Questões de Vestibular de Inglês
Foram encontradas 5.955 questões
Ano: 2020
Banca:
IMT - SP
Órgão:
IMT - SP
Prova:
IMT - SP - 2020 - IMT - SP - 1ª Aplicação - 20/11/2020 |
Q1692593
Inglês
The world has a handful of great commercial hubs.
Silicon Valley dominates technology. The home of
luxury is Paris and the capital of outsourcing is
Bangalore, in India. One of the mightiest clusters of
all is London, which hosts the globe’s largest
international financial center. Within a square mile
on the Thames, a multinational firm can sell $5bn of
shares in 20 minutes, or a European startup can
raise seed finance from Asian pensioners. You can
insure container ships or a pop star’s vocal cords.
Companies can hedge the risk that a factory
anywhere on the planet will face a volatile currency
or hurricanes and a rising sea level a decade from
now.
Adapted from: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/06/27/can-thecity-survive-brexit?cid1
According to the text, what are examples of important
global deals that may be closed in London?
Q1687804
Inglês
Leia os provérbios:
1. Don't count your chickens before they lay eggs.
2. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
3. Every cloud has a silver lining.
A alternativa que melhor expressa a ideia contida em cada um
dos três provérbios, na ordem em que aparecem, é:
Q1687803
Inglês
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more
Well, I wake up in the morning
Fold my hands and pray for rain
I got a head full of ideas
That are drivin' me insane
It's a shame the way she makes me scrub the floor
I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more
I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more
I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more
Well, he hands you a nickel
He hands you a dime
He asks you with a grin
If you're havin' a good time
Then he fines you every time you slam the door
I ain't gonna work for Maggie's brother no more
I ain't gonna work for Maggie's pa no more
No, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's pa no more
Well, he puts his cigar out in your face just for kicks
His bedroom window it is made out of bricks
The National Guard stands around his door
Ah, I ain't gonna work for Maggie's pa no more, alright
Bob Dylan, "Maggie's Farm", do álbum Bringing it all back home, 1965.
Nestas estrofes, o conjunto de cenas descritas mostra que a
principal dificuldade experimentada pela pessoa cuja história é
contada na letra da música refere-se
Q1687802
Inglês
Texto associado
I knew TikTok existed, but I didn't fully understand what it was until a few months ago. I also realized that something radical, yet largely invisible, is happening on the internet - with implications we still don't understand.
When I was growing up, I took it for granted that the people who became famous enough to be listened to by a crowd had worked hard for that accolade and generally operated with the support of an institution or an established industry.
The idea that I, as a teenager in my bedroom, might suddenly communicate with 100,000 people or more, would have seemed bizarre.
Today's kids no longer see life in these hierarchical and institutional terms. Yes, their physical worlds are often constrained by parental controls, a lack of access to the outdoors and insane over-scheduling.
But despite that (or, more accurately, in reaction to that), they see the internet as a constantly evolving frontier, where it is still possible for a bold and lucky pioneer to grab some land or find a voice. Most voices on the internet never travel beyond a relatively small network, and much of the content that goes viral on platforms such as TikTok, YouTube or Instagram does so because of unseen institutions at work (for example, a public relations team aiming to boost a celebrity's profile).
Fame can suddenly appear - and then just as suddenly be taken away again, because the audience gets bored, the platform's algorithms change or the cultural trend that a breakout video has tapped into goes out of fashion.
For a teenager, social media can seem like a summer garden at dusk filled with fireflies: spots of lights suddenly flare up and then die down, moving in an unpredictable, capricious display.
Is this a bad thing? We will not know for several years.
Financial Times. 5 February 2020. Adaptado.
No texto, a referência a um jardim de verão ao entardecer,
repleto de vagalumes, sugere que, para os adolescentes, as
mídias sociais
Q1687801
Inglês
Texto associado
I knew TikTok existed, but I didn't fully understand what it was until a few months ago. I also realized that something radical, yet largely invisible, is happening on the internet - with implications we still don't understand.
When I was growing up, I took it for granted that the people who became famous enough to be listened to by a crowd had worked hard for that accolade and generally operated with the support of an institution or an established industry.
The idea that I, as a teenager in my bedroom, might suddenly communicate with 100,000 people or more, would have seemed bizarre.
Today's kids no longer see life in these hierarchical and institutional terms. Yes, their physical worlds are often constrained by parental controls, a lack of access to the outdoors and insane over-scheduling.
But despite that (or, more accurately, in reaction to that), they see the internet as a constantly evolving frontier, where it is still possible for a bold and lucky pioneer to grab some land or find a voice. Most voices on the internet never travel beyond a relatively small network, and much of the content that goes viral on platforms such as TikTok, YouTube or Instagram does so because of unseen institutions at work (for example, a public relations team aiming to boost a celebrity's profile).
Fame can suddenly appear - and then just as suddenly be taken away again, because the audience gets bored, the platform's algorithms change or the cultural trend that a breakout video has tapped into goes out of fashion.
For a teenager, social media can seem like a summer garden at dusk filled with fireflies: spots of lights suddenly flare up and then die down, moving in an unpredictable, capricious display.
Is this a bad thing? We will not know for several years.
Financial Times. 5 February 2020. Adaptado.
Conforme o texto, um aspecto associado ao caráter efêmero da
popularidade de um usuário da internet, relativo ao uso de
plataformas como TikTok, é
Q1687800
Inglês
Conforme o texto, um critério tradicionalmente utilizado por
astrônomos para avaliar estrelas envolve
Q1687799
Inglês
No texto, o astrofísico Martin Asplund emprega a frase "The
sun is a fundamental yardstick" (L. 15), por considerar o Sol
Q1687798
Inglês
Segundo o texto, conhecer a composição de elementos
químicos que constituem as estrelas é fundamental, pois ela,
entre outros aspectos,
Q1686603
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
No trecho do quarto parágrafo – unless the last two practices
result in forced labour – o termo em destaque indica ideia de
Q1686602
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
De acordo com o quarto parágrafo, a ILO estima que
Q1686601
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
No trecho do terceiro parágrafo – As contemporary systems
of slavery have evolved – o termo em destaque equivale, em
português, a
Q1686600
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
De acordo com o terceiro parágrafo, a Convenção Suplementar das Nações Unidas de 1956 inclui como escravidão
moderna
Q1686599
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
No trecho do terceiro parágrafo – all work or service which is
exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and
for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily –
o termo em destaque se refere a
Q1686598
Inglês
Texto associado
Leia o texto para responder a questão.
Modern-day slavery: an explainer
Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty
What is modern-day slavery?
About 150 years after most countries banned slavery –
Brazil was the last to abolish its participation in the transatlantic
slave trade, in 1888 – millions of men, women and children are
still enslaved. Contemporary slavery takes many forms, from
women forced into prostitution, to child slavery in agriculture
supply chains or whole families working for nothing to pay
off generational debts. Slavery thrives on every continent and
in almost every country. Forced labour, people trafficking,
debt bondage and child marriage are all forms of modern-day
slavery that affect the world’s most vulnerable people.
How is slavery defined?
Slavery is prohibited under the 1948 Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, which states: “No one shall be held in slavery
or servitude: slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in
all their forms.”
Definitions of modern-day slavery are mainly taken
from the 1956 UN supplementary convention, which says:
“debt bondage, serfdom, forced marriage and the delivery
of a child for the exploitation of that child are all slavery-like
practices and require criminalisation and abolishment”. The
1930 Forced Labour Convention defines forced labour as “all
work or service which is exacted from any person under the
menace of any penalty and for which the said person has
not offered himself voluntarily”. As contemporary systems of
slavery have evolved, new definitions, including trafficking and
distinguishing child slavery from child labour, have developed.
How many people are enslaved across the world?
Due to its illegality, data on modern-day slavery is difficult
to collate. The UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO)
estimates that about 21 million people are in forced labour
at any point in time. The ILO says this estimate includes
trafficking and other forms of modern slavery. The only
exceptions are trafficking for organ removal, forced marriage
and adoption, unless the last two practices result in forced
labour. The ILO calculates that 90% of the 21 million are
exploited by individuals or companies, while 10% are forced
to work by the state, rebel military groups, or in prisons under
conditions that violate ILO standards. Sexual exploitation
accounts for 22% of slaves.
(www.theguardian.com/global-development/2013/apr/03/modern-day-slavery-explainer. Adaptado)
Leia o primeiro parágrafo, em que se responde à pergunta
“What is modern-day slavery?”. De acordo com esse parágrafo, uma das formas que a escravidão moderna assume é
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682921
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682920
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
It is an explicit opinion by the author of the text:
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682919
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
No trecho do último parágrafo “we will all be inclined to be”, o
termo sublinhado indica uma
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682918
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
The subtitle that most closely represents the content of the
fifth and sixth paragraphs is:
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682917
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
No trecho do quarto parágrafo “whereas those more
predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in
isolation”, o termo sublinhado introduz
Ano: 2021
Banca:
UNIFESP
Órgão:
UNIFESP
Prova:
UNIFESP - 2021 - UNIFESP - Vestibular - 1º Dia - Língua Portuguesa/ Língua Inglesa / Redação |
Q1682916
Inglês
Texto associado
Remember the good old days, when you could have a
heated-yet-enjoyable debate with your friends about things
that didn’t matter that much — times when you could be a true
fan of the Manchester United soccer team when you didn’t
come from the city of Manchester?
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
How things have changed.
Now disagreements feel deadly serious. Like when your colleague pronounces that wearing a face mask in public is a threat to his liberty. Or when you see that one of your friends has just tweeted that, actually, all lives matter. Before you know it, you’re feeling angry and forming harsh new judgments about your colleagues and friends. Let’s take a collective pause and breathe: there are some ways we can all try to have more civil disagreements in this febrile age of culture wars.
1. ‘Coupling’ and ‘decoupling’
The first is to consider how inclined people are to ‘couple’ or ‘decouple’ topics involving wider political and social factors. Swedish data analyst John Nerst has used the terms to describe the contrasting ways in which people approach contentious issues. Those of us more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to a broader matrix of factors, whereas those more predisposed to ‘decouple’ prefer to consider an issue in isolation. To take a crude example, a decoupler might consider in isolation the question of whether a vaccine provides a degree of immunity to a virus; a coupler, by contrast, would immediately see the issue as inextricably entangled in a mesh of factors, such as pharmaceutical industry power and parental choice.
2.____________________
Most of us are deeply committed to our beliefs, especially
concerning moral and social issues, such that when we’re
presented with facts that contradict our beliefs, we often
choose to dismiss those facts, rather than update our beliefs.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
A study at Arizona State University, U.S., analysed more than 100,000 comments on a forum where users post their views on an issue and invite others to persuade them to change their mind. The researchers found that regardless of the kind of topic, people were more likely to change their mind when confronted with more evidence-based arguments. “Our work may suggest that while attitude change is hard-won, providing facts, statistics and citations for one’s arguments can convince people to change their minds,” they concluded.
3. Just be nicer?
Finally, it’s easier said than done, but let’s all try to be more respectful of and attentive to each other’s positions. We should do this not just for virtuous reasons, but because the more we create that kind of a climate, the more open-minded and intellectually flexible we will all be inclined to be. And then hopefully, collectively, we can start having more constructive disagreements — even in our present very difficult times.
(Christian Jarrett. www.bbc.com, 14.10.2020. Adaptado.)
In the fragment from the fourth paragraph “Those of us
more inclined to ‘couple’ see them as inextricably related to
a broader matrix of factors”, the underlined term refers most
specifically to
Conheça nossos planos