In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

In the 20^th century, we made tremendous advances in discovering fundamental principles in different scientific disciplines that created major breakthroughs in management and technology for agricultural systems, mostly by empirical means. However, as we enter the 21^st century, agricultural research has more difficult and complex problems to solve.

The environmental consciousness of the general public is requiring us to modify farm management to protect water, air, and soil quality, while staying economically profitable. At the same time, market-based global competition in agricultural products is challenging economic viability of the traditional agricultural systems, and requires the development of new and dynamic production systems. Fortunately, the new electronic technologies can provide us a vast amount of real-time information about crop conditions and near-term weather via remote sensing by satellites or ground-based instruments and the Internet, that can be utilized to develop a whole new level of management. However, we need the means to capture and make sense of this vast amount of site-specific data.

Our customers, the agricultural producers, are asking for a quicker transfer of research results in an integrated usable form for site-specific management. Such a request can only be met with system models, because system models are indeed the integration and quantification of current knowledge based on fundamental principles and laws. Models enhance understanding of data taken under certain conditions and help extrapolate their applications to other conditions and locations.

Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell. Whole System Integration and Modeling — Essential to Agricultural Science and Technology in the 21st Century. In: Lajpat R. Ahuja; Liwang Ma; Terry A. Howell

(eds.) Agricultural system models in field research and technology transfer. Boca Raton, CRC Press LLC, 2002 (adapted).

Considering the text presented above, judge the following items.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Many studies reveal the contributions of plant breeding and agronomy to farm productivity and their role in reshaping global diets. However, historical accounts also implicate these sciences in the creation of new problems, from novel disease vulnerabilities propagated through industrial monocrops to the negative ecological and public health consequences of crops dependent on chemical inputs and industrialized food systems more generally.

Increasingly, historical analyses also highlight the expertise variously usurped, overlooked, abandoned, or suppressed in the pursuit of “modern” agricultural science. Experiment stations and “improved” plants were instruments of colonialism, means of controlling lands and lives of peoples typically labeled as “primitive” and “backward” by imperial authorities. In many cases, the assumptions of colonial improvers persisted in the international development programs that have sought since the mid-20^th century to deliver “modern” science to farming communities in the Global South.

Awareness of these issues has brought alternative domains of crop science such as agroecology to the fore in recent decades, as researchers reconcile the need for robust crop knowledge and know-how with the imperatives of addressing social and environmental injustice.

Helen Anne Curry; Ryan Nehring. The history of crop science and the future of food.

Internet: <nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com> (adapted).

Judge the following items about the text above.

Defendemos que a divulgação científica (DC) é produzida pela esfera da cultura científica em colaboração com outras esferas de atividades humanas. Assim, a DC é um produto gerado na interseção de esferas de criação ideológicas, cujas atividades disputam motivos, propósitos, regras, agentes, ferramentas culturais, entre tantos outros elementos.

Em uma análise a partir da cultura científica, teremos a apropriação da comunicação, do jornalismo, da mídia e suas técnicas como ferramentas culturais para a produção da DC, enquanto o universo de referência, os princípios e os valores continuam sendo próprios da cultura científica. Por outro lado, se partirmos da esfera da mídia, teremos a apropriação de conhecimentos, fatos e histórias da ciência, enquanto as formas de produção do suporte são próprias da esfera midiática. Podemos estender esse exercício para todas as esferas que atuam na DC, como a educação, por exemplo, condição que reforça nossa compreensão de que a DC é produzida em meio à interseção da cultura científica com outras esferas de atuação humana.

Embora existam coerções e interseções com outros campos, não há como deslocar princípios ontológicos da cultura científica que são inerentes aos conceitos, às metodologias e às práticas da ciência — fato que sustenta e fortalece a interpretação do divulgador como um representante da cultura científica. A DC, portanto, é produzida em meio a uma interseção de esferas de criação ideológica; a cultura científica, no entanto, exerce maior influência sobre o produto gerado. Tal concepção evidencia que a interseção na qual a DC é produzida não é composta por esferas equipolentes.

Ainda que a cultura científica tenha maior influência na determinação dos produtos da DC, trata-se de produtos gerados em meio a disputas, cujos escopos variam de acordo com os suportes de DC e os meios de comunicação em que são veiculados. Não é preciso ser um especialista em DC para notar as diferenças entre veículos de DC que, por vezes, sustentam coerções da indústria cultural e, por isso, usufruem livremente do sensacionalismo e da fetichização do conhecimento científico, visando ao aumento das vendas, e veículos que claramente têm interesse em ensinar conceitos científicos que estão fortemente baseados em coerções provenientes da educação científica.

Guilherme da Silva Lima e Marcelo Giordan.

Da reformulação discursiva a uma práxis da cultura científica: reflexões sobre a divulgação científica.

In: História, Ciências, Saúde, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro,

v. 28, n.º 2, abr.-jun./2021, p. 389 (com adaptações).

Considerando os aspectos linguísticos do texto apresentado e as ideias nele veiculadas, julgue os próximos itens.

Defendemos que a divulgação científica (DC) é produzida pela esfera da cultura científica em colaboração com outras esferas de atividades humanas. Assim, a DC é um produto gerado na interseção de esferas de criação ideológicas, cujas atividades disputam motivos, propósitos, regras, agentes, ferramentas culturais, entre tantos outros elementos.

Em uma análise a partir da cultura científica, teremos a apropriação da comunicação, do jornalismo, da mídia e suas técnicas como ferramentas culturais para a produção da DC, enquanto o universo de referência, os princípios e os valores continuam sendo próprios da cultura científica. Por outro lado, se partirmos da esfera da mídia, teremos a apropriação de conhecimentos, fatos e histórias da ciência, enquanto as formas de produção do suporte são próprias da esfera midiática. Podemos estender esse exercício para todas as esferas que atuam na DC, como a educação, por exemplo, condição que reforça nossa compreensão de que a DC é produzida em meio à interseção da cultura científica com outras esferas de atuação humana.

Embora existam coerções e interseções com outros campos, não há como deslocar princípios ontológicos da cultura científica que são inerentes aos conceitos, às metodologias e às práticas da ciência — fato que sustenta e fortalece a interpretação do divulgador como um representante da cultura científica. A DC, portanto, é produzida em meio a uma interseção de esferas de criação ideológica; a cultura científica, no entanto, exerce maior influência sobre o produto gerado. Tal concepção evidencia que a interseção na qual a DC é produzida não é composta por esferas equipolentes.

Ainda que a cultura científica tenha maior influência na determinação dos produtos da DC, trata-se de produtos gerados em meio a disputas, cujos escopos variam de acordo com os suportes de DC e os meios de comunicação em que são veiculados. Não é preciso ser um especialista em DC para notar as diferenças entre veículos de DC que, por vezes, sustentam coerções da indústria cultural e, por isso, usufruem livremente do sensacionalismo e da fetichização do conhecimento científico, visando ao aumento das vendas, e veículos que claramente têm interesse em ensinar conceitos científicos que estão fortemente baseados em coerções provenientes da educação científica.

Guilherme da Silva Lima e Marcelo Giordan.

Da reformulação discursiva a uma práxis da cultura científica: reflexões sobre a divulgação científica.

In: História, Ciências, Saúde, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro,

v. 28, n.º 2, abr.-jun./2021, p. 389 (com adaptações).

Considerando os aspectos linguísticos do texto apresentado e as ideias nele veiculadas, julgue os próximos itens.