Comprehension
There were humans long before there was history. The archaic humans loved, played, formed close friendships and competed for status and power, but so did chimpanzees, baboons and elephants. There was nothing special about them.
Nobody, least of all humans themselves, had any inkling that their descendants would one day walk on the moon, split the atom, fathom the genetic code and write history books. The most important thing to know about prehistoric humans is that they were insignificant animals with no more impact on their environment than gorillas, fireflies or jellyfish.
Biologists classify organisms into species. Animals are said to belong to the same species if they tend to mate with each other, giving birth to fertile offspring. Horses and donkeys have a recent common ancestor and share many physical traits. They will mate if induced to do so – but their offspring, called mules, are sterile. Mutations in donkey DNA can therefore never cross over to horses, or vice versa. The two types of animals are consequently considered two distinct species, moving along separate evolutionary paths. By contrast, a bulldog and a spaniel may look very different, but they are members of the same species, sharing the same DNA pool. [203 words]
[Extracted from Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari]
Question: 1

Which of the following can be inferred as the most significant characteristic of prehistoric humans, as per the passage?

Show Hint

Look for the author’s explicit comparison—here humans are directly compared to other species in terms of environmental insignificance.
Updated On: Jul 3, 2026
  • Their conscious effort to alter and shape their environment for survival
  • Their complex social organization and clear hierarchical structures that set them apart from other species
  • Their evolutionary divergence was marked by warfare and dominance
  • Their inability to distinguish themselves from other species in terms of environmental impact
Show Solution

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The passage's core claim about prehistoric humans is that they blended into the animal kingdom rather than standing apart from it, with no greater effect on their surroundings than any other creature. That directly matches option D, which describes humans as indistinguishable from other species in environmental impact.
Was this answer helpful?
0
Question: 2

In the content of the Passage, the terni ‘incognisant’ most likely means:

Show Hint

Context clues near the term often reveal intended meaning—here, references to future achievements indicate “unaware.”
Updated On: Jul 3, 2026
  • Lacking intelligence
  • Unaware of their future potential
  • Incapable of social interaction
  • Disinterested in the environment
Show Solution

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The sentence right before this word talks about nobody knowing that their descendants would walk on the moon or split the atom, so the word is being used to mean unaware of what the future held, not a comment on intelligence or sociability. That points to option B.
Was this answer helpful?
0
Question: 3

Which of the following best explains why humans did,not initially stand out among other organisms?

Show Hint

When multiple animals share similar traits, the point being emphasized is behavioural similarity.
Updated On: Jul 3, 2026
  • They had fewer offspring
  • Their behaviours were not unique compared to other animals
  • They did not yet evolve the ability to use tools
  • They lacked the genetic capacity for language
Show Solution

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The passage explains humans didn't stand out because everything archaic humans did - loving, playing, forming friendships, competing for power - other animals like chimpanzees and elephants did too. Since their behaviours weren't unique, they had no special standing among other organisms, which is option B.
Was this answer helpful?
0
Question: 4

According to the passage, what determines whether two animals belong to the same species?

Show Hint

Species ≠ appearance; species = reproductive compatibility (fertile offspring).
Updated On: Jul 3, 2026
  • Their ability to produce fertile offspring
  • Their physical appearance
  • Their shared evolutionary ancestor
  • Their capacity to adapt to the environment
Show Solution

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

The passage defines species through fertility: horses and donkeys can mate, but their mule offspring is sterile, so they count as separate species despite looking similar and sharing ancestry. Bulldogs and spaniels, despite looking very different, share the same species status because they can produce fertile offspring together. This shows the deciding factor is the ability to produce fertile offspring, which is option A.
Was this answer helpful?
0
Question: 5

The passage explains the concept of species classification by:

Show Hint

When an author uses examples in pairs, look for the contrast—here horses/donkeys vs. bulldog/spaniel.
Updated On: Jul 3, 2026
  • Highlighting behavioural differences between species like horses, donkeys, bulldogs and spaniels
  • Focusing on the DNA pool they share
  • Contrasting horses and bulldogs with donkeys and spaniels to explain reproductive compatibility
  • Discussing environmental impact of species like horses and donkeys
Show Solution

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The passage's whole argument rests on a single test, can two organisms produce fertile offspring? Horses and donkeys fail this test since mules are sterile, so they count as separate species, while bulldogs and spaniels pass it since their pups can breed further, so they count as the same species. This comparison is the passage's method of explaining species classification, matching option 3.
Was this answer helpful?
0

Top Questions on Reading Comprehension