Text 1: Philosopher Dr. Lisa Moore defends thought experiments. "Imaginary scenarios isolate variables and test intuitions," Moore argues. "Trolley problems reveal moral commitments. Philosophy progresses through conceptual experimentation."
Text 2: Empirical ethicist Dr. James Chen notes limitations. "Intuitions elicited by fantastical scenarios may not predict real-world moral behavior," Chen observes. "What people say about trolleys diverges from how they act in genuine emergencies."
What concern does Chen raise about Moore's philosophical method?
That philosophers don't use thought experiments
That intuitions in artificial scenarios may not generalize to actual behavior
That trolleys don't exist as vehicles
That conceptual analysis is never employed
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Moore assumes thought experiment intuitions reveal moral commitments. Chen questions whether those intuitions predict "real-world moral behavior." Ecological validity concern.
- Evidence: Chen: responses to trolleys "diverge from how they act in genuine emergencies."
- Reasoning: Isolated intuitions may not generalize.
- Conclusion: Artificial scenario responses may not predict actual behavior.
Choice A is incorrect because Chen engages with the method. Choice C is incorrect because trolleys are the example. Choice D is incorrect because Chen doesn't reject conceptual work.