Foram encontradas 45.388 questões.
The claim to reason or rationality is the ultimate validation of the affirmation and assertion of the human condition. Aristotle’s definition of man as "a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and the Amerindian. Little did he realise that his definition of "man" laid down the foundation for the struggle for reason between colonialists and colonized peoples.
Aristotle’s definition of man was deeply inscribed in the social ethos of those communities and societies which undertook the so-called voyages of discovery apparently driven by innocent curiosity. It seems then that the entire process of decolonisation has upheld and not jettisoned the questionable belief that "man is a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and of the Amerindian.
The term African philosophy renders the idea that history repeats itself easy to believe. The term tends to revive innate skepticism on the one hand and to stimulate ingrained condescension on the other. The skeptic, unswervingly committed to the will to remain ignorant, is simply dismissive of any possibility let alone the probability of African philosophy. Impelled by the will to dominate, the condescendor is often ready to entertain the probability of African philosophy provided the judgement pertaining to the experience, knowledge and truth about African philosophy is recognised as the sole and exclusive right of the condescendor. The self-appointed heirs to the right to reason have thus established themselves as the producers of all knowledge and the only holders of the truth.
Mogobe B. Ramose. African philosophy through Ubuntu. Harare, Zimbabwe: Mond Books Publishers, 2005, pp. 5-6 (adapted).
Considering the preceding text, judge the following items.
At the end of the second paragraph, if the fragment "questionable belief" were replaced with questionable beliefs, the change would require "was" to be replaced with were for the sentence to remain grammatically correct.
Provas
The claim to reason or rationality is the ultimate validation of the affirmation and assertion of the human condition. Aristotle’s definition of man as "a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and the Amerindian. Little did he realise that his definition of "man" laid down the foundation for the struggle for reason between colonialists and colonized peoples.
Aristotle’s definition of man was deeply inscribed in the social ethos of those communities and societies which undertook the so-called voyages of discovery apparently driven by innocent curiosity. It seems then that the entire process of decolonisation has upheld and not jettisoned the questionable belief that "man is a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and of the Amerindian.
The term African philosophy renders the idea that history repeats itself easy to believe. The term tends to revive innate skepticism on the one hand and to stimulate ingrained condescension on the other. The skeptic, unswervingly committed to the will to remain ignorant, is simply dismissive of any possibility let alone the probability of African philosophy. Impelled by the will to dominate, the condescendor is often ready to entertain the probability of African philosophy provided the judgement pertaining to the experience, knowledge and truth about African philosophy is recognised as the sole and exclusive right of the condescendor. The self-appointed heirs to the right to reason have thus established themselves as the producers of all knowledge and the only holders of the truth.
Mogobe B. Ramose. African philosophy through Ubuntu. Harare, Zimbabwe: Mond Books Publishers, 2005, pp. 5-6 (adapted).
Considering the preceding text, judge the following items.
In the third sentence of the first paragraph, the fragment "Little did he realise" emphasizes the fact that Aristotle had no idea of the consequences of his definition of "man".
Provas
The claim to reason or rationality is the ultimate validation of the affirmation and assertion of the human condition. Aristotle’s definition of man as "a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and the Amerindian. Little did he realise that his definition of "man" laid down the foundation for the struggle for reason between colonialists and colonized peoples.
Aristotle’s definition of man was deeply inscribed in the social ethos of those communities and societies which undertook the so-called voyages of discovery apparently driven by innocent curiosity. It seems then that the entire process of decolonisation has upheld and not jettisoned the questionable belief that "man is a rational animal" was not spoken of the African and of the Amerindian.
The term African philosophy renders the idea that history repeats itself easy to believe. The term tends to revive innate skepticism on the one hand and to stimulate ingrained condescension on the other. The skeptic, unswervingly committed to the will to remain ignorant, is simply dismissive of any possibility let alone the probability of African philosophy. Impelled by the will to dominate, the condescendor is often ready to entertain the probability of African philosophy provided the judgement pertaining to the experience, knowledge and truth about African philosophy is recognised as the sole and exclusive right of the condescendor. The self-appointed heirs to the right to reason have thus established themselves as the producers of all knowledge and the only holders of the truth.
Mogobe B. Ramose. African philosophy through Ubuntu. Harare, Zimbabwe: Mond Books Publishers, 2005, pp. 5-6 (adapted).
Considering the preceding text, judge the following items.
Due to the grammatical function the pronoun "which" has in the first sentence of the second paragraph, it would be grammatically correct to add a comma after "societies".
Provas
In 1977, during his first official visit abroad as President of the United States, Jimmy Carter was betrayed by the language barrier and the choices of his translator. In the course of meeting his Polish counterpart, Edward Gierek, the translator was on hand to provide a translation of his president’s words into Polish. Unfortunately, his translations could, perhaps, have not been farther from the truth of what Carter said.
Announcing that he was extremely glad to be in Poland for his first trip abroad, the translator somehow managed to mistranslate the friendly statement into the announcement of seeming defection by the American President, turning "I left the United States this morning" into "I left the United States, never to return". Furthermore, Carter’s warm statement of his visit to the nation was bizarrely mistranslated into the comment that President Carter "was happy to grasp at Poland’s private parts". Following up this colossal mistake, the interpreter then successively translated Carter’s expression of a hope to learn more about the Polish people’s "desires for the future" into "I desire the Poles carnally". Adding insult to injury, during Carter’s toast at a state banquet later during the same trip, a different interpreter providing a translation could not understand the American President’s Georgia accent and consequently chose to simply not translate his words at all rather than offer an inaccurate depiction. In hindsight, the latter interpreter opted for the better path in the face of confusion.
17 Mishandled International Events Throughout History. Internet: <historycollection.com> (adapted).
About the previous text, judge the items bellow.
It would be acceptable to infer from the text that the first translator it mentioned was an American rather than a Polish citizen.
Provas
In 1977, during his first official visit abroad as President of the United States, Jimmy Carter was betrayed by the language barrier and the choices of his translator. In the course of meeting his Polish counterpart, Edward Gierek, the translator was on hand to provide a translation of his president’s words into Polish. Unfortunately, his translations could, perhaps, have not been farther from the truth of what Carter said.
Announcing that he was extremely glad to be in Poland for his first trip abroad, the translator somehow managed to mistranslate the friendly statement into the announcement of seeming defection by the American President, turning "I left the United States this morning" into "I left the United States, never to return". Furthermore, Carter’s warm statement of his visit to the nation was bizarrely mistranslated into the comment that President Carter "was happy to grasp at Poland’s private parts". Following up this colossal mistake, the interpreter then successively translated Carter’s expression of a hope to learn more about the Polish people’s "desires for the future" into "I desire the Poles carnally". Adding insult to injury, during Carter’s toast at a state banquet later during the same trip, a different interpreter providing a translation could not understand the American President’s Georgia accent and consequently chose to simply not translate his words at all rather than offer an inaccurate depiction. In hindsight, the latter interpreter opted for the better path in the face of confusion.
17 Mishandled International Events Throughout History. Internet: <historycollection.com> (adapted).
About the previous text, judge the items bellow.
With the expression "Adding insult to injury" (fourth sentence of the second paragraph), the author suggests that Carter took the first translator’s mistakes as a case of injury.
Provas
In 1977, during his first official visit abroad as President of the United States, Jimmy Carter was betrayed by the language barrier and the choices of his translator. In the course of meeting his Polish counterpart, Edward Gierek, the translator was on hand to provide a translation of his president’s words into Polish. Unfortunately, his translations could, perhaps, have not been farther from the truth of what Carter said.
Announcing that he was extremely glad to be in Poland for his first trip abroad, the translator somehow managed to mistranslate the friendly statement into the announcement of seeming defection by the American President, turning "I left the United States this morning" into "I left the United States, never to return". Furthermore, Carter’s warm statement of his visit to the nation was bizarrely mistranslated into the comment that President Carter "was happy to grasp at Poland’s private parts". Following up this colossal mistake, the interpreter then successively translated Carter’s expression of a hope to learn more about the Polish people’s "desires for the future" into "I desire the Poles carnally". Adding insult to injury, during Carter’s toast at a state banquet later during the same trip, a different interpreter providing a translation could not understand the American President’s Georgia accent and consequently chose to simply not translate his words at all rather than offer an inaccurate depiction. In hindsight, the latter interpreter opted for the better path in the face of confusion.
17 Mishandled International Events Throughout History. Internet: <historycollection.com> (adapted).
About the previous text, judge the items bellow.
The meaning of the fourth sentence of the second paragraph would remain the same if "could not" were replaced with failed to as long as "chose" were also replaced with to choose.
Provas
In 1977, during his first official visit abroad as President of the United States, Jimmy Carter was betrayed by the language barrier and the choices of his translator. In the course of meeting his Polish counterpart, Edward Gierek, the translator was on hand to provide a translation of his president’s words into Polish. Unfortunately, his translations could, perhaps, have not been farther from the truth of what Carter said.
Announcing that he was extremely glad to be in Poland for his first trip abroad, the translator somehow managed to mistranslate the friendly statement into the announcement of seeming defection by the American President, turning "I left the United States this morning" into "I left the United States, never to return". Furthermore, Carter’s warm statement of his visit to the nation was bizarrely mistranslated into the comment that President Carter "was happy to grasp at Poland’s private parts". Following up this colossal mistake, the interpreter then successively translated Carter’s expression of a hope to learn more about the Polish people’s "desires for the future" into "I desire the Poles carnally". Adding insult to injury, during Carter’s toast at a state banquet later during the same trip, a different interpreter providing a translation could not understand the American President’s Georgia accent and consequently chose to simply not translate his words at all rather than offer an inaccurate depiction. In hindsight, the latter interpreter opted for the better path in the face of confusion.
17 Mishandled International Events Throughout History. Internet: <historycollection.com> (adapted).
About the previous text, judge the items bellow.
There is an ambiguity in the second sentence of the text, resolved by the mentioning of a politician’s name.
Provas
Qatar has made itself into the diplomatic capital of the world. Dotted across Doha are the many palaces and offices that have hosted, over recent years, negotiations about the many intractable diplomatic issues that have taken place the world over.
The power Qatar has come to wield has taken many observers by surprise. As a traditional Muslim monarchy in the Middle East, Qatar is a new kind of location for the sort of high-stakes geopolitical deal-making transacted until recently in Geneva and Oslo. Yet since October, the nation’s massive investment in becoming the world’s go-between has come into its own. Having long cultivated close relations with both the US and Hamas, Qatar became the locus of ceasefire negotiations in major local conflicts, as well as discussions over aid and evacuating the wounded. Its mediation has grown from a strategy to enhance its own safety into a role that underpins the entire world’s security.
Nesrine Malik. The go-between: how Qatar became the global capital of diplomacy. In: The Guardian. Internet: <www.theguardian.com> (adapted).
About the preceding text, judge the following items.
It is correct to infer from the text that European diplomacy, represented in the text by reference to "Geneva and Oslo" (second sentence of the second paragraph), is not paying much attention to conflicts "that have taken place the world over".
Provas
Qatar has made itself into the diplomatic capital of the world. Dotted across Doha are the many palaces and offices that have hosted, over recent years, negotiations about the many intractable diplomatic issues that have taken place the world over.
The power Qatar has come to wield has taken many observers by surprise. As a traditional Muslim monarchy in the Middle East, Qatar is a new kind of location for the sort of high-stakes geopolitical deal-making transacted until recently in Geneva and Oslo. Yet since October, the nation’s massive investment in becoming the world’s go-between has come into its own. Having long cultivated close relations with both the US and Hamas, Qatar became the locus of ceasefire negotiations in major local conflicts, as well as discussions over aid and evacuating the wounded. Its mediation has grown from a strategy to enhance its own safety into a role that underpins the entire world’s security.
Nesrine Malik. The go-between: how Qatar became the global capital of diplomacy. In: The Guardian. Internet: <www.theguardian.com> (adapted).
About the preceding text, judge the following items.
With "has come into its own" (third sentence of the second paragraph), the author means that Qatar is struggling to keep its role as a diplomatic broker after becoming a major investor in the resolution of conflicts.
Provas
Qatar has made itself into the diplomatic capital of the world. Dotted across Doha are the many palaces and offices that have hosted, over recent years, negotiations about the many intractable diplomatic issues that have taken place the world over.
The power Qatar has come to wield has taken many observers by surprise. As a traditional Muslim monarchy in the Middle East, Qatar is a new kind of location for the sort of high-stakes geopolitical deal-making transacted until recently in Geneva and Oslo. Yet since October, the nation’s massive investment in becoming the world’s go-between has come into its own. Having long cultivated close relations with both the US and Hamas, Qatar became the locus of ceasefire negotiations in major local conflicts, as well as discussions over aid and evacuating the wounded. Its mediation has grown from a strategy to enhance its own safety into a role that underpins the entire world’s security.
Nesrine Malik. The go-between: how Qatar became the global capital of diplomacy. In: The Guardian. Internet: <www.theguardian.com> (adapted).
About the preceding text, judge the following items.
It can be correctly inferred from the text that the surprise mentioned in the second paragraph can be explained by people having some preconceived notion of the role played by Middle Eastern countries in the international arena.
Provas
Caderno Container