FUVEST 2018

Questão 34433

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Cartum 1

Cartum 2

No último quadrinho do cartum 1, por meio da fala “If you don’t pursue the truth, you’ll never recognize the lies”, o personagem

Questão 34434

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

De acordo com o texto, as pessoas

Questão 34435

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

No trecho do primeiro parágrafo “A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt”, o termo sublinhado indica sentido de

Questão 34436

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

According to the second paragraph, the link between vaccines and autism

Questão 34437

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

No trecho do segundo parágrafo "but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children", o termo sublinhado refere-se a

Questão 34438

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

O trecho do terceiro parágrafo "we weigh all options as equally valid, regardless of expertise" quer dizer que as pessoas

Questão 34439

(UNESP - 2018/2 - 1ª FASE)

Leia o texto para responder a questão.

When it comes to politics and ‘fake news,’
facts aren’t enough

The myth that vaccines cause autism has persisted, even though the facts paint an entirely different story.

In today’s political climate, it sometimes feels like we can’t even agree on basic facts. We bombard each other with statistics and figures, hoping that more data will make a difference. A progressive person might show you the same climate change graphs over and over while a conservative person might point to the trillions of dollars of growing national debt. We’re left wondering, “Why can’t they just see? It’s so obvious!”

Certain myths are so pervasive that no matter how many experts disprove them, they only seem to grow in popularity. There’s no shortage of serious studies showing no link between autism and vaccines, for example, but these are no match for an emotional appeal to parents worried for their young children.

Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist at University College London, studies how our minds work and how we process new information. In her upcoming book, The Influential Mind, she explores why we ignore facts and how we can get people to actually listen to the truth. Tali shows that we’re open to new information – but only if it confirms our existing beliefs. We find ways to ignore facts that challenge our ideals. And as
neuroscientist Bahador Bahrami and colleagues have found, we weigh all opinions as equally valid, regardless of expertise.

So, having the data on your side is not always enough. For better or for worse, Sharot says, emotions may be the key to changing minds.

(Shankar Vedantam. www.npr.org. Adaptado.)

No trecho do quarto parágrafo "emotions may be the key to changing minds", o termo sublinhado pode ser substituído, sem alteração de sentido no texto, por:

Questão 34538

(UNESP - 2018 - 1ª FASE)  O ibuprofeno é uma medicação prescrita para dor e febre, com meia-vida de aproximadamente 2 horas. Isso significa que, por exemplo, depois de 2 horas da ingestão de 200 mg de ibuprofeno, permanecerão na corrente sanguínea do paciente apenas 100 mg da medicação. Após mais 2 horas (4 horas no total), apenas 50 mg permanecerão na corrente sanguínea e, assim, sucessivamente. Se um paciente recebe 800 mg de ibuprofeno a cada 6 horas, a quantidade dessa medicação que permanecerá na corrente sanguínea na 14ª hora após a ingestão da primeira dose será

Questão 34539

(UNESP - 2018 - 1ª FASE) A figura indica um trapézio ABCD no plano cartesiano.

A área desse trapézio, na unidade quadrada definida pelos eixos coordenados, é igual a

Questão 34540

(UNESP - 2018 - 1ª FASE) Os estudantes 1, 2 e 3 concorreram a um mesmo cargo da diretoria do grêmio de uma faculdade da UNESP, sendo que 1 obteve 6,25% do total de votos que os três receberam para esse cargo. Na figura, a área de cada um dos três retângulos representa a porcentagem de votos obtidos pelo candidato correspondente. Juntos, os retângulos compõem um quadrado, cuja área representa o total dos votos recebidos pelos três candidatos.

Do total de votos recebidos pelos três candidatos, o candidato 2 obteve