Text 1: Ethicist Dr. Sarah Park defends virtue ethics. "Character traits, not rules or outcomes, are morally fundamental," Park argues. "Virtuous people act well because of who they are. Ethics should cultivate character."
Text 2: Situationist psychologist Dr. David Wong challenges trait stability. "Behavior varies dramatically with situations," Wong reports. "People who act honestly in one context cheat in another. The 'character' virtues presuppose may not exist."
What empirical challenge does Wong's research pose to Park's virtue ethics?
That ethics has no practical implications
That the stable character traits virtue ethics assumes may be illusory
That situations don't affect behavior
That honesty is not considered a virtue
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Park's ethics requires stable traits—being honest consistently. Wong shows behavior varies by situation. If no stable traits exist, virtue ethics loses its foundation.
- Evidence: Wong: "character virtues presuppose may not exist."
- Reasoning: Virtue ethics needs stable character; psychology questions this.
- Conclusion: Wong's empirical findings threaten Park's ethical framework.
Choice A is incorrect because Wong studies behavior, not ethics' scope. Choice C is incorrect because Wong emphasizes situational effects. Choice D is incorrect because honesty is Wong's example virtue.