Fundação Getulio Vargas • 2023 • Receita Federal
🔐 Texto de apoio
Policy decisions on taxation and public expenditures intrinsically reflect moral choices. How much of your hard-earned money is it fair for the state to collect through taxes? Should the rich pay more? Should the state provide basic public services such as education and health care for free to all citizens? And so on.
Economists and public finance practitioners have traditionally focused on economic efficiency. When considering distributional issues, they have generally steered clear of moral considerations, perhaps fearing these could be seen as subjective. However, recent work by evolutionary moral psychologists suggests that policies can be better designed and muster broader support if policymakers consider the full range of moral perspectives on public finance. A few pioneering empirical applications of this approach in the field of economics have shown promise.
For the most part, economists have customarily analyzed redistribution in a way that requires users to provide their own preferences with regard to inequality: Tell economists how much you care about inequality, and they can tell you how much redistribution is appropriate through the tax and benefit system. People (or families or households) have usually been considered as individuals, and the only relevant characteristics for these exercises have been their incomes, wealth, or spending potential.
There are two — understandable but not fully satisfactory — reasons for this approach. First, economists often wish to be viewed as objective social scientists. Second, most public finance scholars have been educated in a tradition steeped in values of societies that are WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic). In this context, individuals are at the center of the analysis, and morality is fundamentally about the golden rule — treat other people the way that you would want them to treat you, regardless of who those people are. These are crucial but ultimately insufficient perspectives on how humans make moral choices.
Evolutionary moral psychologists during the past couple of decades have shown that, faced with a moral dilemma, humans decide quickly what seems right or wrong based on instinct and later justify their decision through more deliberate reasoning. Based on evidence presented by these researchers, our instincts in the moral domain evolved as a way of fostering cooperation within a group, to help ensure survival. This modern perspective harks back to two moral philosophers of the Scottish Enlightenment — David Hume and Adam Smith — who noted that sentiments are integral to people’s views on right and wrong. But most later philosophers in the Western tradition sought to base morality on reason alone.
Moral psychologists have recently shown that many people draw on moral perspectives that go well beyond the golden rule. Community, authority, divinity, purity, loyalty, and sanctity are important considerations not only in many non-Western countries, but also among politically influential segments of the population in advanced economies, as emphasized by proponents of moral foundations theory.
Regardless of whether one agrees with those broader moral perspectives, familiarity with them makes it easier to understand the underlying motivations for various groups’ positions in debates on public policies. Such understanding may help in the design of policies that can muster support from a wide range of groups with differing moral values.
🔗 Texto adaptado de:
🔗 https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2022/03/Addingethics-to-public-finance-Mauro.
QUESTÃO
In the subtitle, “garnering” comes from the notion of
storing grains.
renting garrets.
making garlands.
lapidating garnets.
charging garrisons.
📝 Resolução Comentada – Questão 12
A questão avalia Reading Comprehension aplicada à etimologia. O candidato precisa reconhecer a noção original associada ao verbo garner, empregado no subtítulo com o sentido atual de obter, reunir ou conquistar apoio.
O trecho decisivo é:
"Evolutionary moral psychologists point the way to garnering broader support for fiscal policies."
Historicamente, garner relaciona-se à ideia de recolher e armazenar grãos em um celeiro. Por extensão metafórica, passou a significar reunir, acumular ou obter algo, como apoio, votos, atenção ou reconhecimento.
store grains
⇩
gather / accumulate
⇩
garner support
Assim, a noção original correta é storing grains.
🟢 (A) Gabarito Oficial
Mecanismo explorado: Paraphrasing with Semantic Synthesis aplicada à origem lexical.
A alternativa correta recupera a noção etimológica de garner: recolher e armazenar grãos. Esse sentido concreto originou o uso figurado moderno de reunir ou conquistar algo.
Mapeamento:
garner
⇩
armazenar em celeiro / recolher grãos
⇩
reunir, acumular ou conquistar apoio
Nota técnica: O sentido concreto de armazenamento evoluiu para um sentido abstrato de acumulação.
❌ (B)
Tipo do Distrator: Eco Vocabular (Language Echo).
Por que está errada?
Garret significa sótão ou aposento no último andar. A proximidade sonora e visual com garner não indica qualquer relação etimológica.
Mapeamento do Erro:
O termo correto:
garner → reunir / acumular
A alternativa apresenta:
garret → sótão
Técnica utilizada pela banca: Semelhança fonológica parcial para criar falsa familiaridade.
❌ (C)
Tipo do Distrator: Eco Vocabular (Language Echo).
Por que está errada?
Garland significa grinalda ou guirlanda. A palavra apenas compartilha o início gráfico gar- com garner.
Mapeamento do Erro:
O termo correto:
garner → acumular / obter
A alternativa apresenta:
garland → guirlanda
Técnica utilizada pela banca: Semelhança morfológica visual sem parentesco lexical.
❌ (D)
Tipo do Distrator: Eco Vocabular (Language Echo).
Por que está errada?
Garnet significa granada (pedra preciosa). A semelhança gráfica com garner é quase perfeita, mas as duas palavras possuem origens e significados completamente distintos.
Mapeamento do Erro:
O termo correto:
garner → reunir / acumular
A alternativa apresenta:
garnet → granada (pedra preciosa)
Técnica utilizada pela banca: Paronímia visual (quase-anagrama) para induzir associação lexical inexistente.
❌ (E)
Tipo do Distrator: Eco Vocabular (Language Echo).
Por que está errada?
Garrison significa guarnição militar. A palavra compartilha apenas o início gráfico gar-, sem qualquer relação semântica ou etimológica com garner.
Mapeamento do Erro:
O termo correto:
garner → reunir / obter
A alternativa apresenta:
garrison → guarnição militar
Técnica utilizada pela banca: Repetição do mesmo radical gráfico (gar-) para provocar falsa sensação de parentesco lexical.
- Questão de Reading Comprehension aplicada à etimologia lexical.
- O mecanismo central é a Paraphrasing with Semantic Synthesis (Applied to Etymology).
- A FGV explora a origem histórica da palavra garner, cujo significado evoluiu de armazenar grãos para obter, reunir ou conquistar.
- Todos os distratores utilizam Eco Vocabular (Language Echo), repetindo o padrão gráfico GAR- para criar falsa familiaridade visual e fonológica.
Chunk family:
- garner support
- store grains
- gather support
- broader support
- Language Echo
- Reading Comprehension
- Paraphrasing with Semantic Synthesis
Gabarito Oficial: A