Progress became a theme in European thought in about 1750.

The thinkers of the Enlightenment wanted to replace the Biblical account of time (Genesis, Creation, Fall, Redemption) with a myth which put Man, not God, at the centre of the story. The narrative of human progress was understood to be both a material and a moral process; not just changing our technologies, but altering our instincts-and for the better. We now live in ironic, anti-heroic times. Do we still believe in the story of progress? It sits in the attic of our minds like a glorious Victorian antique, as magnificent as a stuffed moose head and just as useless. Perhaps worse than useless. Modern political correctness has lodged a suspicion in our mind about the Ascent of Man. What do you mean, Man? What about Woman? And which Man? Surely not the European conquerors? And Ascent? Surely youre not implying that western civilisation is superior to everything thats gone before? And so on. The Ascent of Man may be an idea we had better do without. Only 20 years ago, this did not seem so. That great educator and scientist, Jacob Bronowski, made it the title of his famous BBC documentary. For Bronowski, the Ascent of Man was the story of human evolution. It began over 4m years ago with the emergence of hominid species in Africa-furry, ape-like creatures who began the human ascent, about 1m years later, by standing on their hind legs. This released their hands to use tools, increasing their food production capacity, their brain size, their superiority over other ape and animal competitors. There were an unknown number of hominid competitors, which were gradually reduced to two and then-100,000 years ago-to one: homo sapiens. Only this creature achieved language, and this gave him mastery of himself and nature. As homo sapiens, we are the product not of one millennium, but of at least a thousand. We may look up at the sky through the lenses of a scientific worldview, but the brain which receives the signals is an organism imprinted with several million years of evolutionary terrors: of animals, strange signs in the skies and the omnipresence of imminent death. For Bronowski the Ascent of Man was the story of mans freedom-his gradual emancipation from nature. But that is not the message which contemporary culture has heard. It has taken the evidence of palaeo-anthropology and archaeology as confirmation that we are more determined by our ancient past than we had supposed. The longer we discover our pre-history to be, the more deeply savage we feel. This reading of the Ascent of Man has been reinforced by genetics. The explosion in genetic research in the past 25 years-the mapping of the human genome, the discovery of the genetic origins of certain diseases-has spurred a huge amount of confident inference about the genetic origin of everything from the sexual division of labour to the incest taboo. Not since the decades following the publication of Darwins On the Origin of Species in 1859 has the public talk of contemporary culture been so dominated by genetic and evolutionary determinism.

In the 50 years since 1945, serious moral thinking has devoted itself to the deep wound which 20th century slaughter inflicted on our pride in ourselves as a species. Time has not healed the wound. If anything, the Holocaust has become more of an obsession with the passing years, making everyone, not just Jews and other victim peoples, ask themselves whether they can trust other human beings again. For trust had been one of the subliminal messages of the Ascent of Man. From the Enlightenment onwards, we had been taught that we were one species; we shared the same ascent, the same path upwards to the light. Beneath difference there was identity, a similar historical process of civilisation which gave us good reasons to trust each other in ultimate moments of moral risk. Yet what was there left to trust when men treated each other so much worse than animals? So, in the 50 years since 1945, we have lived with a deep ambivalence about progress.

Q.1 The author mentions the thinkers of the Enlightenment in order to: a b c d E show the Bible as an impediment in the way of progress. demonstrate Man as the master of the whole world around him. affirm that human progress is akin to mastery over the world. illustrate the transformation in approach towards life. display his exclusive perspective on things.

Q.2 Which of the following cannot be validated from the passage? a b c d e That people have lost their heroes. That people have become skeptical. That heroism has been overtaken by hubris and uppishness. Those olden values have become meaningless. All of these.

Q.3 The author mentions the details about the documentary in order to: a b c d e detail his acute sense of surveillance. specify the decline of man. nostalgically talk about the work. showcase how man evolved. pinpoint the gaps in the theory of evolution.

Q.4 Which is the thematic highlight of this passage? a The Enlightenment idea of moral progress is under siege from all sides, but it is worth hanging on to the battered idea. b c d e The ascent of man is not under the dominion of man himself. Man has been the plaything of fate and nature. The path of human progress has entered the realm of freedom. A passage to the future and overcoming fate.

Q.5 The writer of this passage is most likely a/ an: a Biographer b Philosopher c Economist d Journalist e Historian

SOLUTIONS 1. Correct Option is: "d"

Solution:The author mentions in the first few lines that the thinkers wanted to include the narrative of human progress as supreme. It was understood to be both a material and a moral process; not just changing our technologies but altering our instincts-and for the better. This makes Option (d) correct. Options (a) and (e) are untrue and hence

incorrect. Option (b)seems too strident to be chosen. Option (c) goes adrift from the purpose, hence is negated. 2. Correct Option is: "a" Solution:The totality of moral destruction- Holocaust has caused the olden values to lose their relevance; people to become skeptical and heroism to be overtaken by superficial self-pride. The 20th century is marked by human frailties- ignorance and conceit. The passage alludes to options (b), (c) and (d). These are mentioned in Para 6 and Para 7. Option (a) seems flimsy. Option (e) is incorrect. 3. Correct Option is: "b" Solution:The author laments the descent of man into infighting and somehow chasing ideas which can no longer be called heroic. Read lines, of para 5, For Bronowski the Ascent of Man was the story of mans freedom-his gradual emancipation from nature. But that is not the message which contemporary culture has heard.....The longer we discover our pre-history to be, the more deeply savage we feel. The passage adverts to the fact that the modish culture of today is given to self-deception. This makes option (b) correct. All the other options are false and hence incorrect. 4. Correct Option is: "a" Solution: Ironically enough the ascent of man is in the hands of man himself, he can shape his future; his progress is linked to his way of thinking. Option b) contradicts the nub of the passage and hence is negated. The passage traces the changes in the way of thinking from the Enlightenment to the present. Option (c) is not evident in the passage. Thus it is incorrect. Option (d) doesnt get down to the crux of the discussion, hence is incorrect. Option (e) is vague and clumsy, hence incorrect. The idea of Enlightenment of moral progress is surrounded by contemporary culture of insolence and uppishness. Todays civilisation is built on guilt. It has not made aggression, violence, lust and savagery disappear; they are only sublimated. 5 Correct Option is: "d" Solution:Option (a) is incorrect as there is not account of any persons life. Option (b) is also incorrect as the tenor is based more on reporting than philosophy making option (d) correct. Option (c) is incorrect as economy is not discussed. Option (e) is ambiguous and cannot be opted for.