David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethics 114 (3):458-491 (2004)
Situationist social psychologists tell us that information about people’s distinctive character traits, opinions, attitudes, values, or past behavior is not as useful for determining what they will do as is information about the details of their situations.1 One would expect, they say, that the possessor of a given character trait (such as helpfulness) would behave consistently (helpfully) across situations that are similar in calling for the relevant (helping) behavior, but under experimental conditions, people’s behavior is not found to be cross-situationally consistent (the likelihood that a person who has behaved helpfully on one occasion will behave helpfully on the next is hardly above chance).2 Instead, across a range of situations, the person’s behavior tends to converge on the behavioral norm for those situations. So situationists reason that people’s situations, rather than their characters, are the explanatorily powerful factors in determining why different people behave differently. They add that if behavior does not covary with character traits, then ordinary people, “folk psychologists” who try to explain and predict..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
John Turri (2011). Believing For a Reason. Erkenntnis 74 (3):383-397.
Jason D'Cruz (2015). Trust, Trustworthiness, and the Moral Consequence of Consistency. Journal of the American Philosophical Association 1 (3):467-484.
Peter B. M. Vranas (2005). The Indeterminacy Paradox: Character Evaluations and Human Psychology. Noûs 39 (1):1–42.
David O. Brink (2013). Situationism, Responsibility, and Fair Opportunity. Social Philosophy and Policy (1-2):121-149.
John M. Doris (2009). Skepticism About Persons. Philosophical Issues 19 (1):57-91.
Similar books and articles
Candace L. Upton (2005). A Contextual Account of Character Traits. Philosophical Studies 122 (2):133 - 151.
Peter B. M. Vranas (2009). Against Moral Character Evaluations: The Undetectability of Virtue and Vice. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 13 (2/3):213 - 233.
Sandrine Berges (2002). Evil Behaviour and Character: Virtue Ethics Versus Social Psychology. In Diane Medlicott (ed.), Their Deeds were Evil: Understanding Atrocity, Ferocity and Extreme Crime. Rodopi
Christian Miller (2009). Social Psychology, Mood, and Helping: Mixed Results for Virtue Ethics. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 13 (2-3):145 - 173.
Edwin M. Hartman (1998). The Role of Character in Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (3):547-559.
Christian Miller (2009). Empathy, Social Psychology, and Global Helping Traits. Philosophical Studies 142 (2):247-275.
Gilbert Harman (2003). No Character or Personality. Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):87-94.
Miguel Alzola (2008). Character and Environment: The Status of Virtues in Organizations. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 78 (3):343 - 357.
Gilbert Harman (2009). Skepticism About Character Traits. Journal of Ethics 13 (2/3):235 - 242.
Gopal Sreenivasan (2002). Errors About Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution. Mind 111 (441):47-68.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads190 ( #17,835 of 1,907,402 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #108,771 of 1,907,402 )
How can I increase my downloads?