Gabarito disponível
Texto-base:
There is nothing inevitable about choices that are environmentally destructive. In 1800, there were indeed 550 steam engines in Europe but there were over 500,000 water mills. Coal was more expensive than hydro power and many industrialists were not persuaded of its added value. It was the economic recession of 1825-1848 with increasing agitation by textile workers over salaries and conditions which made the use of coal-powered, steam-driven spinning machines a much more attractive proposition. More machines meant fewer workers and fewer workers meant fewer demands, notably for wage rises. Therefore, the substantial increase in CO₂ emissions in Britain in the first half of the nineteenth century, which through economic competition, war and imperial domination would start a worldwide trend, was not the blind outcome of the machinery of ‘progress’ but the cumulative consequence of a set of very specific decisions taken by identifiable socio-economic actors.
Similarly, the notion that ecological awareness is only a very recent phenomenon where “humanity” finally woke up to the environmental consequences of its economic activities does not stand up to scrutiny. In the period from the beginnings of the industrial revolution to the decade when the movement towards fossil fuels use becomes more marked, awareness of the relationships between humans and their environment or the “natural world” was widespread. Environmental risks have been clearly and repeatedly signalled from the time of the industrial revolution onwards. The notion of an unthinking humanity bringing destruction upon itself does not bear up to examination.
Michael Cronin. Eco-Translation: translation and ecology in the Age of the Anthropocene. New York: Routledge, 2017. p. 11-12 (adapted).
In relation to the previous text, judge the items that follow.
In the first paragraph, the author states that what increased the use of steam-driven spinning machines was the living conditions of textile workers.
There is nothing inevitable about choices that are environmentally destructive. In 1800, there were indeed 550 steam engines in Europe but there were over 500,000 water mills. Coal was more expensive than hydro power and many industrialists were not persuaded of its added value. It was the economic recession of 1825-1848 with increasing agitation by textile workers over salaries and conditions which made the use of coal-powered, steam-driven spinning machines a much more attractive proposition. More machines meant fewer workers and fewer workers meant fewer demands, notably for wage rises. Therefore, the substantial increase in CO₂ emissions in Britain in the first half of the nineteenth century, which through economic competition, war and imperial domination would start a worldwide trend, was not the blind outcome of the machinery of ‘progress’ but the cumulative consequence of a set of very specific decisions taken by identifiable socio-economic actors.
Similarly, the notion that ecological awareness is only a very recent phenomenon where “humanity” finally woke up to the environmental consequences of its economic activities does not stand up to scrutiny. In the period from the beginnings of the industrial revolution to the decade when the movement towards fossil fuels use becomes more marked, awareness of the relationships between humans and their environment or the “natural world” was widespread. Environmental risks have been clearly and repeatedly signalled from the time of the industrial revolution onwards. The notion of an unthinking humanity bringing destruction upon itself does not bear up to examination.
Michael Cronin. Eco-Translation: translation and ecology in the Age of the Anthropocene. New York: Routledge, 2017. p. 11-12 (adapted).
In relation to the previous text, judge the items that follow.
In the first paragraph, the author states that what increased the use of steam-driven spinning machines was the living conditions of textile workers.
Resolução comentada
O que tornou as máquinas a vapor mais atraentes foi a recessão e a agitação dos trabalhadores, não suas condições de vida.
O texto diz que foi a recessão econômica de 1825–1848, com crescente agitação dos trabalhadores têxteis por salários e condições, que tornou as máquinas movidas a carvão mais atraentes. Ou seja, o fator foi a agitação trabalhista dentro da recessão, e não as condições de vida em si. O item simplifica indevidamente.
Análise das alternativas
A) Errada: desloca a causa para as condições de vida em si. B) Correta: a causa foi a recessão com agitação trabalhista.
Referência: Michael Cronin, Eco-Translation (2017).
Resolução comentada do VaiConcursos.