Pular para o conteúdo
English for ALL
← Todas as questões

Ideia principal do artigo “It’s neither artificial, nor intelligent” (ITA 2026)

Leia o texto a seguir para responder às questões 46 a 48.

The problem with artificial intelligence? It’s neither artificial, nor intelligent.

Elon Musk and Apple’s co-founder Steve Wozniak have recently signed a letter calling for a six-month moratorium on the development of AI systems. The goal is to give society time to adapt to what the signatories describe as an “AI summer”, which they believe will ultimately benefit humanity, as long as the right guardrails are put in place. These guardrails include rigorously audited safety protocols.

It is a laudable goal, but there is an even better way to spend these six months: retiring the hackneyed label of “artificial intelligence” from public debate.

[…]

However, many critics have pointed out that intelligence is not just about pattern-matching. Equally important is the ability to draw generalisations. Marcel Duchamp’s 1917 work of art Fountain is a prime example of this. Before Duchamp’s piece, a urinal was just a urinal. But, with a change of perspective, Duchamp turned it into a work of art. At that moment, he was generalising about art.

[...]

Human intelligence is not one-dimensional. It rests on what the 20th-century Chilean psychoanalyst Ignacio Matte Blanco called bi-logic: a fusion of the static and timeless logic of formal reasoning and the contextual and highly dynamic logic of emotion. The former searches for differences; the latter is quick to erase them. Marcel Duchamp’s mind knew that the urinal belonged in a bathroom; his heart didn’t. Bi-logic explains how we regroup mundane things in novel and insightful ways. We all do this – not just Duchamp.

AI will never get there because machines cannot have a sense (rather than mere knowledge) of the past, the present and the future; of history, injury or nostalgia. Without that, there’s no emotion, depriving bi-logic of one of its components. Thus, machines remain trapped in the singular formal logic.

[...]

But the reason why tools like ChatGPT can do anything even remotely creative is because their training sets were produced by actually existing humans, with their complex emotions, anxieties and all. If we want such creativity to persist, we should also be funding the production of art, fiction and history – not just data centres and machine learning.

That’s not at all where things point now. The ultimate risk of not retiring terms such as “artificial intelligence” is that they will render the creative work of intelligence invisible, while making the world more predictable and dumb.

So, instead of spending six months auditing the algorithms while we wait for the “AI summer,” we might as well go and reread Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream. That will do so much more to increase the intelligence in our world.

Fonte: MOROZOV, Evgeny. The problem with artificial intelligence? It’s neither artificial nor intelligent. The Guardian. 30 mar 2023. Disponível em: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/30/artificial-intelligence-chatgpt-human-mind

Fonte: The Guardian, 30/03/2023.

The sentence that BEST summarizes the main idea of the text is

  1. A) Machines are unreliable because they cannot replicate emotion and contextual understanding.
  2. B) Society should retire the misleading label "artificial intelligence" and focus on nurturing human creativity.
  3. C) Human intelligence is multifaceted, combining logical reasoning with emotional insight, a balance that machines cannot achieve.
  4. D) Misleading terms like "artificial intelligence" make the world overly predictable and uninspired.
  5. E) AI systems rely on human-produced data for creativity alongside technological development.
Ver gabarito comentado

Resposta correta: B

A tese aparece logo no terceiro parágrafo, como contraproposta à moratória: “there is an even better way to spend these six months: retiring the hackneyed label of ‘artificial intelligence’ from public debate”. Ela é retomada no fecho, quando o autor diz que “we should also be funding the production of art, fiction and history – not just data centres and machine learning” e sugere reler Shakespeare em vez de auditar algoritmos — ou seja, aposentar o rótulo e alimentar a criatividade humana, exatamente o que B reúne. C é o distrator mais forte porque descreve corretamente a bi-lógica, mas essa é a premissa que sustenta o argumento, não a proposta do texto. D e E também são verdadeiras isoladamente, porém recortam apenas um risco e apenas uma constatação sobre o ChatGPT, sem a conclusão que o autor defende.

Questões relacionadas

Ver todas →

C1 Interpretação de texto Editorial

ITA 2026: o declínio da leitura entre adolescentes
Leia o texto a seguir para responder às questões 40 e 41. The decline of teenagers reading is an impact on education If you are a teenager reading this story, you are in the minority. Statistics show that 80% of teenagers do not read for pleasure on a daily ba…

De acordo com as informações do texto, é CORRETO afirmar que

Resolver questão

C1 Interpretação de texto Reportagem

ITA 2025 – Quais asserções sobre detecção de textos de IA são verdadeiras
As scientists explore AI-written text, journals hammer out policies Many ask authors to disclose use of ChatGPT and other generative artificial intelligence “It’s all we’ve been talking about since November,” says Patrick Franzen, publishing director for SPIE,…

Leia as asserções destacadas e, em seguida, assinale a alternativa CORRETA. I. Pesquisadores acostumados a ler artigos de periódicos médicos não conseguem compreender um terço das publicações. II. Por ora, editores e revisores de publicações científicas têm dificuldades para iden- tificar, de forma consistente, textos gerados por IA dada a escassez de softwares especializados. III. Responsáveis por publicações científicas estão relutantes em coibir o uso de geradores de texto por computador, temendo uma potencial enxurrada de críticas por parte da comunidade acadêmica. IV. A publicação de prospectos gerados por IA, contendo novas versões de alguns artigos científicos específicos, causou uma onda de choque na indústria editorial acadêmica.

Resolver questão

C1 Interpretação de texto Reportagem

ITA 2025 – A preocupação dos editores científicos com textos escritos por IA
As scientists explore AI-written text, journals hammer out policies Many ask authors to disclose use of ChatGPT and other generative artificial intelligence “It’s all we’ve been talking about since November,” says Patrick Franzen, publishing director for SPIE,…

According to the text, some publishers of scientific journals are concerned about the

Resolver questão