In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the question for the answer based on the given article.

Article: A messy desk can actually lead people towards clearer thinking, say researchers from Germany. The researchers found in a series of linked studies - using a messy desk and a messy shop front - that people actually thought more clearly when all around was chaos, as they sought to simplify the tasks at hand. Visual and mental clutter forces human beings to focus and think more clearly. Famous thinkers and writers such as Albert Einstein and Roald Dahl have been notorious for their untidy desks. "Messy desks may not be as detrimental as they appear to be, as the problem-solving approaches they seem to cause can improve work efficiency or increase employees' creativity in problem solving," say the authors. "Business and government managers often promote 'clean desk' policies to avoid disorganized offices and messy desks, for the purpose of boosting work efficiency and productivity," writes lead researcher Jia Liu of the University of Groningen in a paper published in the Journal of Consumer Research. "This practice is based on the conventional wisdom that a disorganized and messy environment can clutter one's mind and complicate one's judgments." "However, not all evidence supports this conventional link between a messy environment and a messy mind." The scientists tested people's response in various 'messy' environments - including a messy shop front, a disorganized desk, and even a work environment where a language task 'reminded' people of messiness. The authors found in the series of six studies people tended towards simplicity in their thinking. "They categorized products in a simpler manner, were willing to pay more for a T-shirt that shows a simple-looking picture, and sought less variety in their choices." said the researchers.
Answer: to support the idea that clearer thinking comes from messy environment.
Why does the author take Albert Einstein as an example?

Article: Coketown was a town of red brick, or of brick that would have been red if the smoke and ashes had allowed it; but in fact it was a town of unnatural red and black like the painted face of savage . It was a town of machinery and tall chimney, out of which smoke trailed themselves for ever and ever. It had a black canal in it, and a river that ran purple with ill smelling color1, and large piles of building full of windows where there was a rattling and a trembling all day long, and where the steam-engine worked up and down like the head of an elephant in a state of madness. The town contained several large streets all very like one another, and many small streets still more like one another, inhabited by people equally like one another. A sunny midsummer day. There was such a thing sometimes even in Coketown. Seen from a distance in such weather, Coketown lay covered in a smoke of its own. You only knew the town was there, because you knew there could have been no such a place upon the view without a town. The streets were hot and dusty on the summer day, and the sun was so bright that it even shone through the smoke over Coketown, and could not be looked at steadily. Workers appeared from low underground doorways into factory yards, and sat on steps, wiping their face sand looking at coals. The whole town seemed to be frying in oil. There was a smell of hot oil everywhere. The atmosphere of those places was like the breath of hell , and their inhabitants wasting with heat, walked lazily in the desert. But no temperature made the mad elephants more mad or more sane . Their tiresome heads went up and down at the sane rate, in hot weather and in cold, wet weather and dry. The measured movement of their shadows of wood; while for the summer noise of insects, it could offer all the year round, from the dawn of Monday to the night of Saturday.
Answer: deserted
Which of the following words is NOT properly used to describe Coketown ?

Article: Cloning is suggested as a means of bringing back a relative,usually a child,killed tragically.Some parents can understand that wish,but it must first be recognized that the copy would be a new baby and not the lost child.Here lies the difficulty,for the sad parents are seeking not a new baby but a return of the dead one.Since the original would be fondly remembered as having particular talents and interest,would not the parents expect the copy to be the same?It is possible,however,that the copy would develop quite differently.Is it fair to the new child to be placed in a family with such unnatural expectations? Copying is also suggested as a means by which parents can have the child of their dreams.Couples might choose to have a copy of a film star,baseball player or scientist,depending on their interest.But because personality is only partly the result of genetic inheritance ,conflicts would be sure to arise if the cloned child failed to develop the same interest as the original.What if the copy of Einstein shows no interest in science?Or the baseball player turns to acting?Success also depends upon fortune.What if the child does not live up to the hopes and dreams of the parents simply because of bad luck? Every child should be wanted for itself,as an individual.In making a copy of oneself or some famous person,a parent is deliberately specifying the way he or she wishes that child to develop.In recent years,particularly in the U.S.,much importance has been placed on the right of individuals to reproduce in ways that they wish.So I suggest there is a greater need to consider the interest of the child and to reject these proposed uses of cloning.
Answer: Parents expect too much from the copy.
What happens to parents in cloning a lost child?