Questões: Centro Universitário São Camilo — com gabarito

Leia o texto para responder à questão.

    Se o século XIX, marcado pelo progresso científico — genética, evolucionismo, positivismo, sociologia, racionalismo, etc. — motivou escolas literárias correspondentes — ________, _______ , _______ —, propugnando uma descrição rígida, precisa e minuciosa, acarretou, em contrapartida, um momento de descrédito da ciência, uma reação quase radical, que propunha a diluição dos objetos e sentimentos no vago e indistinto, no inefável, abstrato e incorpóreo, ideal supremo do ________.

(Lauro Junkes, 2016. Adaptado.)

As palavras “indistinto” e “incorpóreo” são formadas com um prefixo que tem o mesmo significado do prefixo de

Leia o texto para responder à questão.

    Se o século XIX, marcado pelo progresso científico — genética, evolucionismo, positivismo, sociologia, racionalismo, etc. — motivou escolas literárias correspondentes — ________, _______ , _______ —, propugnando uma descrição rígida, precisa e minuciosa, acarretou, em contrapartida, um momento de descrédito da ciência, uma reação quase radical, que propunha a diluição dos objetos e sentimentos no vago e indistinto, no inefável, abstrato e incorpóreo, ideal supremo do ________.

(Lauro Junkes, 2016. Adaptado.)

Completam as lacunas do texto, respectivamente:

A experiência realizada com o tubo de Crookes foi importante para a descoberta do elétron. Quando duas placas metálicas eletrizadas foram acopladas, uma positivamente e outra negativamente, desviaram os raios luminosos emitidos por qualquer gás colocado no interior do tubo, atraído pela placa positiva e repelido pela negativa.

A figura representa o tubo de Crookes, no qual há dois pares de placas, sendo um par disposto horizontalmente (P1, P2) e o outro par, disposto verticalmente (P3, P4).

Para que o raio luminoso emitido pelo gás ilumine a parte vermelha do tubo, as placas P1, P2, P3 e P4 devem estar eletrizadas, respectivamente, com cargas de sinais

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

Assinale a alternativa cujo trecho evidencia a posição atual da autora sobre o desafio apresentado no título.

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

No trecho do sétimo parágrafo “However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue”, o termo sublinhado pode ser substituído, sem alteração de sentido, por

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

De acordo com o quinto e o sexto parágrafos, um dos benefícios dos dados médicos disponíveis na internet é

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

No trecho do quinto parágrafo “as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent”, o termo sublinhado equivale, em português, a

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

De acordo com o quarto parágrafo, a profissão médica contribui para que as pessoas recorram à internet em vez de recorrer a médicos. A justificativa apresentada é que

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

No terceiro parágrafo, o termo “expertise” está entre aspas para

Leia o texto para responder à questão. 

The challenge of doctor-patient relations in the internet age

     “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you,” my patient said. My patient, a 19-year-old student, had already taken time off from school because of her anxiety. I was her psychiatrist, with over two decades of experience treating university students, and had just explained my diagnostic impressions based on a lengthy evaluation. I’d recommended that she try a medicine I expected would help. I’d also laid out the risks and benefits of other treatment options. 

      “Do you have additional questions I can answer?” I asked. I wanted to let her know that’s why I was there, to cull the research, to help make sense of it. “No, I like to go online and look for myself,” she said.

     More and more, I see students turning away from the expertise that a live person can offer and instead turning to the vast and somehow more objective-seeming “expertise” of the digital world.

     In an age when journalism we don’t like can be dismissed as “fake news,” suggesting that the information we do like is most credible, regardless of its source, it’s not hard to understand why young people do this. The medical profession itself, under managed care, has played a role as well, providing less time for doctor-patient interactions and undermining the chances that a personal relationship and trust can develop. Under the guise of efficiency, medical test results are now often released directly to patients, sometimes before or even without the benefit of any interpretation.

     But there’s danger in trusting data over people, as there is in thinking the expertise of all people is equivalent. When it comes to health, digital natives may not be learning how to navigate effectively. And the consequences could be harmful.

    The availability of health data on the internet has its benefits. Online, for example, we can find explanations and solutions for symptoms we might be too embarrassed, or afraid, to discuss with another person, in person. Or, for lifethreatening diseases, we can locate clinical trials our doctors may not be aware of.

     However, there’s also a lot of misleading information, and information that’s simply untrue. The internet is full of people selling things – supplements, treatment regimens that have not been rigorously tested, even prescription medications – and making false promises that have not been scrutinized by regulatory agencies. Sometimes, as in the case of some websites that promote “an anorexic diet” for “aggressive” weight loss, the information can encourage life-threatening behavior.

      Years ago, when we discussed paternalism versus patient autonomy in my medical school ethics class, I came down strongly in favor of autonomy. Who but the patient could best decide what was right for him or her? But years of clinical – and personal – experience have taught me that information in and of itself is insufficient. Judgment is also indispensable, especially in complex situations, and the capacity for good judgment rests within people, not data sets.

(Doris Iarovici is a psychiatrist at Harvard University’s Counseling and

Mental Health Services and the author of Mental Health Issues and the

University Student. www.nytimes.com, 01.03.2018. Adaptado.)

No trecho do primeiro parágrafo “Let me do some research and I’ll get back to you”, o termo sublinhado refere-se

Analise um trecho da canção “As caravanas”, composta por Chico Buarque.

É um dia de real grandeza, tudo azul

[...]

Quando pinta em Copacabana

[...]

A caravana do Irajá,

o comboio da Penha.

Não há barreira que retenha

esses estranhos

Suburbanos tipo muçulmanos

do Jacarezinho

[...]

Com negros torsos nus deixam

em polvorosa

A gente ordeira e virtuosa que apela

Pra polícia despachar de volta

O populacho pra favela

Ou pra Benguela, ou pra Guiné.

[...]

(Chico Buarque. “As caravanas”. Caravanas, 2017.)

Nessa letra, o compositor

A chegada de Adolf Hitler ao poder, em 30 de janeiro de 1933, é celebrada pelos nazistas como a aurora de uma nova era revolucionária. Imprensa, rádio e cinema são mobilizados para convencer o mundo de que o povo alemão inteiro ajusta o passo ao guia que ele escolheu. Manifestações grandiosas tendem a provar que, num mundo dividido por lutas econômicas e sociais, a Alemanha hitlerista fundou a sociedade unanimista, com a qual muitos europeus fora da Alemanha sonham.

(Henri Burgelin. “O sucesso da propaganda nazista”.

In: A Alemanha de Hitler, 1991. Adaptado.)

O texto apresenta o nazismo vitorioso na Alemanha como

A pirâmide de Quéfren e o obelisco de Luxor são dois monumentos do Egito Antigo datados, respectivamente, dos séculos XXVI e XIII a.C.

(www.pimpmytrip.it)

(www.molon.de)

Apesar das diferenças visíveis existentes entre esses monumentos, ambos exprimem

Um grupo internacional de especialistas alerta que, caso não sejam adotadas medidas mais drásticas para reduzir a emissão de gases do efeito estufa do que as estabelecidas no âmbito do Acordo de Paris, o teto considerado seguro para o aquecimento global – de 2 °C acima dos níveis pré-industriais até o final do século – pode ser alcançado já em 2050.

(https://agencia.fapesp.br)

Entre os desafios para o cumprimento das metas do Acordo de Paris, pode-se mencionar

(https://sosgis.com)

A bacia hidrográfica ilustrada na imagem apresenta como uma de suas características principais

O cinturão orogênico do Atlântico estende-se desde a parte oriental da região Nordeste até o sudeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul. É uma faixa de grande complexidade litológica e estrutural, prevalecendo rochas metamórficas de diferentes tipos e idades, como gnaisses, migmatitos, quartzitos, micaxistos, filitos, e, secundariamente, intrusivas, como granitos e sienitos.

(Jurandyr L. S. Ross (org.). Geografia do Brasil, 2008.)

Uma feição geomorfológica do território brasileiro integrante da área descrita no excerto é

Analise a charge do cartunista Carlos Latuff.

(www.brasildefato.com.br)

O processo em andamento no Brasil, ironizado pela charge, refere-se

A eleição do clérigo moderado Hassan Rohani, em 15 de junho de 2013, supõe um degelo das relações com os Estados Unidos. Em 27 de setembro, Rohani e o presidente americano Barack Obama falam por telefone, um tipo de contato inédito desde a Revolução Islâmica. Em 14 de julho de 2015, o país alcança um acordo com as potências mundiais sobre seu programa nuclear, acabando com 12 anos de crise e 21 meses de negociações.

(https://istoe.com.br. Adaptado.)

As transformações apresentadas no excerto foram protagonizadas pelo

O Brasil e um número crescente de países voltaram a protestar hoje (07.03.2018) na ________ e a pedir para o presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, reconsiderar a medida unilateral contra importações de aço e alumínio. Alguns países mencionaram o impacto de uma guerra comercial. No entanto, mais uma vez nenhum país ameaçou claramente com retaliação ou denúncia porque continuam aguardando a medida formal a ser tomada por Trump.

(www.valor.com.br. Adaptado.)

O nome da organização supranacional que preenche a lacuna do texto é

Leia o poema do escritor português Fernando Pessoa para responder à questão. 

Às vezes, em sonho triste

Nos meus desejos existe

Longinquamente um país

Onde ser feliz consiste

Apenas em ser feliz.

Vive-se como se nasce

Sem o querer nem saber.

Nessa ilusão de viver

O tempo morre e renasce

Sem que o sintamos correr. 

O sentir e o desejar

São banidos dessa terra.

O amor não é amor

Nesse país por onde erra

Meu longínquo divagar.

Nem se sonha nem se vive:

É uma infância sem fim.

Parece que se revive

Tão suave é viver assim

Nesse impossível jardim.

(Obra poética, 1997.)

Os versos “O sentir e o desejar / São banidos dessa terra.” (3a estrofe) podem ser reescritos, sem prejuízo para o seu sentido e respeitando-se a correção gramatical, da seguinte forma: