1

Team - Kohlberg’s Moral Development Paper

Aubrey Brennan, Emily Tinger, Julie Fisher, Sharon Diggs,

Tarina Duplantis And Gigi Mayoliz

PSYCH/600

09/03/2019
 2

Kohlberg’s Moral Development Paper

Intro:

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development

Lawrence Kohlberg was a psychologist best recognized for his theory of moral

development. Piaget's earliest work on that of the child's moral judgement influenced how much

more extensive cognitive-developmental theory of moral values by Lawrence Kohlberg.

Kohlberg’s theory, which was initially named the cognitive developmental theory of

moralization is mainly based on ongoing experimental analyses of children's and adolescents'

expressions of moral reasoning Kohlberg used a clinical interviewing procedure in which he

presented a sample of 10- to 16-year-old boys with hypothetical moral dilemmas—stories

involving a conflict between two moral values—and asked them what the main actor should do

and why (Berk, 2014). He recognized three separate stages of moral reasoning with two

particular sub-stages in each. The three stages are preconventional, conventional, and

postconventional. Each level has 2 additional distinct stages. Stages should never be bypassed

overturned; each offers a different and essential view, more extensive and distinguished than its

counterparts but associated with them. Not all accomplish all the stages. In our social

interactions, moral development acts as a significant role. It is very helpful in several

environments to comprehend why or how people make choices about moral questions.

Kohlberg’s Contributions

Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development contributed to our understanding of moral

development in several ways. Branching off of Jean Piaget’s Theory of Moral Development,

which he supported, he was able to break things down further by examining stories and examples
 3

Piaget used to gain a further understanding of how moral reasoning changes in a person as they

age. He built a cognitive framework for further studying and testing to be conducted about how

people determine what is right and wrong when faced with a moral dilemma (McLeod, 2013).

According to Wilber, 2018, “Kohlberg’s theory profoundly shifted the way in which we view

moral development. Researchers now study how individuals base moral judgments on their

understanding of the social world, rather than seeing morality as simply the attainment of

“control over self-gratifying impulses” (Lawrence Kohlberg’s Six Stages of Moral

Development). His work has changed the perception on how many sociologists and

psychologists have come to view moral development. His theories were more complex than

Piaget’s and he believed that people could only work through the dilemmas they faced in stages.

He put his focus on testing and studying children, mainly males.

Kohlberg’s Limitations

Kohlberg’s theories were accurate to the most part but there were some limitations as

to how it measured certain aspects of theories that impacted different circumstances. The

most radical opposition to Kohlberg’s Theory was coming from researchers who—referring to

wide variability in moral reasoning across situations—claimed that Kohlberg’s stage sequence

inadequately accounts for morality in everyday life (Berk, 2014). They argue how each

individual is responsible for their own moral decisions at different paces of maturity, based on a

person's present framework and motivations. After a re-examination of Kohlberg's stages, it has

been implied that moral maturity could be discovered in stages 3 and 4, yet few individuals

have attained the post-conventional stage because the contextual variables have such an

impact on ethical decisions. Furthermore, Kohlberg's stage is best known as weakly defined and

inconsistent, implying no identifiable section. Kohlberg’s theory does not underestimate the
 4

moral maturity of females but instead taps both justice and caring orientations (Berk, 2014). In

further review it is said that in village societies, where moral cooperation is based on direct

relations between people, moral reasoning rarely moves beyond Kohlberg’s Stage 3(Berk,

2014). So, there is a limit as to how far one can progress through Kohlberg’s Theory stages.

Carol Gilligan

Carol Gilligan, a moral psychologist has been termed as one who has interests within

feminism (Jorgenson, 2006). She has been criticized by Jorgenson for having potential lack of

belief of developmental psychology for unknown reasons other than no real criticism. Her

research suggests some statements in regard to possible gender differences within moral

reasoning. Within the small piece of history, we have viewed history under the psychological

umbrella, women, as well as other minorities, have been potentially viewed for their own

development compared to societal norms broken at this point in modern day (Jorgenson, 2006).

Meaning, the context in which the woman or women are compared to all theories of human

development is really more important to Gilligan and her own thoughts towards feminism and

femininity. This begs questions in regards if the fact women are viewed differently than men

have changed the perspectives in which we as society treat them, making developmental factors

also be affected. Thus, gender differences in moral reasonings are different and can also depend

if on the western side of the world as they may not make as much sense in regard to other

cultures, minorities, ethnicities or other unique sub-cultures.

Conclusion
 5

References

Berk, L. E. (2014). Development Through the Lifespan (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Jorgensen, G. (2006). Kohlberg and Gilligan: duet or duel? Journal of Moral Education, 35(2),

179–196. https://doi-org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1080/03057240600681710

McLeod, S. (n.d.). Simply Psychology. Retrieved from

https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html

Wilber, J. (2018). Lawrence Kohlberg’s Six Stages of Moral Development. Retrieved from

https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/Lawrence-Kohlbergs-Six-Stages-of-Moral-

Development