CAT 2025 Slot 2 · VARC · RC passage 3: Big Tech, Language and Complicity

The full passage and all 4 questions (Q13–Q16) from CAT 2025 Slot 2, with answers and solutions.

The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.

In [my book "Searches"], I chronicle how big technology companies have exploited human language for their gain. We let this happen, I argue, because we also benefit somewhat from using the products. It's a dynamic that makes us complicit in big tech's accumulation of wealth and power: we're both victims and beneficiaries. I describe this complicity, but I also enact it, through my own internet archives: my Google searches, my Amazon product reviews and, yes, my ChatGPT dialogues. . . .

People often describe chatbots' textual output as "bland" or "generic" – the linguistic equivalent of a beige office building. OpenAI's products are built to "sound like a colleague", as OpenAI puts it, using language that, coming from a person, would sound "polite", "empathetic", "kind", "rationally optimistic" and "engaging", among other qualities. OpenAI describes these strategies as helping its products seem "professional" and "approachable". This appears to be bound up with making us feel safe . . .

Trust is a challenge for artificial intelligence (AI) companies, partly because their products regularly produce falsehoods and reify sexist, racist, US-centric cultural norms. While the companies are working on these problems, they persist: OpenAI found that its latest systems generate errors at a higher rate than its previous system. In the book, I wrote about the inaccuracies and biases and also demonstrated them with the products. When I prompted Microsoft's Bing Image Creator to produce a picture of engineers and space explorers, it gave me an entirely male cast of characters; when my father asked ChatGPT to edit his writing, it transmuted his perfectly correct Indian English into American English. Those weren't flukes. Research suggests that both tendencies are widespread.

In my own ChatGPT dialogues, I wanted to enact how the product's veneer of collegial neutrality could lull us into absorbing false or biased responses without much critical engagement. Over time, ChatGPT seemed to be guiding me to write a more positive book about big tech – including editing my description of OpenAI's CEO, Sam Altman, to call him "a visionary and a pragmatist". I'm not aware of research on whether ChatGPT tends to favor big tech, OpenAI or Altman, and I can only guess why it seemed that way in our conversation. OpenAI explicitly states that its products shouldn't attempt to influence users' thinking. When I asked ChatGPT about some of the issues, it blamed biases in its training data – though I suspect my arguably leading questions played a role too. When I queried ChatGPT about its rhetoric, it responded: "The way I communicate is designed to foster trust and confidence in my responses, which can be both helpful and potentially misleading.". . .

OpenAI has its own goals, of course. Among them, it emphasizes wanting to build AI that "benefits all of humanity". But while the company is controlled by a non-profit with that mission, its funders still seek a return on their investment. That will presumably require getting people using products such as ChatGPT even more than they already are – a goal that is easier to accomplish if people see those products as trustworthy collaborators.

Question 13 · RC Detail and Fact Based Questions

All of the following statements from the passage affirm the disjunct between the claims about AI made by tech companies and what AI actually does EXCEPT:

  1. A

    "In my own ChatGPT dialogues, I wanted to enact how the product's veneer of collegial neutrality could lull us into absorbing false or biased responses without much critical engagement."

  2. B

    "When I prompted Microsoft's Bing Image Creator to produce a picture of engineers and space explorers, it gave me an entirely male cast of characters . . ."

  3. C

    "It's a dynamic that makes us complicit in big tech's accumulation of wealth and power: we're both victims and beneficiaries."

  4. D

    "I'm not aware of research on whether ChatGPT tends to favor big tech, OpenAI or Altman, and I can only guess why it seemed that way in our conversation."

Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option D

The disjunct in question is the gap between what companies claim their AI is – polite, professional, neutral, benefiting all of humanity – and what it actually does.

Option 1 names that gap directly: a 'veneer of collegial neutrality' that lulls users into absorbing false or biased responses. Claimed neutrality against actual bias is the disjunct itself.

Option 2 is the gap demonstrated: a system marketed as professional returns an entirely male cast for engineers and space explorers.

Option 3 sets the stated mission of benefiting humanity against the reality that users are 'both victims and beneficiaries' of big tech's accumulation of wealth and power – again a gap between claim and effect.

Option 4 asserts no gap at all. The author says he does not know of research on the matter and 'can only guess'. An admission of ignorance makes no claim about AI behaviour, so it cannot affirm a disjunct.

Shortcut: in an EXCEPT question, look for the option whose verb is a hedge – 'not aware', 'can only guess', 'suspect'. A hedged line asserts nothing, and a line that asserts nothing cannot affirm the thing being asked about.

Hence, the answer is option 4.

Question 14 · Reading Comprehension

The author compares AI-generated texts with "a beige office building" for all of the following reasons EXCEPT:
  1. A
    AI-generated texts often exhibit a warm, polite, and collegial tone.
  2. B
    AI aims to foster a feeling of trust and credibility among its users.
  3. C
    AI generates generalised responses that lack specificity and nuance.
  4. D
    AI tends to blame its training data when scrutinised for its biases.
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option D

The comparison sits in paragraph 2. Chatbot output is called 'bland' or 'generic' – the linguistic equivalent of a beige office building. Everything the image carries must come from that paragraph.

Option 3 is the plain sense of the image: bland and generic, lacking specificity and nuance.

Option 1 is also in the paragraph: products built to 'sound like a colleague', using language that would sound 'polite', 'empathetic', 'kind'. A beige office building is exactly that kind of inoffensive, collegial neutrality.

Option 2 is the paragraph's closing note: these strategies help the products seem 'professional' and 'approachable', and this 'appears to be bound up with making us feel safe'. Safety and trust are what blandness buys.

Option 4 belongs to paragraph 4, where ChatGPT blamed biases in its training data when asked about the issues. That is an AI response to scrutiny, not a quality of the prose style the beige building describes.

Shortcut: fence off the paragraph that contains the quoted image and accept only options traceable to it. One option here comes from two paragraphs later, and that is the answer.

Hence, the answer is option 4.

Question 15 · Reading Comprehension

On the basis of the purpose of the examples in the passage, pick the odd one out from the following AI-generated responses mentioned in the passage:
  1. A
    "Over time, ChatGPT seemed to be guiding me to write a more positive book about big tech – including editing my description of OpenAI's CEO, Sam Altman, to call him 'a visionary and a pragmatist'."
  2. B
    ". . . when my father asked ChatGPT to edit his writing, it transmuted his perfectly correct Indian English into American English."
  3. C
    "When I prompted Microsoft's Bing Image Creator to produce a picture of engineers and space explorers, it gave me an entirely male cast of characters . . ."
  4. D
    "When I queried ChatGPT about its rhetoric, it responded: 'The way I communicate is designed to foster trust and confidence in my responses, which can be both helpful and potentially misleading'."
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option D

The question turns on purpose, so ask what each example is doing in the argument.

Option 1 shows a slant towards big tech – ChatGPT nudging the author's book in a friendlier direction and editing Altman into 'a visionary and a pragmatist'. A problem, demonstrated.

Option 2 shows US-centric bias – perfectly correct Indian English converted into American English. A problem, demonstrated.

Option 3 shows sexist bias – an entirely male cast for engineers and space explorers. A problem, demonstrated.

Option 4 is different in kind. It is not an instance of the AI going wrong; it is the AI describing its own design, conceding that its communication style can be 'both helpful and potentially misleading'. It is self-report, not evidence of a flaw.

Shortcut: sort the examples into 'the AI did something problematic' and anything else. Three fall in the first pile; the self-description is the odd one out.

Hence, the answer is option 4.

Question 16 · RC Main Idea and Central Theme

The author of the passage is least likely to agree with which one of the following claims?
  1. A
    ChatGPT favours AI companies and their officials, like Sam Altman, in its responses.
  2. B
    The neutrality of AI is motivated by economic considerations.
  3. C
    When we use AI, we become accomplices to the exploitative practices of big tech companies.
  4. D
    The neutrality of AI is conducive to critical thinking.
Pick an option, then check.
Answer & solution

Answer: Option D

Check each claim against the author's stated positions.

Option 1 is something the author reports from his own experience – ChatGPT guiding him towards a more positive book and recasting Altman as 'a visionary and a pragmatist'. He hedges on whether this is general, but he would not disagree with it.

Option 2 matches the last paragraph. OpenAI's funders 'still seek a return on their investment', a goal 'easier to accomplish if people see those products as trustworthy collaborators'. Trustworthiness, and the neutral tone that produces it, is tied to money.

Option 3 is the opening thesis: 'It's a dynamic that makes us complicit in big tech's accumulation of wealth and power'. The author plainly agrees.

Option 4 is the one he would reject. His words are that the 'veneer of collegial neutrality could lull us into absorbing false or biased responses without much critical engagement'. Neutrality suppresses critical thinking in his account; it does not encourage it.

Shortcut: a 'least likely to agree' question is answered by the option that reverses the author's own phrasing. Here 'without much critical engagement' becomes 'conducive to critical thinking' – a direct flip.

Hence, the answer is option 4.

Take this paper as a timed test
Real exam timing, instant score, rank and topic-wise analysis.

Practice timed →