Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) was a well-

known theorist in the field of moral development.

He posed moral dilemmas (e.g., Heinz Dilemma)
to his subjects then asked questions to probe
their reasons for recommending a specific course
of action. 1
KOHLBERG’S THEORY OF MORAL
DEVELOPMENT

Organismic-Developmental
Theory

Universal, Invariant Sequence

of Hierarchical Stages

2
All people are born with the
same innate genetic abilities to
assimilate and accommodate.

All human societies present

people with the same moral
challenges.

???? 3
 HEINZ DILEMMA
Scenario 1
A woman was near death fr om a unique
ki nd of cancer . There is a drug t hat
mi ght save her. The dr ug cost $4, 000 per
dosage. The si ck woman' s husband,
Hei nz, went to everyone he knew to
borrow t he m oney and tri ed every legal
means, but he coul d onl y get t ogether
about $2, 000. H e asked the
doctor/ sci enti st w ho di scovered the drug
for a di scount or to l et hi m pay later. B ut
the doctor/ sci entist ref us ed.
Shoul d Heinz break into the l abor atory t o
4
 Scenario 2
Heinz broke into the laboratory and stole the drug.
The next day the newspapers reported the break-in
and theft. Brown, a police officer and a friend of
Heinz, remembered seeing Heinz last evening,
behaving suspiciously near the laboratory. Later
that night he saw Heinz running away from the
laboratory.
Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why
not?
Scenario 3
Officer Brown reported what he saw. Heinz was
arrested and brought to court. Heinz was found
guilty.
Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison? Why or
why not?
5
Piaget KOHLBERG
FO POST-CONVENTIONAL REASONING
6. Universal Principled Reasoning
5. Social Contract Reasoning

CO CONVENTIONAL REASONING
4. Law and Order Reasoning
3. Good Boy, Nice Girl Reasoning

PO PRE-CONVENTIONAL REASONING
2. Instrumental Hedonism
1. Punishment and Obedience Reasoning
6
 PRE-CONVENTIONAL
REASONING

No ability to take the

perspective of another.

What’s moral is what’s good

for me.
7
 STAGE 1
(PRE-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

I do that which brings reward or

pleasure. I avoid that which
brings punishment or pain.

Pleasing POWERFUL OTHERS is

the basis of morality.
Actions are judged by their
consequences, not by intent.
8
 STAGE 2
(PRE-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)
I still feel that what is moral is what is
good for me, but now I have the cognitive
ability to understand that others have
motivations.
Because I am egocentric I assume that
others have the same selfish motivation
as I do. Therefore, I try to manipulate
others in order to get my way. (You give
me what I want, and I’ll give you what you
want.)

9
 STAGE 2
(PRE-CONVENTIONAL REASONING cont.)

Market Exchange Morality

I'll scratch your back;

you scratch mine.

10
 CONVENTIONAL
REASONING
The person develops an ability to
understand both interpersonal
reciprocity and rules and norms that
apply to all.
What is moral is what is
normative (3) and legal (4).

Rules and laws are now more important

than one’s individual desires.
11
 STAGE 3
(CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

Morality consists of following the rules

and norms of the group. Those who do
not follow them or who cannot meet
group standards are considered to be
evil or bad and not worthy of respect.

12
 STAGE 3
(CONVENTIONAL REASONING, cont.)

Often a powerful leader may

determine what is considered to
be moral.
Stereotyping

Disagreements are settled by

attacking or shunning the non-
conformer and by inter-group
conflict.
13
 STAGE 4
(CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

Morality consists of following the

law and abiding by legal
agreements. An understanding of
contractual obligations develops.
Disagreements are settled by
going to court.
Following proper legal procedures
is a fundamental part of morality.
14
 POST-CONVENTIONAL
REASONING
Protecting each individual’s RIGHTS
is the basis of morality. The current
political/legal system is seen as one
among many hypothetical
possibilities. And that system must
be changed if it does not protect
individual rights.

What is moral is what is just.

15
 POST-CONVENTIONAL
REASONING
Once again the individual
becomes more important than
societal rules or laws. But
individual rights, rather than
selfish individual desires, become
the basis for making moral
judgments.
16
 STAGE 5
(POST-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

SO CI AL CON TRAC T M ORAL ITY

Society is viewed as a social contract
among individuals. This contract is
entered into in order to protect each
person’s rights. Laws that deny a
person or groups equal rights are
immoral.
Conflicts among rights are resolved by
employing the utilitarian principle
17
 STAGE 6
(POST-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

Reasoning is based upon a

UNIVERSAL principle of morality.

Morality is no longer tied to a

particular political system (social
contract).

18
 STAGE 6
(POST-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

GOLDEN RULE
LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF!
We make moral judgments as though
we do not know which person we are
in any given moral situation.
An individual does not distinguish
him/herself from her/his neighbor when
making moral judgments.
19
 STAGE 6
(POST-CONVENTIONAL REASONING)

• Moral judgments are based

on this universal principle
(golden rule).
• Rights are still paramount.
• Moral judgments are no
longer bound to any particular
moral code or social contract!
20
KOHLBERG CLAIMS TO
HAVE IDENTIFIED A
UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE
OF MORALITY.
In all societies, using the golden rule
principle will result in arriving at the
just solution to moral problems and
dilemmas.
21
 Piaget’s Stages
FORMAL OPERATIONAL--ability to understand
hypothetical abstractions; understand that
physical reality reality represents only one of
many hypothetical possibilities

CONCRETE OPERATIONAL--logical thinking

about the concrete world; ability to
understand rules of physical reality.

PRE-OPERATIONAL--egocentric thinking; world

viewed from the individual’s perspective; no
ability to take the perspective of the other
22
UTILITARIAN PRINCIPLE
(The right to life takes precedence
over all other rights.)

When one individual’s rights are in

conflict with those of another, we
choose the action that brings the
greatest good to the greatest
number. (Winners win more than
the losers lose.)
23