27 MARCH RDFC
Practice passage
The concept of innovation is often romanticized with clichés about persistence and resilience. However, distinguishing between persistence and stubbornness is critical. Safi Bahcall’s book Loonshots provides a framework to differentiate between false fails and true fails through compelling real-world examples.
Consider the story of Akira Endo, a Japanese microbiologist who sought to find a drug to lower cholesterol. Through relentless effort, Endo identified a compound called mevastatin, which eventually became the foundation for all statins, now among the most prescribed drugs globally. However, the drug's journey faced significant obstacles.
Endo’s early experiments failed during live animal testing. Standard trials on rats showed no cholesterol reduction, leading to what appeared as a failure. Instead of abandoning his project, Endo questioned the validity of the results. He hypothesized that rats might not be suitable models because of their distinct cholesterol profiles. Testing on chickens, which share similarities with human cholesterol systems, revealed the drug’s effectiveness. This was a **false fail**—a failure caused by flawed testing rather than an actual issue with the drug.
Years later, after initial success in clinical trials, another false fail occurred when high-dose tests in dogs suggested a cancer risk. Despite Endo’s skepticism of the results, his company terminated the research. Eventually, further investigations disproved the cancer claims, leading to the approval and massive success of statins.
Similarly, Peter Thiel, a venture capitalist, encountered a false fail when evaluating the social networking landscape. Friendster, a popular social network, experienced mass user abandonment. While most investors concluded that social networks were fleeting fads, Thiel investigated further. He discovered that users were not leaving due to lack of interest, but because Friendster’s servers crashed frequently. By recognizing this false fail, Thiel confidently invested in Facebook, which later became a colossal success.
The key to navigating false fails is adopting the “Listen to the Suck with Curiosity” (LSC) approach. Rather than dismissing failures with frustration, innovators like Endo and Thiel investigated setbacks with genuine curiosity. This mindset fosters resilience and distinguishes between problems worth solving and pursuits that should be abandoned.
The next time a project seems doomed, consider whether it’s truly failing or simply facing a false fail. By listening with curiosity, innovators unlock insights that might otherwise remain hidden.
---
Question Set 1: Reading Comprehension
1Q. According to the passage, which of the following best describes a false fail?
a) A temporary decline in a product's sales despite high demand.
b) A failure caused by external market forces beyond one’s control.
c) A perceived failure due to flawed testing or misinterpretation.
d) A failure resulting from competitors offering superior alternatives.
2Q. What did Akira Endo’s success primarily demonstrate?
a) The importance of collaboration across scientific disciplines.
b) The significance of continuous experimentation despite failures.
c) The need to prioritize human trials over animal testing.
d) The role of government regulation in ensuring medical breakthroughs.
3Q. Which of the following is analogous to Peter Thiel’s decision to invest in Facebook?
a) A film producer rejecting a script based on audience disinterest.
b) A restaurant owner relocating due to declining footfall.
c) A scientist re-evaluating an experiment after inconsistent results.
d) A software engineer quitting a project due to tight deadlines.
4Q. The author’s primary purpose in this passage is to:
a) Argue that all failures in innovation are false fails.
b) Highlight the importance of resilience in overcoming challenges.
c) Promote a scientific mindset in evaluating failures.
d) Describe the financial rewards of overcoming false fails.
---
Question Set 2: Critical Reasoning
1Q. Which of the following, if true, would strengthen the author’s argument about false fails?
a) Pharmaceutical companies frequently abandon drugs that succeed in human trials.
b) Technological products with initial failures rarely achieve market success.
c) Most investors rely solely on public opinion to make decisions.
d) Companies that dismiss early failures often reduce their overall innovation output.
2Q. The author assumes that:
a) All failures in scientific research are reversible.
b) Investigating failures is more beneficial than abandoning projects.
c) Scientific research is inherently flawed.
d) Animal testing is always inaccurate.
3Q. Which of the following best challenges the concept of a false fail as presented in the passage?
a) Technological failures are often irreversible despite further investigation.
b) Innovations that experience initial success may still face long-term issues.
c) Investors often overestimate the likelihood of false fails.
d) Companies that act quickly to abandon failing projects minimize resource wastage.
---
Question Set 3: Vocabulary and Contextual Meaning
1Q. What does the term “false fail” most likely mean in the passage?
a) A failure that occurs due to external competition.
b) A failure that results from inaccurate assumptions.
c) A failure caused by an incorrect evaluation method.
d) A failure that leads to a significant financial loss.
2Q. In the context of the passage, what does “Listen to the Suck with Curiosity” imply?
a) Acknowledging a project’s flaws without reacting emotionally.
b) Continuing to pursue a project despite repeated failures.
c) Seeking external opinions to validate one’s decisions.
d) Focusing solely on the positive aspects of a failing project.
---
Set 4: Para Summary
1Q. Which of the following best summarizes the main idea of the passage?
a) Failure is inevitable in the pursuit of innovation, and it must be accepted.
b) False fails can derail promising innovations unless critically examined.
c) Technological advancements are often the result of accidental discoveries.
d) Effective leadership involves taking calculated risks without questioning failures.
---
Solutions
Set 1: Reading Comprehension
1. (c) A perceived failure due to flawed testing or misinterpretation.
2. (b) The significance of continuous experimentation despite failures.
3. (c) A scientist re-evaluating an experiment after inconsistent results.
4. (c) Promote a scientific mindset in evaluating failures.
Set 2: Critical Reasoning
1. (d) Companies that dismiss early failures often reduce their overall innovation output.
2. (b) Investigating failures is more beneficial than abandoning projects.
3. (d) Companies that act quickly to abandon failing projects minimize resource wastage.
Set 3: Vocabulary and Contextual Meaning
1. (c) A failure caused by an incorrect evaluation method.
2. (a) Acknowledging a project’s flaws without reacting emotionally.
Set 4: Para Summary
1. (b) False fails can derail promising innovations unless critically examined.
Comments
Post a Comment