Pure research provides us with new technologies that contribute to

OFFICIAL ANSWER:

This question asks you to identify the point on which Laird and Kim disagree with respect to pure research. Laird identifies two contributions of pure research: its medical applications (“technologies that contribute to saving lives”) and its role in expanding knowledge and providing new ideas. Of these, Laird considers the second contribution to be more worthwhile. Kim, on the other hand, maintains that “Saving lives is what counts most of all.” Since pure research saves lives through medical applications, Kim disagrees with Laird about whether pure research has its most valuable achievements in medical applications. The correct response, therefore, is (D).

Response (A) is incorrect since we can determine, based on their statements, that Laird and Kim agree that pure research “derives its significance in part from its providing new technologies.” Laird explicitly cites the value of pure research with respect to providing new technologies. Kim indicates agreement with (A), at least in the case of medical technologies, by asserting that “Without pure research, medicine would not be as advanced as it is.”

Response (B) is incorrect since we can determine, based on their statements, that Laird and Kim would likely agree that pure research “expands the boundaries of our knowledge of medicine.” Laird notes that pure research provides us with new technologies that have medical applications. Kim points out that “Without pure research, medicine would not be as advanced as it is.”

Response (C) is incorrect. Kim indicates agreement that pure research “should have the saving of human lives as an important goal” since Kim’s position is that “Saving lives is what counts most of all.” Since Laird cites the saving of lives as one way in which pure research is worthwhile or valuable, Laird also indicates agreement that pure research “should have the saving of human lives as an important goal,” although Laird indicates that expanding knowledge and providing new ideas should be an even more important goal of pure research. The same activity can of course have more than one goal.

Response (E) is incorrect. Laird clearly agrees that pure research has value “apart from its role in providing new technologies to save lives,” given that Laird explicitly cites a second way in which pure research is valuable. However, nothing in what Kim says suggests disagreement with (E). Kim’s position is that the greatest value of pure research is its role in providing new technologies to save lives.We cannot infer fromthis that Kim believes this role to be the only value of pure research.

OPTION: D

Laird: Pure research saves lives. More importantly, it expands knowledge.
Kim: Most imp role of pure research is saving lives.

The two disagree on what the most imp role of pure research is. Laird thinks it's "expands knowledge", Kim thinks it's "saving lives"

Laird and Kim disagree on whether pure research

(A) derives its significance in part from its providing new technologies
They both believe that part of significance is new tech.

(B) expands the boundaries of our knowledge of medicine
We don't know what Kim thinks about "expanding knowledge"

(C) should have the saving of human lives as an important goal
The question is whether it is the most important goal.

(D) has its most valuable achievements in medical applications
Correct. They disagree on the most valuable achievement.

(E) has any value apart from its role in providing new technologies to save lives
Not so. Kim just says that the most imp role is saving lives. We don't know what she thinks about other value additions.

Answer (D)

Here is a video discussion on Method questions and the solution to this one: