Moral Development and Moral Reasoning

1. Kohlbergs Theory
Psychological research says that as person mature they change their values in very deep and profound ways. Psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg concluded after 20 years of research that there is a sequence of six identifiable stages in the development of a persons ability to deal with moral issues Level one: Preconventional stages Stage one Punishment and Obedience Orientation: At this stage the physical consequences of an act fully determine the goodness or badness of that act. The childs reasons for doing the right thing are to avoid punishments or defer to the superior physical power of authorities. There is little awareness that others have needs and desires similar to ones own. Stage two Instrumental and Relative Orientation: At this stage, right actions become those that can serve as instruments for satisfying the childs own needs or the needs of those for whom the child cares. Level two: Conventional Stages Stage three Interpersonal Concordance Orientation: Right action is conformity to what is generally expected in ones role as a good son, daughter, brother, friend and so on. Doing something right is motivated by the need to be seen as a good performer in ones own eyes and in the eyes of others. Stage four- Law and Order Orientation: Right action is determined by loyalty to ones own larger nation or surrounding society. The person is now able to see other people as parts of a larger social system that defines individual roles and obligations. Level three: Postconventional, Autonomous or Principled stages Stage five- Social Contract Orientation: Person becomes aware that people hold a variety of conflicting personal views and opinions and emphasizes fair ways of reaching consensus by agreement, contract and due process. Stage Six Universal Ethical Principles Orientation: Right action is determined in terms of moral principles chosen because of their logical understanding, universality and consistency. These are general principles dealing with justice, societys welfare, human rights, respect for dignity of selves etc.

1.1 Interpretation of Kohlbergs theory

1. Helps in understanding how our moral capacities develop and reveals how we can become more sophisticated and critical in our use and understanding of the moral standards we hold.

2. Kohlberg found that many people remain stuck at one of the early stages throughout their lives. 3. Implies that moral reasoning of people at the later stages of moral development is better than those of earlier stages.

2.1 Criticism
1. Criticized for claiming that the higher stages are morally preferable. 2. Work of psychologist Carol Gilligan: a. Identifies that the moral development is male biased (androcentric). Gilligan says that the theory fails to address the pattern of development in women. Male deal with moral issues in terms of impersonal, impartial and abstract moral rules whereas women deal with moral issues concering with sustaining relationships (family and friends), avoiding hurting others in these relationships and caring for their wellbeing. (think about the incident where one of our female classmates supported a person who admitted that he was not listening in the class). In simple terms, Kohlberg theory can be related to Justice Perspective and Gilligans work to Care Perspective. Note: But both Kohlberg and Gilligan agreed that there are stages of growth in our moral development 3. Too much emphasis on moral thought and not enough on moral behavior. Theories, such as the four-component model by Rest in 1986, have since been developed to further explain moral behavior (walker, 2002) 4. Underestimated the contribution of family relationships 5. His theory is culturally biased and not universal 6. Stage theories in general are not adequate to explain moral development

2. Moral Reasoning
Moral reasoning refers to the reasoning process by which human behaviors, institutions or policies are judged to be in accordance or in violation with moral standards. Two important components are 1. Understanding what reasonable moral standards require, prohibit, value or condemn. 2. Evident or information that shows that a person, policy or behavior has the kinds of features that these moral standards require, prohibit, value or condemn. Moral Standards Factual Information (must be accurate, relevant and complete) Moral Judgment on the rightness or wrongness