Are all people moral? How is this human facet developed? These questions have been on the minds of thousands of people for centuries, but moral development has also become a hot topic in both psychology and education, and remains so today. Do parental or social influences play a more important role in moral development? Do all children develop morality in similar ways?
One of the best-known theories that explores some of these basic questions was developed by a psychologist named Lawrence Kohlberg. His work modified and expanded on the work of Jean Piaget to explain how children develop verbal reasoning. Piaget described a two-stage process of moral development, while Kohlberg's theory of moral development described six stages at three different levels. Kohlberg extended Piaget's theory, proposing that moral development is a continuous process that occurs throughout life.
In recent years, Kohlberg's theory has been criticized for being Western, male-centered (he primarily used male research subjects) and for having a narrow worldview based on upper-middle-class value systems and perspectives.
Heinz's dilemma
Kohlberg based his theory on a series of moral dilemmas that were presented to these participants and were also interviewed to determine the reasoning behind their judgments about each scenario.
An example was "Heinz steals the drugs." In this scenario, a woman has cancer and her doctors believe that only a drug could save her. This medication is discovered by a local pharmacist and can be obtained for $200 per dose but is sold for $2.000 per dose. The woman's husband, Heinz, could only raise $1.000 to buy the medication. He tried to negotiate with the pharmacist for a lower price or receive extended credit to pay it in monthly installments. But the pharmacist refused to sell it for less or accept partial payments. Rejected, Heinz broke into the pharmacy and stole the drug to save his wife. Kohlberg asked, 'Was the husband right to do this?'
Kohlberg was not so much interested in the answer to whether Heinz was wrong or not, but in the reasoning behind each participant's decision. The responses were then classified into various stages of reasoning in his theory of moral development.
Level 1. Preconventional Morality
Stage 1: Punishment-obedience orientation
The earliest stage of moral development, obedience and punishment is especially common in young children, but adults are also capable of expressing this type of reasoning. At this stage, Kohlberg says, children view rules as fixed and absolute. Obeying the rules is important because it is a means to avoid the bad consequences of your behavior.
This stage includes the use of punishment to get the person to refrain from performing the action and continue to obey the rules. For example, we follow the law because we don't want to go to jail.
Stage 2: Instrumental relativistic orientation
In the individualism and exchange stage of moral development, children represent individual points of view and judge actions based on how they serve individual needs. In Heinz's dilemma, the children argued that the best course of action was the option that best met Heinz's needs. Reciprocity is possible at this point in moral development, but only if it serves one's own interests.
At this stage, the person is said to judge the morality of an action based on how well it meets the individual needs of the doer. For example, a person steals money from another person because he needs that money to buy food for his hungry children.
Level 2. Conventional morality
Stage 3: Known as the 'good boy-good girl' orientation
The interpersonal relations stage of moral development focuses on living up to social expectations and roles. There is an emphasis on conformity, being “nice,” and considering how choices influence relationships with other people.
At this stage, a person judges an action based on the social roles and social expectations before them. This is also known as the “interpersonal relationships” phase. For example, a child gives his lunch to a poor child because he thinks it is a good boy.
Stage 4: Law and Order Orientation
At this stage the focus is on maintaining social order. At this stage of moral development, people begin to consider society as a whole when making judgments. The goal is to maintain law and order by following the rules, doing duty and respecting authority. In this way, good social coexistence is promoted.
Level 3. Postconventional Morality
Stage 5: Orientation of the social contract
At this stage people begin to become aware of the different values, opinions and beliefs of other people. The rules of law are important to maintaining a society, but the members of the society must agree to these standards.
Stage 6: orientation of universal ethical principles
Kohlberg's final level of moral reasoning is based on universal ethical principles and abstract reasoning. At this stage, people follow these internalized principles of justice, even if they conflict with laws and rules.
Criticisms of Kohlberg's moral development
Kohlberg's theory refers to moral thinking, but there is a big difference between knowing what we should do versus our actual actions. Moral reasoning, therefore, may not lead to moral behavior. This is just one of the many criticisms of Kohlberg's theory.
Critics have pointed out that Kohlberg's theory of moral development overstates the concept of justice when making moral decisions. Factors such as compassion, caring, and other interpersonal feelings can play an important role in moral reasoning.
Kolberg does not take into account that Eastern and collectivist cultures can have different perspectives on morality without it being inappropriate in their cultures. Furthermore, the majority of subjects in his studies were under 16 years old and did not have relevant life experiences. Heinz's dilemma may have been too abstract for these children to understand, and a scenario more applicable to their daily concerns could have led to different results.
Critics of this theory speak of gender bias because the subjects of the study were men. Kohlberg believed that women tended to remain at the third level of moral development because they placed greater emphasis on things like social relationships. and the well-being of others. It was also thought that in this theory the terms of justice are exaggerated and that good moral reasoning is not addressed.