Philosophy is an important part of the Human Sciences and its Technologies area of Enem.
The good result of the participants depends on the mastery of some central themes of the discipline such as ethics, politics, theory of knowledge and metaphysics.
question 1
(Enem/2012) TEXT I
Anaximenes of Miletus said that air is the original element of everything that exists, existed and will exist, and that other things come from its descendants. When air expands, it turns into fire, whereas winds are condensed air. Clouds form from the air by felting and, further condensed, turn into water. Water, when more condensed, turns into earth, and when condensed as much as possible, turns into stones.
BURNET, J. The dawn of Greek philosophy. Rio de Janeiro: PUC-Rio, 2006 (adapted).
TEXT II
Basil the Great, medieval philosopher, wrote: “God, as creator of all things, is at the beginning of the world and of times. How sparse in content the contradictory speculations of philosophers are presented to us, in view of this conception, for which the world originates, either from one of the four elements, as the Ionians teach, or from atoms, as you think Democritus. In fact, they seem to want to anchor the world in a spider's web.”
GILSON, E.: BOEHNER, P. History of Christian Philosophy. São Paulo: Voices, 1991 (adapted).
Philosophers from different historical times developed theses to explain the origin of the universe, starting from a rational explanation. The theses of Anaximenes, ancient Greek philosopher, and Basil, medieval philosopher, have in common theories that
a) were based on the natural sciences.
b) refuted the theories of philosophers of religion.
c) originated in the myths of ancient civilizations.
d) postulated an original principle for the world.
e) argued that God is the beginning of all things.
Correct alternative: d) postulated an original principle for the world.
The question about the origin of all things is a question that has moved philosophy since its birth in ancient Greece.
In an attempt to abandon mythical thinking based on images and fables, a logical and rational explanation for the original principle of the world was sought.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Greek thought seeks to understand nature to explain the origin of the world. However, the principle established by Basil the Great is founded on the idea of God.
b) The philosopher Basilio the Great was a theologian and a philosopher of religion.
c) Philosophical thought is born from the refutation (refusal, denial) of myths.
e) Only Basilio the Great defends that God is the beginning of all things. For Anaximenes, the primordial element (arche) generator of all that exists is Air.
question 2
(Enem/2017) A conversation of such a nature transforms the listener; Socrates' contact paralyzes and embarrasses; it leads to reflection on itself, to give attention to an unusual direction: the temperamental ones, like Alcibiades, know that they will find with him all the good they are capable of, but they flee because they fear this powerful influence, which leads them to censor. Especially to these young people, many of whom are almost children, whom he tries to imprint his guidance on.
BREHIER, E. History of philosophy. São Paulo: Mestre Jou, 1977.
The text highlights characteristics of the Socratic way of life, which was based on
a) Contemplation of the mythical tradition.
b) Support of the dialectical method.
c) Relativization of true knowledge.
d) Valorization of rhetorical argumentation.
e) Investigation of the fundamentals of nature.
Correct alternative: b) Support of the dialectical method.
Socrates was an advocate of ignorance as the basic principle for knowledge. Hence the importance of his phrase "I only know that I know nothing". For him, it is preferable not to know than to think he knows.
Thus, Socrates built a method that, through dialogue (dialectical method), false certainties and prejudices were abandoned, the interlocutor assumed his ignorance. From there, he sought true knowledge.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Socrates seeks to abandon myths and opinions for the construction of true knowledge.
c) Socrates believed that true knowledge exists and that it can be awakened through reason. He made several criticisms of the sophists for taking a perspective of relativizing knowledge.
d) The sophists claimed that the truth is a mere point of view, being based on the most convincing argument. For Socrates, this position was contrary to the essence of true knowledge, proper to the human soul.
e) The philosopher begins the anthropological period of Greek philosophy. Issues relating to human life became the center of attention, leaving aside the search for the foundations of nature, typical of the pre-Socratic period.
question 3
For Plato, what was true about Parmenides was that the object of knowledge is an object of reason and not of sensation, and it was I need to establish a relationship between rational object and sensitive or material object that would privilege the former over the second. Slowly but irresistibly, the Doctrine of Ideas formed in his mind.
ZINGANO, M. Plato and Aristotle: the fascination of philosophy. São Paulo: Odysseus, 2012 (adapted).
The text makes reference to the relationship between reason and sensation, an essential aspect of Plato's Doctrine of Ideas (427 a. C.-346 a. Ç.). According to the text, how does Plato stand in front of this relationship?
a) Establishing an unbridgeable gulf between the two.
b) Privileging the senses and subordinating knowledge to them.
c) Sticking to Parmenides' position that reason and sensation are inseparable.
d) Affirming that reason is capable of generating knowledge, but sensation is not.
e) Rejecting Parmenides' position that sensation is superior to reason.
Correct alternative: d) Affirming that reason is capable of generating knowledge, but sensation is not.
The main mark of Plato's Doctrine or Theory of Ideas is reason as the source of true knowledge.
The philosopher divides the world in two:
- The world of ideas or intelligible world - is the true, eternal and unchanging world, where ideas dwell, that is, the essence of things, which can only be reached through the intellect (of reason).
- The world of the senses or sensible world - it is the world of error, of deceit, where things change and suffer the action of time. It is the world we live in and interact with things through our senses. This world is an imitation of the world of ideas.
Thus, reason is capable of generating true knowledge, while the senses lead to error and mere opinion.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) There is a connection between the Platonic worlds. The world of the senses is the imitation of the world of ideas, it is how things present themselves to our senses.
b) For Plato, reason is privileged and not the senses, only it is capable of attaining knowledge.
c) For both Plato and Parmenides, there is a clear division between the senses and reason.
e) Parmenides and Plato reinforce the idea of a hierarchy, in which reason is superior to the senses.
question 4
(Enem/2017) If, therefore, for the things we do there is an end that we desire for itself and everything else is desired in the interest of that end; evidently such an end will be the good, or rather the supreme good. But will not knowledge have a great influence on this life? If so, let us endeavor to determine, even if only in general terms, what it is and which of the sciences or faculties it constitutes the object. No one will doubt that his study belongs to the most prestigious art and that one can more truly call the master art. Now, politics proves to be of this nature, since it determines which sciences must be studied in a State, which each citizen must learn, and to what extent; and we see that even the faculties held in the highest esteem, such as strategy, economics, and rhetoric, are subject to it. Well, as politics uses the other sciences and, on the other hand, legislates on what we should and what not we must do, the purpose of this science must encompass the two others, so that purpose will be the good human.
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics. In: Thinkers. São Paulo: Nova Cultural, 1991 (adapted)
For Aristotle, the relationship between the supreme good and the organization of the polis presupposes that
a) The good of individuals consists in each one pursuing their own interests.
b) The highest good is given by the faith that the gods are the bearers of truth.
c) Politics is the science that precedes all others in the organization of the city.
d) Education aims to form the conscience of each person to act correctly.
e) Democracy protects political activities necessary for the common good.
Correct alternative: c) Politics is the science that precedes all others in the organization of the city.
The question works with two central concepts in Aristotle:
- The human being is a political animal (zoon politikon). FIt is part of human nature to associate and live in community (polis) and is what sets us apart from other animals.
- The human being naturally seeks happiness. happiness is the Bin bigger and it is only through ignorance, not understanding the good, that the human being does evil.
Therefore, politics is the science that precedes all others in the organization of the city, for being the guarantee of the realization of human nature in the relationships existing in the polis and the organization of everyone towards happiness.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) For the philosopher, the political nature of human beings tends to define common interests.
b) Aristotle affirms that the highest good is happiness (eudaimonia) and human beings are realized through political life.
d) The Aristotelian philosophy understands the human being as essentially good, not needing "to form the conscience to act correctly".
e) Aristotle was a defender of politics, but not necessarily of democracy. For the philosopher, there are a number of factors that make up a good government and these factors vary according to contexts, also changing the best form of government.
question 5
(Enem/2019) In fact, it is not because man can use his free will to sin that one must suppose that God granted it to do so. There is, therefore, a reason why God gave man this characteristic, for without it he could not live and act correctly. It can be understood, then, that it was granted to man for this purpose, considering that if a man uses it to sin, divine punishment will fall upon him. Now this would be unjust if free will had been given to man not only to do right, but also to sin. Indeed, why should anyone who used his will for the purpose for which it was given him be punished?
AUGUSTINE. Free will. In: MARCONDES, D. Basic ethics texts. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar, 2008.
In this text, the Christian philosopher Augustine of Hippo argues that divine punishment is based on (a)
a) deviation from the celibate posture.
b) insufficiency of moral autonomy.
c) removal of detachment actions.
d) distancing from sacrificial practices.
e) violation of Old Testament precepts.
Correct alternative: b) insufficiency of moral autonomy.
For Augustine of Hippo, or St. Augustine, God endowed human beings with autonomy, the finality of that gift is the possibility to act freely and in accordance with his teachings, not to sin.
Sin is an effect of human capacity to fail to use their freedom, based on insufficiency of their moral autonomy, so they must account for their mistakes and assume the possible punishment from God.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) The condition of celibacy is not a rule for all human beings. Thus, it does not substantiate divine punishment.
c) The removal of the actions of detachment can be understood as a deviation, but they do not include all the possibilities of sin.
d) The sacrifice in St. Augustine is understood as the union of humans with God. Thus, the practices of sacrifice are the donation of oneself as a form of offering to God, through his fellow men.
The distance from these practices could lead human beings to a distance from God and possible punishment, but it is not the main factor that supports it.
e) The philosophy of Augustine of Hippo is based on the precepts of the New Testament and, mainly, on the figure of Christ.
Thus, the violation of Old Testament precepts does not support divine punishment.
question 6
(Enem/2013) A question arises from here: whether it is worth more to be loved than feared or feared than loved. The answer is that both things would be to be desired; but because it is difficult to put them together, it is much safer to be feared than loved when one of the two must be lacking. Because of men who can be said, in general, that they are ungrateful, fickle, simulators, cowards and greedy for profit, and while you do them good they are entirely yours, they offer you blood, goods, life and children, when, as I said above, the danger it is far away; but when he arrives, they revolt.
MACHIAVEL, NO. The prince. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand, 1991.
Based on the historical analysis of human behavior in its social and political relations, Machiavelli defines man as a being
a) armed with virtue, with an innate disposition to do good to himself and to others.
b) possessor of wealth, making use of wealth to achieve success in politics.
c) guided by interests, so that their actions are unpredictable and fickle.
d) naturally rational, living in a pre-social state and carrying their natural rights.
e) sociable by nature, maintaining peaceful relationships with peers.
Correct alternative: c) guided by interests, so that your actions are unpredictable and fickle.
Machiavelli shows us in his book The prince that morals and politics are not always related and that the individual is guided by interests, so that their actions are unpredictable and fickle. And, for the good of all, it is preferable that a government be feared rather than loved.
Machiavelli draws attention to the power exercised by rulers. From his perspective, the stronger and more merciless the power, the more capable of guaranteeing peace and harmony it will be.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) The concept of virtue (virtù), in Machiavelli, is linked to the possibility of choice (free will) of the prince. That is, virtue is related to the ruler and not to the common man.
b) The concept of fortune also relates only to the prince. It is your ability to predict and control the "wheel of fortune", which means controlling the unpredictability of the effects generated from actions.
d) This answer is similar to the thinking about the state of nature proposed by contractualist philosophers.
e) Sociable by nature, maintaining peaceful relationships with peers. This conception refers to Rousseau's thought. The philosopher affirms that the human being is naturally good, the “good savage”.
question 7
(Enem / 2019) For Machiavelli, when a man decides to tell the truth putting his own physical integrity at risk, such a resolution concerns only his person. But if that same man is a head of state, personal criteria are no longer adequate to decide on actions whose consequences become so broad, since the damage will not only be individual, but collective. In this case, depending on the circumstances and the ends to be achieved, it can be decided that the best thing for the common good is to lie.
SPIDER, M. L. Machiavelli: the logic of force. São Paulo: Moderna, 2006 (adapted).
The text points to an innovation in political theory in the modern era expressed in the distinction between
a) ideality and effectiveness of morality.
b) nullity and preservation of freedom.
c) illegality and legitimacy of the ruler.
d) verifiability and possibility of the truth.
e) objectivity and subjectivity of knowledge.
Correct alternative: a) ideality and effectiveness of morality.
Machiavellian philosophy is marked by the strong distinction between the duty of the common individual and the duty of the prince (State).
Thus, the ideality of morals, applied to ordinary individuals, cannot be applied to the logic of government. The prince's responsibility is with the governance, therefore, it is linked to the effectiveness of his actions, even if they go against the ideal morality.
In other words, the virtue of the ruler is based on his ability to anticipate the unpredictability of history and take effective measures, which differ from traditional Christian morality.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
None of the other alternatives present a relevant distinction in Machiavelli's thought.
question 8
(Enem/2012) TEXT I
I have sometimes experienced that the senses were deceptive, and it is prudent never to rely entirely on someone who has deceived us once.
DESCARTES, R. Metaphysical Meditations. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1979.
TEXT II
Whenever we harbor any suspicion that an idea is being used without any meaning, we need only ask: from what impression does this supposed idea derive? And if it is impossible to attribute any sensory impression to him, it will serve to confirm our suspicion.
HUME, D. An investigation into understanding. São Paulo: Unesp, 2004 (adapted).
In the texts, both authors take a stand on the nature of human knowledge. Comparing the excerpts allows us to assume that Descartes and Hume
a) they defend the senses as an original criterion to consider legitimate knowledge.
b) understand that it is unnecessary to suspect the meaning of an idea in philosophical and critical reflection.
c) they are legitimate representatives of criticism regarding the genesis of knowledge.
d) agree that human knowledge is impossible in relation to ideas and senses.
e) attribute different places to the role of the senses in the process of obtaining knowledge.
Correct alternative: e) they attribute different places to the role of the senses in the process of obtaining knowledge.
Descartes and Hume are representatives of opposing currents of thought.
Meanwhile, Descartes' rationalism proposes that the senses are deceptive and cannot serve as a basis for knowledge. Empiricism, which has in Hume its most radical defender, asserts that all knowledge originates in experience, in the senses.
With that, we can say that they assign different places to the role of the senses in the process of obtaining knowledge.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Descartes and rationalism despise the senses for knowledge.
b) The Cartesian cogito (I think therefore I am) is born of methodical doubt. Descartes doubts everything until he finds something safe to base his knowledge on. Thus, suspicion is an essential part of philosophical reflection.
c) Criticism is a Kantian perspective that aims to criticize the positions of rationalism and empiricism.
d) Although Hume assumes a skeptical position about knowledge, for Descartes there is no idea of the impossibility of knowledge.
question 9
(Enem/2019) TEXT I
I think it proper to stop some time in the contemplation of this all perfect God, to ponder fully at ease its wonderful attributes, consider, admire and adore the incomparable beauty of this immense light. DESCARTES, R. Meditations. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1980.
TEXT II
What is the most reasonable way to understand what the world is like? Is there any good reason to believe that the world was created by an all-powerful deity? We cannot say that belief in God is “only” a matter of faith. RACHELS, J. Problems of philosophy. Lisbon: Gradiva, 2009.
The texts address a questioning of the construction of modernity that defends a model
a) centered on human reason.
b) based on mythological explanation.
c) based on the immanentist order.
d) focused on contractualist legitimacy.
e) configured in ethnocentric perception.
Correct alternative: a) centered on human reason.
The Modern Age, or modernity, is marked by a turn centered on human reason. Descartes' thought marks this transition, the human being endowed with reason is capable of knowing all aspects of divine creation.
In text II, he shows an advance in rationalization that calls into question the bases for rational knowledge.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
b) the mythological explanation of reality was being abandoned by the first (pre-Socratic) philosophers, who sought knowledge based on "logos", giving rise to philosophical explanations, logical-rational.
The alternatives "c", "d", and "e" present points arising from modern thought, but none of them presents itself as a model for the construction of modern thought.
question 10
(Enem/2019) It is said that Humboldt, a 19th century naturalist, marveled by the geography, flora and fauna of the South American region, via his inhabitants as if they were beggars sitting on a sack of gold, referring to their immeasurable natural wealth not explored. Somehow, the scientist ratified our role as exporters of nature in what would be the world after of the Iberian colonization: he saw us as territories condemned to take advantage of natural resources existing.
ACOSTA, A. Living well: an opportunity to imagine other worlds. São Paulo: Elephant, 2016 (adapted).
The relationship between human being and nature highlighted in the text reflected the permanence of the following philosophical current:
a) Cognitive Relativism.
b) Dialectical materialism.
c) Cartesian rationalism.
d) Epistemological pluralism.
e) Phenomenological existentialism.
Correct alternative: c) Cartesian rationalism.
Cartesian rationalism is a reference to the thought of philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650). For the thinker, reason is the greatest of human faculties and the foundation of all valid knowledge.
It is through reason that human beings dominate nature and use it as a means for their development.
Thus, Humboldt's thought, which relates nature to a "sack of gold", demonstrates a conception of nature based on its aspect as a product to be explored and commercialized.
The view of nature as a means of obtaining wealth is a hallmark of the Cartesian conception of the domain and exploitation of nature by human beings.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Cognitive relativism is marked by the possibility of different knowledge being simultaneously valid.
In the text there is no relativization mark, only the reinforcement of the idea of nature as a product.
b) Dialectical materialism is a theory developed by sociologist Karl Marx (1818-1883). According to Marx, production relations will determine social construction, which advances from the exploitation of one class by another.
Humboldt's thought expressed in the text does not take into account this type of productive relationship.
d) Epistemological pluralism is a current of thought that argues that knowledge is directly linked to different contexts.
In the text, there is the reinforcement of an ethnocentric/Eurocentric vision, which reinforces the vision of the colonies as a possibility of exploring nature.
It also disqualifies the epistemology (knowledge) of the original peoples of the Americas, who do not explore nature like the Europeans and are seen as "beggars sitting on a bag of gold".
e) Phenomenological existentialism, influenced by the thought of Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980), seeks to understand and respect individuals based on their experiences and construction of their existence.
Thus, the subject is constructed from inter-subjective relations (between subjects), while in the text individuals from the Americas are taken as objects ("exporters of nature").
question 11
(Enem/2013) So that there is no abuse, it is necessary to organize things so that power is contained by power. Everything would be lost if the same man or the same body of the principals, or of the nobles, or of the people, exercised these three powers: that of making laws, that of executing public resolutions and that of judging crimes or differences of individuals.
The Legislative, Executive and Judiciary powers act independently to carry out the freedom, which does not exist if the same person or group exercises the aforementioned powers concomitantly.
MONTESQUIEU, B. From the Spirit of Laws. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1979 (adapted).
The division and independence between powers are necessary conditions for there to be freedom in a study. This can only occur under a political model where there is
a) exercise of guardianship over legal and political activities.
b) consecration of political power by religious authority.
c) concentration of power in the hands of technical-scientific elites.
d) setting limits on public actors and government institutions.
e) bringing together the functions of legislating, judging and executing in the hands of an elected government.
Correct alternative: d) setting limits on public actors and government institutions.
Montesquieu was a philosopher influenced by Enlightenment thought. With that, he criticizes absolutism and the centralization of power. He was a defender of the idea of the tripartition of power so that there was setting limits on public actors and government institutions from the regulation between the powers, preventing the tyranny of power centralized in the hand of a ruler.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) For the philosopher, anything that interferes with the independence of each of the powers affects the risk of authoritarianism generated by the excessive accumulation of power.
b) Montesquieu values the power that comes from the people, regardless of religious determination.
c) As previously stated, the philosopher was against any possibility of concentration of power.
e) Even democratically elected governments cannot accumulate all powers within themselves at the risk of becoming tyrannical.
question 12
(Enem/2018) Everything that is valid for a time of war, in which every man is every man's enemy, is also valid for the time during which men live with no security other than that which can be offered them by their own strength and invention.
HOBBES, T. Leviathan. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1983.
TEXT II
Let us not conclude with Hobbes that, because he has no idea of goodness, man is naturally bad. This author should say that, since the state of nature is the one in which the care of our conservation is less harmful to the others, this state was, therefore, the most suitable for peace and the most convenient to the gender. human.
ROUSSEAU, J.-J. Discourse on the origin and foundation of inequality among men. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1993 (adapted).
The excerpts present conceptual divergences between authors who support an understanding according to which equality between men is due to a
a) predisposition to knowledge.
b) submission to the transcendent.
c) epistemological tradition.
d) original condition.
e) political vocation.
Correct alternative: d) original condition.
In the question above, we see one of the most classic rivalries in the history of philosophy: Hobbes x Rousseau. Despite having opposing views, Hobbes and Rousseau agree to use the same central idea, the state of nature human.
The state of nature is an abstraction, an imagined idea about original condition of human beings. A pre-social moment of humanity where individuals have only the freedom given by nature (natural freedom), just like other animals.
The authors differ as to what this original condition of humanity.
- For Hobbes, humanity in state of nature it would be humanity in a war of all against all. In nature we are our biggest enemies. For the author, "man is man's wolf".
- For Rousseau, human beings are naturally good. In state of nature, the human beings would be in a state of happiness making the most of their natural freedom. For the author, the human being would be the "good savage".
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) For philosophers, there is no predisposition to knowledge common to human beings, they are linked only by the meaning attributed by nature.
b) The state of nature explained by Hobbes and Rousseau consists, precisely, in a state of natural freedom which is to be subject only to the laws of nature.
c) The two philosophers do not identify roots or a common epistemological tradition in human beings.
e) For them, human beings do not have a political vocation. Both Rousseau's "good savage" and Hobbes' "wolf man" point to a natural unfitness for politics.
question 13
(Enem/2017) A person is forced by necessity to borrow money. You know very well that you will not be able to pay, but you also see that they will not lend you anything if you do not firmly promise to pay within a specified period. You are tempted to make the promise; but she is still conscious enough to ask herself: is it not forbidden and contrary to getting out of trouble in this way? Assuming you decide to do so, your maxim of action would be: when I think I'm in money trouble, I'll borrow it and promise to pay it back, even though I know it will never happen.
KANT, l. Metaphysical foundation of morals. Sao Paulo. April Cultural, 1980
According to Kantian morals, the "false promise of payment" represented in the text
a) Ensures that the action is accepted by all based on free participatory discussion.
b) Ensures that the effects of actions do not destroy the possibility of future life on earth.
c) It is opposed to the principle that every human action can be valid as a universal norm.
d) It is materialized in the understanding that the ends of human action can justify the means.
e) Allows individual action to produce the greatest happiness for the people involved.
Correct alternative: c) Opposes the principle that every action of man can count as a universal norm.
This question demands from the participants a study of Kant's morals, above all, of his Categorical Imperative, which is a kind of Kantian formula for the resolution of moral questions.
With the Kantian Categorical Imperative we have the answer to the question. When making the “false payment promise”, the person who borrows the money lies and “uses” the person who will lend him the money. The person who lends the money is seen as a simple means of solving the other person's financial problems.
We can also conclude that the "false promise" can never be understood as a universal norm or law of nature. If promises are always false, they lose their meaning and can ultimately prevent people from trusting each other.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) For Kant, actions must be evaluated apart from their context and judged by reason. Moral action is not a collective agreement or contract.
b) The action must be judged in its relation only to the duty. It is not in question, for Kant, the possible effects of the action.
d) This conception is close to Machiavelli's perspective on the Prince's morals, in which actions are valid ways (means) to achieve an objective (end).
e) The production of happiness is related to Stuart Mill's utilitarian thinking. For him, actions should be judged by the maximum amount of happiness (a goal of human nature) that they can generate.
question 14
(Enem/2019) TEXT I
Two things fill the mood with ever-increasing admiration and veneration: the starry sky above me and the moral law in me.
KANT, I. Critique of practical reason. Lisbon: Editions 70, s/d (adapted).
TEXT II
Two things I admire: the harsh law covering me and the starry sky inside me.
FONTELA, O. Kant (reread). In: Complete poetry. São Paulo: Hedra, 2015.
The rereading carried out by the poet inverts the following central ideas of Kantian thought:
a) Possibility of freedom and obligation of action.
b) Priority of judgment and importance of nature.
c) Need for good will and criticism of metaphysics.
d) Dispensability of the empirical and authority of reason.
e) Interiority of the norm and phenomenality of the world.
Correct alternative: e) Interiority of the norm and phenomenality of the world.
In the excerpt taken from the book Criticizing practical reason, Kant affirms two of his central ideas:
- The interiority of moral norms as an a priori judgment, innate;
- O world as a phenomenon, a manifestation, making it impossible to know the essence of things (the thing-in-itself).
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) The possibility of freedom and the obligation of action are not in question, but "moral law in me".
b) Kant understands nature from its phenomenological bias, its importance from human knowledge.
c) In Kantian thought, good will is subordinated to the idea of duty. It is noteworthy that Kant's critique of metaphysics concerns traditional metaphysics.
d) Although Kant reinforces the idea of the authority of reason, he exposes its limits and also values the empirical field through phenomena.
Kantian thought marked by the attempt to reconcile the rationalist tradition with empiricism.
question 15
(Enem/2013) Until today it was accepted that our knowledge should be regulated by objects; however, all attempts to discover, through concepts, something that would broaden our knowledge, failed with this assumption. Let us try, then, once, to try whether the tasks of metaphysics will not be better solved, assuming that objects should be regulated by our knowledge.
KANT, I. Critique of pure reason. Lisbon: Calouste-Gulbenkian, 1994 (adapted).
The passage in question is a reference to what became known as the Copernican revolution in philosophy. In it, two philosophical positions that
a) take opposing views on the nature of knowledge.
b) argue that knowledge is impossible, leaving us only skepticism.
c) reveal the interdependent relationship between experience data and philosophical reflection.
d) bet, with regard to the tasks of philosophy, in the primacy of ideas over objects.
e) they refute each other as to the nature of our knowledge and both are rejected by Kant.
Correct alternative: a) take opposing views on the nature of knowledge.
For Kant, the confrontation between the empiricist position and the rationalist position assumes that knowledge is anchored in the subject-object relationship, with the object as the center of attention.
The philosopher claims that knowledge must be based on our ideas.
Thus, he sought, from an analogy to Copernicus' heliocentric theory, to establish ideas, not objects, as the center of knowledge.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
b) Only empiricist thinking can agree with skepticism. For rationalists, all knowledge is the result of Reason itself.
c) What is revealed is the centrality of the subject as a source of knowledge.
d) The primacy of ideas is the basis of Kantian thought, but they are not in the ideas that confront each other in the text.
e) Kant criticizes the thought of the philosophical tradition, but seeks a synthesis between opposing currents.
question 16
(Enem/2016) We feel that all satisfaction of our desires coming from the world is similar to the alms that keeps the beggar alive today, but extends his hunger tomorrow. Resignation, on the contrary, resembles inherited fortune: it frees the heir forever from all worries.
SCHOPENHAUER, A. Aphorism for the wisdom of life. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2005.
The passage highlights an idea reminiscent of a Western philosophical tradition, according to which happiness is inextricably linked to
a) the consecration of affective relationships.
b) administration of inner independence.
c) fugacity of empirical knowledge.
d) freedom of religious expression.
e) search for ephemeral pleasures.
Correct alternative: b) administration of inner independence.
Schopenhauer is known as the philosopher of pessimism. He stated that life is suffering and individuals are frustrated by idealizing that the few moments of happiness that exist in life are a rule and not a brief moment of exception.
With that, he affirms that resignation is liberating, being the administration of inner independence, the self-determination of will and free will.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Although Schopenhauer dedicated a few lines to a subject that for him is under-studied by philosophy - love - does not find in affective relationships something that can be consecrated or sacralized.
For him, love is a device of nature for the reproduction of the species. The philosopher understood that human beings, because of their rational character, could simply choose not to reproduce. Love would be a natural impulse that overrides reason and makes human beings look for what they lack in others, providing the balance of the species.
c) Knowledge from experience is not in question. Schopenhauerian thought tends towards idealism, understanding that knowledge is related to will and not to sensible experience.
d) Happiness is not related to the issue of freedom of religious expression. By the way, the philosopher begins a critique of Christian morality that was more harshly developed by Nietzsche.
e) Schopenhauer's thought affirms the ephemeral character of happiness, but this idea is not part of the philosophical tradition.
In fact, Schopenhauer starts a current of thought that brings Western philosophy closer to Eastern thought, seeking a different conception of happiness, suffering and pleasure.
question 17
(Enem/2019) In a general and fundamental sense, Law is the technique of human coexistence, that is, the technique aimed at making the coexistence of men possible. As a technique, Law is materialized in a set of rules (which, in this case, are laws or norms); and such rules have as their object the intersubjective behavior, that is, the reciprocal behavior of men among themselves.
ABBAGNANO, N. Dictionary of Philosophy. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2007.
The general and fundamental sense of the Law, as highlighted, refers to the
a) application of legal codes.
b) regulation of social interaction.
c) legitimization of political decisions.
d) mediation of economic conflicts.
e) representation of the constituted authority.
Correct alternative: b) regulation of social interaction.
In the text, Law is understood as a technique that aims to enable the "coexistence of men" ("men" here taken as a synonym for human beings).
Thus, the formulation of a set of rules seeks to regulation of social life, enabling a fair and reciprocal relationship between the subjects.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) The application of legal codes refers to the way in which the law seeks to regulate social interaction, and not its foundation.
c) The legitimacy of political decisions transcends law and, in democratic States, is based on the general will of the population.
d) The mediation of economic conflicts is only one part of the possible disputes within society. It is up to the law to act in this area, but it does not define its activity.
e) The representation of constituted authority, in modern societies, is presented from the tri-partition of power: executive, legislative and judiciary. Thus, the law, inscribed in the judiciary, is a relevant part, but it is not the whole of representation.
question 18
(Enem/2019) This atmosphere of madness and unreality, created by the apparent lack of purpose, is the true iron curtain that hides from the eyes of the world all forms of fields of concentration. Seen from the outside, the fields and what happens in them can only be described with extraterrestrial images, as if life in them were separated from the purposes of this world. More than barbed wire, it is the unreality of the detainees it confines that provokes such an incredible cruelty that it ends up leading to the acceptance of extermination as a perfectly normal solution. ARENDT, H. Origins of totalitarianism. São Paulo: Company das Letras, 1989 (adapted).
From the author's analysis, in the meeting of historical temporalities, a criticism of the naturalization of (a)
a) national ideals, which legitimize social inequalities.
b) ideological alienation, which justifies individual actions.
c) religious cosmology, which supports hierarchical traditions.
d) human segregation, which underlies biopolitical projects.
e) cultural background, which favors punitive behaviors.
Correct alternative: d) human segregation, which underlies biopolitical projects.
Hannah Arendt draws attention to the dehumanization of individuals sent to concentration camps as a characteristic present in totalitarian regimes.
The separation (segregation) of these human beings and the removal of their reality underlie the projects of violence to which they are submitted and framed as normal.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) Social inequalities underlie a national ideal and favor the persecution of social groups within totalitarian regimes.
b) Totalitarian regimes have a strong ideology and prevent individual actions.
c) There is nothing in the text that points to a naturalization of a religious cosmology.
e) Cultural frameworks, even though they favor punitive behavior, do not support the existence of extermination camps.
question 19
(Enem/2019) I think there is no sovereign, founder subject, a universal form of subject that we could find everywhere. I think, on the contrary, that the subject is constituted through the practices of subjection or, more autonomously, through the practices of liberation, freedom, as in antiquity — from, obviously, a certain number of rules, styles, which we can find in the middle cultural.
FOUCAULT, M. Sayings and writings V: ethics, sexuality, politics. Rio de Janeiro: University Forensics, 2004.
The text points out that subjectivation takes place in a dimension
a) legal, based on legal precepts.
b) rational, based on logical assumptions.
c) contingency, processed in social interactions.
d) transcendental, carried out in religious principles.
e) essential, based on substantialist parameters.
Correct alternative: c) contingency, processed in social interactions.
Foucault's thought, expressed in the text, points to the impossibility of an "absolute being" or an idea of a universal subject, that is, the subject is quota.
He also states that this subject becomes effective from the interactions that occur in the cultural (social) environment.
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) It is not the legal precepts that make the subject effective.
b) Subjectivation does not occur through logical precepts.
d) Transcendence and religious principles are not expressed as foundations for the construction of subjects.
e) Subjectivation based on an essence is precisely the criticism carried out by Foucault and he points to its impossibility.
question 20
(Enem/2019) Pure hospitality consists of welcoming those who arrive before imposing conditions on them, before knowing and asking anything, even if it is a name or a "document" of identity. But she also supposes that she addresses him in a singular way, calling him therefore and recognizing his own name: "What's your name?" Hospitality is about doing everything to yourself. directing the other, in granting him, even asking his name, preventing this question from becoming a "condition", a police inquiry, a record or a simple control of borders. An art and a poetics, but also an entire politics depend on it, an entire ethics is decided there.
DERRIDA, J. Paper machine. São Paulo: Estação Liberdade, 2004 (adapted).
Associated with the contemporary migratory context, the concept of hospitality proposed by the author imposes the need for
a) cancellation of the difference.
b) crystallization of the biography.
c) incorporation of otherness.
d) suppression of communication.
e) verification of provenance.
Correct alternative: c) incorporation of otherness.
In the text, Jacques Derrida (1930-2005) develops the concept of hospitality from the idea of accepting the other, or rather, "incorporating otherness".
Receiving the other, the one who migrates, without imposing conditions for this to happen, requires a structure of thought (poetic, political and ethical).
The other alternatives are wrong because:
a) The annulment of the difference requires that the migrant individual adapt to the place of arrival, denying his particularities, differences and his own existence.
Thus, hospitality is not presupposed, but an invisibility and denial of the other.
b) The crystallization of the biography may suggest the separation (by crystallization) of the identity of the receiver from the identity of the receiver. This reinforces the non-integration of the migrant.
d) The suppression of communication means an impediment to communication, contrary to the idea of Derrida who states that "The hospitality consists in doing everything to address the other (...)", that is, it presupposes the need for a Communication.
e) The verification of provenance reinforces the character of "police investigation" and "border control" which impedes hospitality to Derrida.
Want to know more about Enem? Read too:
- Philosophy Exercises
- Philosophy at Enem: what most falls on the test
- Enem's questions that fell on the test
- Simulated Enem: questions that fell on the test
- Enem Sociology Issues