#16 - Global Reference, Must Be True

[me2987a]

I got this question incorrect, but I mostly didn't really understand what the question stem was asking.

Thanks,

[Adam Tyson]

Technically we classify this question as a Must Be True, me2987a, meaning that the correct answer can be based entirely on an anlysis of the contents of the passages. I think a helpful way to look at it is to think of it much like a Point of Agreement question, which is in the same family as Must Be True in that it will be based entirely on what you read and no outside information.

What you are looking for is some pair of things that both authors say conflict with each other. That is, they agree that these two things appear to be opposed.

Author A starts right out of the gate telling us that he fears that the treatment of research findings as commodities will threaten the public good that research provides. His whole passage is about that conflict between commercialization and the public good and his fears about that shift.

Author B is a bit less alarmed than Author A, but still tells us that while scientific research results were once considered a public good, they are not being transformed into commodities. That tells us that this author, too, sees "public good" and "commercialization" as being opposing ideas, and he reinforces this later in the passage when he talks about the moral implications and blurring of the lines between what should and should not be patented.

To sum up, the question wants you to find a pair of things that both authors discuss as being opposites, or inconsistent with each other. Any pair of things that at least one author does NOT discuss as being inconsistent or opposed would be a wrong answer.

Confusing question for sure! I hope that helped clear it up.