.
O homem-forte
O homem-forte
Vendo o sucesso dos líderes políticos que são
homens-fortes, muitos gestores empresariais intermédios ou de topo
questionam-se naturalmente sobre se precisam de ser mais agressivos para
serem mais bem-sucedidos, respeitados ou olhados como alternativa.
𝓞 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓸 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪́ 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓸 𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓶𝓸𝓬𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓼.
𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓵𝓮́𝓶 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓶𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪̃𝓸 𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓱𝓪́ 𝓪𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓮𝓯𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓫𝓪𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓼𝓸𝓼. 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓰𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓳𝓪́ 𝓽𝓮̂𝓶 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓪𝓾𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓪. 𝓔 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓻 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓮 𝓭𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓱𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓮 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮. 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓪𝓬𝓻𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓶 𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓮́𝓶 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓮́𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓾𝓼𝓪𝓶 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓪𝓻 𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓱𝓸 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓸́𝓫𝓿𝓲𝓪𝓼, 𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲́𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓪𝓼. 𝓘𝓰𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝔃𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝔁𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓮𝓶 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼, 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓪𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓶 𝓸𝓫𝓳𝓮𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓸́𝓫𝓿𝓲𝓸𝓼, 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸, 𝓹𝓸𝓻 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸, 𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓲𝓷𝓱𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓸 𝓷𝓪 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪.
𝓝𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓪𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓶𝓲𝓼𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓻𝓪𝔃𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓮 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓾𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼. 𝓘𝓰𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓪 𝓾𝓷𝓲𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓿𝓪𝓵𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮 𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸. 𝓔 𝓸𝓼 𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓻 𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓽𝓸𝓶𝓲𝓪 "𝓷𝓸́𝓼-𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼" 𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓪𝓶𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓬̧𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼.
𝓐 𝓽𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓽𝓮́ 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓻𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓷𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓢𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓖𝓾𝓮𝓻𝓻𝓪 𝓜𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓵. 𝓐 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪, 𝓽𝓪𝓵 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓼𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓷𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 - 𝓻𝓮𝓵𝓲𝓰𝓲𝓸𝓼𝓪, 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓪, 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓸𝓵𝓸́𝓰𝓲𝓬𝓪 -, 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓲𝓼𝓬𝓾𝓻𝓼𝓸 𝓹𝓾́𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓸𝓼𝓸𝓼. 𝓢𝓲𝓶, 𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓮́𝓶 𝓮𝓶 𝓟𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓾𝓰𝓪𝓵, 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓶𝓸𝓼𝓪 𝓯𝓻𝓪𝓼𝓮 "𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓶 𝓼𝓮 𝓶𝓮𝓽𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓟𝓢 𝓵𝓮𝓿𝓪," 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓽𝓮̂𝓶 𝓮𝓶 "𝓶𝓪𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪".
𝓞 𝓾𝓼𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓲𝓷𝓰𝓾𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓶 𝓫𝓮́𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓮 𝓶𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓮́ 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓸𝓬𝓾𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮. 𝓠𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓸 𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓸 𝓫𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓬𝓪𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓲𝔃𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝔁𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓮𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓮𝓲 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 "𝓵𝓮𝓲 𝓭𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸" 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪́ 𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓶𝓾𝓵𝓪𝓻 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓪𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓾𝓼 𝓪𝓹𝓸𝓲𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼. 𝓒𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓼𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓽𝓸𝓶𝓲𝓪, 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓮 𝓿𝓲𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓪, 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮́ 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓪́𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓵𝓸́𝓰𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓳𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓸. 𝓔𝓶 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪, 𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓵𝓪𝓿𝓻𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓶.
𝓥𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓼, 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓰𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓶𝓮́𝓭𝓲𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓸𝓹𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓶-𝓼𝓮 𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓸𝓫𝓻𝓮 𝓼𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓪𝓶 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓪𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓶 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓫𝓮𝓶-𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓼, 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓸𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓪𝓵𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪.
𝓜𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓬𝓾𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓪𝓶 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓬𝓲𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪: "𝓓𝓮𝓿𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓻-𝓶𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓟𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓫𝓮𝓶-𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓭𝓸?" 𝓐 𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓭𝓾́𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪, 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸 𝓼𝓮𝓳𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓭𝓪, 𝓳𝓪́ 𝓮́ 𝓾𝓶 𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓶𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓵.
𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓵𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪𝓶 𝓬𝓪𝓲𝓻 𝓪𝓼 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓲𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓵𝓪́𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓾𝓲 𝓾𝓶 𝓫𝓸𝓶 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓮𝓶 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓲𝓻𝓬𝓾𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓼. 𝓞 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓰𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮 𝓮𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪́𝓬𝓲𝓪. 𝓞 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓬̧𝓪 𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸. 𝓐 𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓪𝓻 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸. 𝓐 𝓯𝓵𝓮𝔁𝓲𝓫𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓰𝓲𝓻 𝓪𝓸 𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸. 𝓐 𝓬𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮 𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓸̃𝓮𝓼. 𝓐 𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓾𝓲𝓻 𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓻.
𝓔 𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓾𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓸 𝓵𝓮𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓸. 𝓞 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪 𝓾𝓶 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓸 𝓯𝓾𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓸? 𝓤𝓶𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓹𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓪𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸? 𝓒𝓸𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓯𝓲𝓸𝓼? 𝓤𝓶 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼, 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸, 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓶 𝓮 𝓪𝓭𝓶𝓲𝓻𝓪𝓶?
𝓐 𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪, 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓼, 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓼𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓾𝓶 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓲𝓬̧𝓸 𝓪𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼. 𝓐𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻, 𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸, 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 "𝓠𝓾𝓮𝓶 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓾 𝓮𝓾 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓲𝓻?" 𝓮 "𝓒𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓸 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻?" 𝓓𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪 𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓷𝓾𝓶 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓶-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓪́ 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓫𝓸𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓸𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓼.
𝓞 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓸 𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓸 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪́ 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓸 𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓶𝓸𝓬𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓼.
𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓵𝓮́𝓶 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓶𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪̃𝓸 𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓱𝓪́ 𝓪𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓮𝓯𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓫𝓪𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓼𝓸𝓼. 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓰𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓳𝓪́ 𝓽𝓮̂𝓶 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓪𝓾𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓪. 𝓔 𝓽𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓻 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓮 𝓭𝓪 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓱𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼 𝓮 𝓭𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮. 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓪𝓬𝓻𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓶 𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓮́𝓶 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓮́𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓾𝓼𝓪𝓶 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓿𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓪𝓻 𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓱𝓸 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓸́𝓫𝓿𝓲𝓪𝓼, 𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓲́𝓿𝓸𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓪𝓼. 𝓘𝓰𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓬𝓮𝓻𝓽𝓮𝔃𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮𝔁𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓮 𝓮𝓶 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼, 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓪𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓶 𝓸𝓫𝓳𝓮𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓮 𝓸́𝓫𝓿𝓲𝓸𝓼, 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸, 𝓹𝓸𝓻 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸, 𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓲𝓷𝓱𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓸 𝓷𝓪 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪.
𝓝𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓪𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓶𝓲𝓼𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓻𝓪𝔃𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓮 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓾𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼. 𝓘𝓰𝓷𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓪 𝓾𝓷𝓲𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓿𝓪𝓵𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮 𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸. 𝓔 𝓸𝓼 𝓻𝓲𝓼𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓭𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓾𝓪𝓻 𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓽𝓸𝓶𝓲𝓪 "𝓷𝓸́𝓼-𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼" 𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓶𝓪𝓻𝓬𝓪𝓶𝓸𝓼 𝓪𝓼 𝓷𝓸𝓼𝓼𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓬̧𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓼.
𝓐 𝓽𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓪𝓽𝓮́ 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪𝓬𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓺𝓾𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓻𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓬̧𝓸̃𝓮𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓷𝓸 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓪𝓵𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓢𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓪 𝓖𝓾𝓮𝓻𝓻𝓪 𝓜𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓪𝓵. 𝓐 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪, 𝓽𝓪𝓵 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓼𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓷𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪 𝓬𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓷𝓪 𝓼𝓸𝓬𝓲𝓮𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 - 𝓻𝓮𝓵𝓲𝓰𝓲𝓸𝓼𝓪, 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓪́𝓻𝓲𝓪, 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓸𝓵𝓸́𝓰𝓲𝓬𝓪 -, 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓲𝓼𝓬𝓾𝓻𝓼𝓸 𝓹𝓾́𝓫𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓸𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓸𝓼𝓸𝓼. 𝓢𝓲𝓶, 𝓽𝓪𝓶𝓫𝓮́𝓶 𝓮𝓶 𝓟𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓾𝓰𝓪𝓵, 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓶𝓸𝓼𝓪 𝓯𝓻𝓪𝓼𝓮 "𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓶 𝓼𝓮 𝓶𝓮𝓽𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓟𝓢 𝓵𝓮𝓿𝓪," 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓪𝓵𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓼 𝓽𝓮̂𝓶 𝓮𝓶 "𝓶𝓪𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓻𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪".
𝓞 𝓾𝓼𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓲𝓷𝓰𝓾𝓪𝓰𝓮𝓶 𝓫𝓮́𝓵𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓮 𝓶𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓮́ 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓸𝓬𝓾𝓹𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮. 𝓠𝓾𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓹𝓻𝓲𝓶𝓮𝓲𝓻𝓸 𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓲𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓸 𝓫𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓸 𝓬𝓪𝓻𝓪𝓬𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓲𝔃𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓺𝓾𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓮𝔁𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓮𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓮𝓲 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 "𝓵𝓮𝓲 𝓭𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸" 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪́ 𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓶𝓾𝓵𝓪𝓻 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓪𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓼𝓮𝓾𝓼 𝓪𝓹𝓸𝓲𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼. 𝓒𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓼𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓽𝓸𝓶𝓲𝓪, 𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓮 𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓲𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓮 𝓿𝓲𝓽𝓸́𝓻𝓲𝓪, 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓮́ 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓪́𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓵𝓸́𝓰𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓳𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓼𝓾𝓪𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓪 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓸. 𝓔𝓶 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪, 𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓵𝓪𝓿𝓻𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓶.
𝓥𝓮𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓸 𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓸 𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓼-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮𝓼, 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓰𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓶𝓮́𝓭𝓲𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓸𝓹𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓶-𝓼𝓮 𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓸𝓫𝓻𝓮 𝓼𝓮 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓪𝓶 𝓭𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓪𝓰𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓶 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓫𝓮𝓶-𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓼, 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓸𝓵𝓱𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓪𝓵𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓪.
𝓜𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓸𝓼 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓬𝓾𝓽𝓲𝓿𝓸𝓼 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓻𝓻𝓸𝓰𝓪𝓶 𝓪 𝓼𝓾𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓬𝓲𝓮̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪: "𝓓𝓮𝓿𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓻𝓷𝓪𝓻-𝓶𝓮 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓸 𝓬𝓸𝓶 𝓸 𝓟𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓫𝓮𝓶-𝓼𝓾𝓬𝓮𝓭𝓲𝓭𝓸?" 𝓐 𝓶𝓮𝓻𝓪 𝓭𝓾́𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪, 𝓶𝓮𝓼𝓶𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸 𝓼𝓮𝓳𝓪 𝓿𝓮𝓻𝓫𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓭𝓪, 𝓳𝓪́ 𝓮́ 𝓾𝓶 𝓭𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓶𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓵.
𝓟𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸 𝓹𝓵𝓪𝓷𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪𝓶 𝓬𝓪𝓲𝓻 𝓪𝓼 𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓲𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓵𝓪́𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓬𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓸 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓲𝓽𝓾𝓲 𝓾𝓶 𝓫𝓸𝓶 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓮𝓶 𝓶𝓾𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓬𝓲𝓻𝓬𝓾𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪𝓼. 𝓞 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓲𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓰𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮 𝓮𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓪́𝓬𝓲𝓪. 𝓞 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓸 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓪 𝓭𝓲𝓯𝓮𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓬̧𝓪 𝓮 𝓹𝓮𝓵𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓾𝓵𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓼𝓶𝓸. 𝓐 𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝓵𝓪𝓻 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓸 𝓽𝓸𝓭𝓸 𝓭𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸. 𝓐 𝓯𝓵𝓮𝔁𝓲𝓫𝓲𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓰𝓲𝓻 𝓪𝓸 𝓲𝓷𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸. 𝓐 𝓬𝓮𝓵𝓮𝓻𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓮 𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓪𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓪𝓼 𝓭𝓮𝓬𝓲𝓼𝓸̃𝓮𝓼. 𝓐 𝓬𝓪𝓹𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓭𝓪𝓭𝓮 𝓭𝓮 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓾𝓲𝓻 𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓻𝓸𝓬𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓸𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓶 𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓯𝓾𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓻.
𝓔 𝓪𝓬𝓲𝓶𝓪 𝓭𝓮 𝓽𝓾𝓭𝓸 𝓪 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪̂𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓪 𝓭𝓸 𝓵𝓮𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓸. 𝓞 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓭𝓮𝓲𝔁𝓪 𝓾𝓶 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓸 𝓯𝓾𝓽𝓾𝓻𝓸? 𝓤𝓶𝓪 𝓸𝓻𝓰𝓪𝓷𝓲𝔃𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓹𝓽𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓪𝓸 𝓶𝓾𝓷𝓭𝓸? 𝓒𝓸𝓵𝓪𝓫𝓸𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪𝓭𝓸𝓼 𝓹𝓪𝓻𝓪 𝓮𝓷𝓯𝓻𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓻 𝓭𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓯𝓲𝓸𝓼? 𝓤𝓶 𝓮𝔁𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓵𝓸 𝓭𝓮 𝓿𝓲𝓭𝓪 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼, 𝓼𝓮𝓰𝓾𝓲𝓭𝓸𝓻𝓮𝓼 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓪̃𝓸, 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓲𝓽𝓪𝓶 𝓮 𝓪𝓭𝓶𝓲𝓻𝓪𝓶?
𝓐 𝓵𝓲𝓭𝓮𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓬̧𝓪, 𝓷𝓪 𝓹𝓸𝓵𝓲́𝓽𝓲𝓬𝓪 𝓸𝓾 𝓷𝓪𝓼 𝓮𝓶𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓪𝓼, 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻 𝓹𝓮𝓷𝓼𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓾𝓶 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓲𝓬̧𝓸 𝓪𝓸𝓼 𝓸𝓾𝓽𝓻𝓸𝓼. 𝓐𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓶𝓪𝓲𝓼 𝓲𝓶𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓮𝓼 𝓺𝓾𝓮 𝓬𝓪𝓭𝓪 𝓵𝓲́𝓭𝓮𝓻 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓮 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻, 𝓹𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓪𝓷𝓽𝓸, 𝓼𝓪̃𝓸 "𝓠𝓾𝓮𝓶 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓸𝓾 𝓮𝓾 𝓪 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓿𝓲𝓻?" 𝓮 "𝓒𝓸𝓶𝓸 𝓸 𝓭𝓮𝓿𝓸 𝓯𝓪𝔃𝓮𝓻?" 𝓓𝓲𝓯𝓲𝓬𝓲𝓵𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓽𝓮 𝓪 𝓽𝓻𝓪𝓷𝓼𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓶𝓪𝓬̧𝓪̃𝓸 𝓷𝓾𝓶 𝓱𝓸𝓶𝓮𝓶-𝓯𝓸𝓻𝓽𝓮 𝓼𝓮𝓻𝓪́ 𝓾𝓶𝓪 𝓫𝓸𝓪 𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓹𝓸𝓼𝓽𝓪 𝓪 𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓪𝓼 𝓹𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓾𝓷𝓽𝓪𝓼.
* Professor na Universidade Católica Portuguesa
IN "JORNAL DE NEGÓCIOS"
26/09/19
.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário