Hinman argues that what is morally significant about this story is not just what the villagers did but what kind of people they were, what kind of character they had. A) False

B) True

This is TRUE.

Explanation:

Let's take a look at the passage where Hinman speaks of the villagers from Le Chambon:

When we look at the villagers of Le Chambon, we are not only struck by  what they did but also by who they were. We are struck by what good people  they were. Their goodness did not seem to stem from any Kantian test of  universality or utilitarian calculus of consequences. It came from the heart—  from who they were as persons.

The villagers he is speaking of were responsible for saving the lives of thousands of Jews when Nazism was terrorizing Europe. When the Nazi soldiers got hold of one man, the villagers surrounded the bus where he was sitting and gave him precious, rationed food. When he returned and tried to give them their gifts back, they wouldn't accept it. Their actions, according to Hinman, had no purpose or gain for themselves. They did what they did simply because they were good people, because they had goodness in their hearts.

not concrete, existing in thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete existence

well so many people believe its a sin to be gay or be apart of the lgbtq+ community, but i believe you should be you. don't let people tell you you cant be someone. be who you are because you will be uncomfortable your whole life. be you!