Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Updated on: 30 Aug 2020, 01:20
Originally posted by RaviChandra on 13 Sep 2010, 23:57.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 30 Aug 2020, 01:20, edited 4 times in total.
Last edited by Sajjad1994 on 30 Aug 2020, 01:20, edited 4 times in total.
Updated - Complete topic (1059).
Kudos
Bookmarks
A game of strategy, as currently conceived in game theory, is a situation in which two or more “players” make choices among available alternatives (moves). The totality of choices determines the outcomes of the game, and it is assumed that the rank order of preferences for the outcomes is different for different players. Thus the “interests” of the players are generally in conflict. Whether these interests are diametrically opposed or only partially opposed depends on the type of game.
Psychologically, most interesting situations arise when the interests of the players are partly coincident and partly opposed, because then one can postulate not only a conflict among the players but also inner conflicts within the players. Each is torn between a tendency to cooperate, so as to promote the common interests, and a tendency to complete, so as to enhance his own individual interests.
Internal conflicts are always psychologically interesting. What we vaguely call “interesting” psychology is in very great measure the psychology of inner conflict. Inner conflict is also held to be an important component of serious literature as distinguished from less serious genres. The classical tragedy, as well as the serious novel, reveals the inner conflict of central figures. The superficial adventure story, on the other hand, depicts only external conflict; that is, the threats of the person with whom the leade (or viewer) identifies stem in these stories exclusively from external obstacles and from the adversaries who create them. On the most primitive level this sort of external conflict is psychologically empty. In the fisticuffs between the protagonists of good and evil, no psychological problems are involved or, at any rate, none are depicted in juvenile represents of conflict.
The detective story, the “adult” analogue of a juvenile adventure tale, has at times been described as a glorification of intellectualized conflict. However, a great deal of the interest in the plots of these stories is sustained by withholding the unraveling of a solution to a problem. The effort of solving the problem is in itself not a conflict if the adversary (the unknown criminal) remains passive, like Nature, whose secrets the scientist supposedly unravels by deduction. If the adversary actively puts obstacles in the detective’s path toward the solution, there is genuine conflict. But the conflict is psychologically interesting only to the extent that it contains irrational components such as tactical error on the criminal’s part or the detective’s insight into some psychological quick of the criminal or something of this sort. Conflict conducted in a perfectly rational manner is psychologically no more interesting than a standard Western. For example, Tic-tac-toe, played perfectly by both players, is completely devoid of psychological interest. Chess may be psychologically interesting but only to the extent that it is played not quite rationally. Played completely rationally, chess would not be different from Tic-tac-toe.
In short, a pure conflict of interest (what is called a zero-sum game) although it offers a wealth of interesting conceptual problems, is not interesting psychologically, except to the extent that its conduct departs from rational norms.
Psychologically, most interesting situations arise when the interests of the players are partly coincident and partly opposed, because then one can postulate not only a conflict among the players but also inner conflicts within the players. Each is torn between a tendency to cooperate, so as to promote the common interests, and a tendency to complete, so as to enhance his own individual interests.
Internal conflicts are always psychologically interesting. What we vaguely call “interesting” psychology is in very great measure the psychology of inner conflict. Inner conflict is also held to be an important component of serious literature as distinguished from less serious genres. The classical tragedy, as well as the serious novel, reveals the inner conflict of central figures. The superficial adventure story, on the other hand, depicts only external conflict; that is, the threats of the person with whom the leade (or viewer) identifies stem in these stories exclusively from external obstacles and from the adversaries who create them. On the most primitive level this sort of external conflict is psychologically empty. In the fisticuffs between the protagonists of good and evil, no psychological problems are involved or, at any rate, none are depicted in juvenile represents of conflict.
The detective story, the “adult” analogue of a juvenile adventure tale, has at times been described as a glorification of intellectualized conflict. However, a great deal of the interest in the plots of these stories is sustained by withholding the unraveling of a solution to a problem. The effort of solving the problem is in itself not a conflict if the adversary (the unknown criminal) remains passive, like Nature, whose secrets the scientist supposedly unravels by deduction. If the adversary actively puts obstacles in the detective’s path toward the solution, there is genuine conflict. But the conflict is psychologically interesting only to the extent that it contains irrational components such as tactical error on the criminal’s part or the detective’s insight into some psychological quick of the criminal or something of this sort. Conflict conducted in a perfectly rational manner is psychologically no more interesting than a standard Western. For example, Tic-tac-toe, played perfectly by both players, is completely devoid of psychological interest. Chess may be psychologically interesting but only to the extent that it is played not quite rationally. Played completely rationally, chess would not be different from Tic-tac-toe.
In short, a pure conflict of interest (what is called a zero-sum game) although it offers a wealth of interesting conceptual problems, is not interesting psychologically, except to the extent that its conduct departs from rational norms.
OA:C
A)internal conflicts, rather than external conflicts, form an important component of serious literature as distinguished from less serious genres.
B)only juveniles or very few “adults” actually experience external conflict, while internal conflict is more widely prevalent in society.
C)in situations of internal conflict, individuals experience a dilemma in resolving their own preferences for different outcomes.
D)there are no threats to the reader (or viewer) in case of external conflicts
OA:B
A) A statistician’s dilemma over choosing the best method to solve an optimization problem.
B) A chess player’s predicament over adopting a defensive strategy against an aggressive opponent
C) A mountaineer’s choice of the best path to Mt. Everest from the base camp.
D) A finance manger’s quandary over the best way of raising money from the market.
OA:D
A) Assuming that the rank order of preferences for options is different for different players.
B) Accepting that the interests of different players are often in conflict.
C) Not assuming that the interests are in complete disagreement.
D) All of the above
OA:C
A) scientists study inanimate objects, while detectives deal with living criminals or law offenders.
B) scientists study known objects, while detectives have to deal with unknown criminals or law offenders.
C) scientists study phenomena that are not actively altered, while detectives deal with phenomena that have been deliberately influenced to mislead.
D)scientists study psychologically interesting phenomena, while detectives deal with “adult” analogues of juvenile adventure tales.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Reading Comprehension (RC) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
14 Sep 2010, 00:03
Kudos
Bookmarks
OA:
CBDC
15 Sep 2010, 20:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
For
2) Which, according to the author, would qualify as interesting psychology?
A) A statistician’s dilemma over choosing the best method to solve an optimization problem.
B) A chess player’s predicament over adopting a defensive strategy against an aggressive opponent
C) A mountaineer’s choice of the best path to Mt. Everest from the base camp.
D) A finance manger’s quandary over the best way of raising money from the market.
i useds stratergy as except B all other opions are similar in nature so i picked B. Is it ok to use such stratergy for solving RC
2) Which, according to the author, would qualify as interesting psychology?
A) A statistician’s dilemma over choosing the best method to solve an optimization problem.
B) A chess player’s predicament over adopting a defensive strategy against an aggressive opponent
C) A mountaineer’s choice of the best path to Mt. Everest from the base camp.
D) A finance manger’s quandary over the best way of raising money from the market.
i useds stratergy as except B all other opions are similar in nature so i picked B. Is it ok to use such stratergy for solving RC
