Text 1: Political theorist Dr. Emma Wright defends nationalism. "National identity provides solidarity necessary for redistribution," Wright argues. "Welfare states require citizens to feel connected to fellow nationals. Without nationalism, social democracy fails."
Text 2: Cosmopolitan philosopher Dr. David Chen challenges this connection. "Transnational solidarity is possible and morally required," Chen contends. "Global challenges—climate, pandemic, inequality—demand cooperation beyond national boundaries. Nationalism limits our ethical horizons."
Based on the texts, what do Wright and Chen fundamentally disagree about?
Whether social cooperation exists at all
Whether solidarity can effectively extend beyond national boundaries
Whether climate change is occurring
Whether philosophy can address political questions
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Wright says solidarity requires national identification—without it, redistribution fails. Chen says "transnational solidarity is possible." They disagree on whether solidarity can transcend nations.
- Evidence: Wright: solidarity needs nationalism; Chen: transnational solidarity is possible.
- Reasoning: Wright limits solidarity scope; Chen expands it.
- Conclusion: Their disagreement is about solidarity's possible scope.
Choice A is incorrect because both believe cooperation occurs. Choice C is incorrect because climate is Chen's example, not disputed. Choice D is incorrect because both engage politically.