CLAT Logical Reasoning Practice Set 1 | CLAT 2027 Series

This passage is from the Logical Reasoning (Logical Reasoning Practice Set 1) section of CLAT. Read the passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.

---

Passage Logical Reasoning Practice Set 1

Public institutions often rely on expert advisory committees to guide complex policy decisions, particularly in areas involving scientific uncertainty. While such committees enhance the technical quality of decision-making, their recommendations are not always accepted by governments. Critics argue that when expert advice is disregarded without adequate explanation, public trust in institutional decision-making may erode. However, others contend that elected representatives must retain discretion to balance expert recommendations against competing economic, social, and political considerations.

Furthermore, the assumption that expert opinion is inherently neutral has been questioned in recent scholarship. Experts may operate within particular disciplinary frameworks that shape how problems are defined and solutions proposed. Consequently, reliance on expertise does not eliminate value judgments but rather shifts the location at which such judgments occur.

At the same time, transparency in explaining departures from expert advice can mitigate concerns regarding arbitrariness. When decision-makers clearly articulate their reasons, citizens are better positioned to evaluate whether alternative considerations justify divergence from technical recommendations. Thus, the legitimacy of institutional decisions depends not only on the quality of expertise consulted but also on the reasoning publicly offered for accepting or rejecting such advice.

---

Questions

Question 1

Which of the following best states the central claim of the passage?

A. Governments should always follow expert committee recommendations
B. Expert advice is unnecessary in democratic decision-making
C. The legitimacy of decisions depends partly on how authorities justify accepting or rejecting expert advice
D. Expert committees eliminate value judgments from policymaking

---

Question 2

Which of the following assumptions is most strongly implied in the argument that ignoring expert advice without explanation reduces public trust?

A. Citizens are generally unaware of expert committee recommendations
B. Citizens expect decision-makers to justify departures from expert recommendations
C. Expert committees are always unbiased
D. Governments rarely consult expert committees

---

Question 3

The passage suggests that expert opinion cannot be considered completely neutral because:

A. experts are elected representatives
B. experts intentionally mislead policymakers
C. disciplinary frameworks influence how experts interpret problems
D. experts lack technical training

---

Question 4

If a government rejects expert advice but provides a detailed public explanation citing economic constraints and social priorities, the passage suggests that:

A. public trust will necessarily decline
B. the decision will automatically become correct
C. concerns about arbitrariness may be reduced
D. expert committees will become unnecessary

---

Question 5

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the claim that transparency improves legitimacy when governments reject expert advice?

A. Citizens rarely access or understand official explanations of policy decisions
B. Expert committees publish their recommendations publicly
C. Governments frequently consult multiple advisory bodies
D. Experts sometimes disagree with each other

---

Question 6

Which of the following best describes the role of “value judgments” in expert decision-making as discussed in the passage?

A. They are completely absent from expert analysis
B. They are replaced entirely by technical reasoning
C. They shift location rather than disappear
D. They invalidate all expert recommendations

---

Question 7

Which of the following conclusions logically follows from the passage?

A. Democratic governments must always prioritize expert advice over political considerations
B. Transparency alone guarantees correct policy decisions
C. Institutional legitimacy depends partly on public reasoning accompanying decisions
D. Experts should not participate in policymaking

---

Solutions with Explanations

Answer 1: C
The passage concludes legitimacy depends both on expertise consulted and explanations given for accepting or rejecting it.

Answer 2: B
The argument assumes citizens expect justification when governments depart from expert recommendations.

Answer 3: C
The passage explicitly states disciplinary frameworks shape how experts define problems and solutions.

Answer 4: C
Transparency helps mitigate concerns regarding arbitrariness when expert advice is rejected.

Answer 5: A
If citizens do not access or understand explanations, transparency cannot meaningfully improve legitimacy.

Answer 6: C
The passage states reliance on expertise shifts the location of value judgments rather than eliminating them.

Answer 7: C
Legitimacy depends not only on expertise but also on publicly offered reasoning.