childhood trauma,that they never imagined existed.
In assessments of these classes, students say that these small groups become “healing communities,” where we overcome victimization and claim agency. Healingoccurs as we transcend an “us vs. them” mentality, crossing borders and forging connections. These communities show a way of reducing intergroup prejudice andfostering inclusion based in psychology research and pedagogical practice. What makes the others well-being a moral responsibility for us?
In the following question, two statements are given each followed by two conclusions I and II. You have to consider the statements to be true even if theyseem to be at variance from commonly known facts. You have to decide which of the given conclusions, if any, follows from the given statements. Statement:
(I) Happiness is around everyone, we have to find it.
(II) Happiness is a state of mind. If we can't find it, we should create it. Conclusions:
(I) Creation of happiness itself makes an individual satisfied and happy because creativity is constructive.
(II) It's all about analyzing the situational factors to understand happiness.
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives. By practicing mindfulness and other principles, we become more aware of and present to our fears and others fears, bearing witness as a way of healing andempowering. We see the spiritual path as intertwined with the path of social action, with contemplation and action parts of the same whole, each nourishing andguiding the other. Acknowledging that our well-being depends on others makes caring for others well-being a moral responsibility.
Through a “mindful citizen” exercise, we create a story articulating who we are as individuals who are also part of communities. This exercise helps us move beyond cynicism, complacency, and despair, instead infusing us with a sense of purpose. We embrace our gifts, resolving to do our part to promote a sense of common humanity as a means toward social justice.
With this exercise, I believe we can help students bridge their divides and replace anger and distrust with compassionate connections – just as I witnessed betweenShirley and Tiffany.
Shirley returned to class after a brief hiatus, keeping a cool distance from Tiffany. But over the weeks spent together they gradually came to know each other. They practiced seeing and listening, sharing stories so different that they felt bewildered as to how they could overcome the gap. But they found that acknowledging their differences led them to discover a place of deep connection in commonalities, such as being raised by grandmothers, and even wounds, including childhood trauma,that they never imagined existed.
In assessments of these classes, students say that these small groups become “healing communities,” where we overcome victimization and claim agency. Healingoccurs as we transcend an “us vs. them” mentality, crossing borders and forging connections. These communities show a way of reducing intergroup prejudice andfostering inclusion based in psychology research and pedagogical practice. How students can replace their anger and distrust?
Read the passage carefully and select the best answer to each question out of the given four alternatives. By practicing mindfulness and other principles, we become more aware of and present to our fears and others fears, bearing witness as a way of healing andempowering. We see the spiritual path as intertwined with the path of social action, with contemplation and action parts of the same whole, each nourishing andguiding the other. Acknowledging that our well-being depends on others makes caring for others well-being a moral responsibility.
Through a “mindful citizen” exercise, we create a story articulating who we are as individuals who are also part of communities. This exercise helps us move beyond cynicism, complacency, and despair, instead infusing us with a sense of purpose. We embrace our gifts, resolving to do our part to promote a sense of common humanity as a means toward social justice.
With this exercise, I believe we can help students bridge their divides and replace anger and distrust with compassionate connections – just as I witnessed betweenShirley and Tiffany.
Shirley returned to class after a brief hiatus, keeping a cool distance from Tiffany. But over the weeks spent together they gradually came to know each other. They practiced seeing and listening, sharing stories so different that they felt bewildered as to how they could overcome the gap. But they found that acknowledging their differences led them to discover a place of deep connection in commonalities, such as being raised by grandmothers, and even wounds, including childhood trauma,that they never imagined existed.
In assessments of these classes, students say that these small groups become “healing communities,” where we overcome victimization and claim agency. Healingoccurs as we transcend an “us vs. them” mentality, crossing borders and forging connections. These communities show a way of reducing intergroup prejudice andfostering inclusion based in psychology research and pedagogical practice. What was the reason behind the strong connection between Shirley and Tiffany?