SóProvas


ID
5048755
Banca
UNIFESP
Órgão
UNIFESP
Ano
2021
Provas
Disciplina
Inglês
Assuntos

    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.____________________

    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.

(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

Alternativas
Comentários
  • A questão cobra interpretação de um texto sobre desavenças na era de guerras culturais.

    Vamos analisar o enunciado:


    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...
    Tradução - No fragmento do quarto parágrafo "Aqueles de nós mais inclinados a 'acoplar' as vêem como inextricavelmente relacionadas a uma matriz mais ampla de fatores", o termo em negrito se refere mais especificamente a...


    Vejamos o trecho em questão:

    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.
    Tradução - A primeira é considerar como as pessoas estão inclinadas a 'acoplar' ou 'desacoplar' tópicos que envolvem fatores políticos e sociais mais amplos. O analista de dados sueco John Nerst usou os termos para descrever as maneiras contrastantes pelas quais as pessoas abordam questões contenciosas. Aqueles de nós mais inclinados a 'acoplar' as veem como inextricavelmente relacionadas a uma matriz mais ampla de fatores, enquanto aqueles mais predispostos a 'desacoplar' preferem considerar uma questão isoladamente.



    Podemos perceber pela tradução acima que o artigo "as" se refere a algo que foi mencionado logo antes, na sentença anterior, no caso "questões contenciosas".
    Analisando as alternativas teremos:


    A) Incorreto - contrasting ways.  = formas contrastantes.

    B) Incorreto - wider political and social factors. = fatores políticos e sociais mais amplos.

    C) Incorreto - topics  = tópicos

    D) Incorreto - terms  = termos

    E) Correto - contentious issues  = questões contenciosas


    Gabarito do Professor: Letra E.