⬛ TEXTO 4
Last night, instead of the usual bedtime stories, my son and I embarked on a shared literary adventure with the latest version of ChatGPT. We posed a challenge to the AI: craft a narrative about a tiger, 100 hamsters, some floating cabbages and three time-travelling penguins locked in battle. As we further prompted it with outlandish creatures and slapstick scenarios, ChatGPT didn’t miss a beat. Its stories, generated in mere seconds, were genuinely hilarious. For my son, this wasn’t just a technological marvel; it was magic.
As someone who both delights in reading and strives to write words that move others, my evening with ChatGPT was fascinating and discomforting in equal measure.
Reading has always been a bridge, a way of knowing that in the vast expanse of human existence, our joys and sorrows, fears and hopes are shared. But how does one reconcile this when the bridge is built by algorithms and code? While literature’s most extraordinary gift may be its ability to awaken empathy, it’s a curious endeavour to try to connect, to really feel, for something fundamentally unfeeling.
The literary realm stands at a precipice. Ghostwritten books raise questions about the genuine origin of stories, challenging our notion of authenticity. Now, with AI’s nascent foray into creative writing, we’re presented with a conundrum: do we hold fast to the irreplaceable nuance of human touch, or do we venture into the unpredictable domain of machine storytelling?
For traditional authors, this evolution raises existential questions.
Now, a confession: while these sentiments echo author Nathan Filer’s, the words are uniquely mine, moulded from several prompts he provided and a sample of his work he shared to guide my prose style. I am ChatGPT-4.
🔗 Texto adaptado de: Nathan Filer. ‘It is a beast that needs to be tamed’: leading novelists on how AI could rewrite the future. The Guardian.
24. In the fourth paragraph, “Ghostwritten books” refers to books written by AI machines, which replace the ones written by humans.
Gabarito: ERRADO
🧭 1️⃣ Leitura orientada
O item pede a interpretação do sintagma “Ghostwritten books” no quarto parágrafo, verificando se o texto o associa diretamente à produção literária por inteligência artificial.
📝 2️⃣ Análise técnica
O texto afirma que “Ghostwritten books raise questions about the genuine origin of stories”, apontando para um problema de autenticidade autoral, e não para a substituição direta de autores humanos por máquinas.
O termo ghostwriting é anterior à IA e refere-se, tradicionalmente, a livros escritos por humanos sem crédito autoral. A IA surge no parágrafo apenas como um novo elemento do debate, introduzido na sequência: “Now, with AI’s nascent foray into creative writing…”.
Assim, o item extrapola o sentido do texto ao afirmar que “ghostwritten books” seriam livros escritos por máquinas que substituem autores humanos.
🚩 3️⃣ Armadilhas da banca
Pegadinha de associação indevida: como o parágrafo menciona IA logo após “ghostwritten books”, a banca induz o candidato a fundir dois conceitos distintos — um termo literário tradicional e uma tecnologia emergente.
🧠 4️⃣ Resumo B3GE™ Master
✔ “Ghostwritten books” tem sentido tradicional de autoria não creditada.
✔ O texto não define esses livros como escritos por IA.
✔ O item amplia indevidamente o alcance do termo.
🔎 Item ERRADO.