43. With the emergence of biotechnology companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary results on their in–house researchers and their academic consultants. This constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering. Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?

A. Biotechnological research funded by industry has reached some conclusions that are of major scientific importance.

B. When the results of scientific research are kept secret, independent researchers are unable to build on those results.

C. Since the research priorities of biotechnology companies are not the same as those of academic institutions, the financial support of research by such companies distorts the research agenda.

D. To enhance the companies' standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important.

E. Biotechnology companies devote some of their research resources to problems that are of fundamental scientific importance and that are not expected to produce immediate practical applications.

正確答案是D，我已經看過OG的解釋，我比較疑惑的一點是，答案是與禁口令相反的推廣政策，可讓新興公司有能見度。但是這怎能算是weaken呢？因為禁口的確會造成R&D低落，weaken不就是應該要破壞這個關連嗎？答案是沒有就破壞這個關係去講。

而推廣政策是另一線路的發展不是嗎？就結果面是與題目相反沒錯。像這種否定因的討論，我很容易想成「離題」的選項。

請教各位應該怎樣正確思考，謝謝

the companies do not want their researchers have the results published-----therefore slow the development----what choice could bring a weaken effect to this conclusion?

D it refuses the fundamental of the conclusion "the companies do not want their researchers have the results published" thus seriously weakens the conclusion.

Miles

发现看繁体跟看英文一样困难，不太懂LZ的思路，只能试试说说我自己的：

题目：条件，公司会对科研成果silence,结论是，使科研发展变慢

D提出了新的证据，说公司不会对科研成果keep silence，具体是讲，发表科研成果可以提高公司的standing，也就是地位。

到底有没有out of scope，主要要注重逻辑链条的把握，不仅仅是相关的事物

真是对不住，我忘了转成简体字贴上

谢谢你的回答
 

我为何有这样的问题，套用题目的逻辑：

就譬如

1.要运动，不然你身体会变胖，很丑就没人爱。

2.所以你要每天勤运动，展现好身材，就一堆人追。

第一条是成立的，

如果有人作了作了第2条，就不会落入1的结果。

所以我就百思不解，为何可weaken第一条，就总觉得我对weaken的定义一定有误解。

此题的关键是it was feared.........., 也就是说只是害怕会出现禁口令，所以答案D给予直接的否定，说不会出现这样的情况。所以此题和楼主举的例子是有区别的

如果把楼主的例子1增添一些内容

 1、甲科学家认为运动会使人减肥.......’

削弱的答案是：乙科学家发现有些人运动后依然肥胖......，

这个例子就和上题是类似的了

这是一个因果论证cause/effect.

biotechnology companies would slow the development of biological science and engineering
  (Effect) because they would not share their scientists' results with others. (Cause)

To weaken the prediction (biotechnology companies would slow the development of biological science and engineering) , 你可以举一个反例来论证: 如果biological companies are willing to share their employees'results with others, 则原来的结论 biotechnology companies would slow the development of biological science and engineering就不成立了.  

 比如说, 科学家提出人人都要运动, 因为运动使人健康.

削弱这一说法, 举一个反例, 说运动不使人健康, 象有心脏病的人不能运动, 运动有可能使他的病复发,根据这一反例, 推出人人都要运动的这一说法是有问题的.

感谢大家的回复，让我对这一题比较了解。