Morality is the principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. It is a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society.
Lawrence Kohlberg (October 25, 1927 – January 19, 1987) was an American psychologist best known for his theory of stages of moral development. The theory holds that moral reasoning, the basis for ethical behavior, has six identifiable developmental stages, each more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than its predecessor. Furthermore, logic and morality develop through 3 constructive levels.
According to his theory, the process of moral development was principally concerned with justice, and it continues throughout an individual’s lifetime. Stages cannot be skipped, and it is extremely rare to regress in stages. Progress from one stage to the next usually occurs when an individual with increasing competence gained from life experience encounters a moral dilemma and finds their current level of moral reasoning unsatisfactory, thus, they will look to the next level. Realizing the limitations of the current stage of thinking is the driving force behind moral development, as each progressive stage is more adequate than the last.
It is important to note that most people are usually content to stay at their current level because it is familiar, which helps explain why some people never seem to evolve past certain beliefs. While we can easily look back and recognize the levels that we have already passed through, it is quite difficult to conceive of those levels that are higher. However, life delivers painful experiences to us that challenge our current belief system, our views of people, and our social perspective, pushing us to the next level.
Before discussing the stages, consider the following scenario:
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
A woman was on her deathbed. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her: a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So, Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s laboratory to steal the drug for his wife.
Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife?
PRE-CONVENTIONAL
The pre-conventional level consists of the first and second stages of moral development and is solely concerned with the self in an egocentric manner. It is especially common in children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners at this level judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. A child with pre-conventional morality has not yet adopted or internalized society’s conventions regarding what is right or wrong but instead focuses largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring. Throughout the preconventional level, an individual’s sense of morality is externally controlled. For example, children accept and believe the rules of authority figures, such as parents and teachers.
STAGE 1
Obedience and Punishment
Stage 1 focuses on an individual’s desire to obey rules and avoid being punished. An action is perceived as morally wrong solely because the perpetrator is punished. For example, a child will perceive an action to be bad because they were spanked afterwards. The worse the punishment for the act is, the more “bad” the act is perceived to be. This level of thinking is problematic because 1) it can give rise to an inference that even innocent victims are guilty in proportion to their suffering and 2) it lacks recognition that others’ points of view are different from one’s own.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person.
Heinz should steal the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.
STAGE 2
Self-Interest
Stage 2 expresses the “what’s in it for me” position, in which right behavior is defined by whatever the individual believes to be in their best interest but understood in a narrow way which does not consider one’s reputation or relationships to groups of people. For example, a child might ask, “what’s in it for me?” when told to do a chore by their parents. The parents offer the child an incentive by giving a child an allowance to pay them for their chores. Stage 2 reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a point where it might further the individual’s own interests. As a result, concern for others is not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect, but rather a “You scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours” mentality.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.
Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would more likely languish in a jail cell than over his wife’s death.
CONVENTIONAL
The conventional level consists of the third and fourth stages of moral development and is typical of adolescents and adults. Conventional morality is characterized by an acceptance of society’s conventions concerning right and wrong. At this level an individual obeys rules and follows society’s norms even when there are no consequences for obedience or disobedience. Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid, and a rule’s appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned to ensure positive relationships and societal order.
STAGE 3
Interpersonal Accord and Conformity
In Stage 3, the self enters society by conforming to social standards. Individuals are receptive to approval or disapproval from others as it reflects society’s views. They try to be a “good boy” or “good girl” to live up to these expectations, having learned that being regarded as good benefits the self. Stage 3 reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person’s relationships, which now begin to include things like respect, gratitude, and the “golden rule”. “I want to be liked and thought well of; apparently, not being naughty makes people like me.” Conforming to the rules for one’s social role is not yet fully understood. The intentions of actors play a more significant role in reasoning at this stage; one may feel more forgiving if one thinks that “they mean well”.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband.
Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he has tried to do everything he can without breaking the law, you cannot blame him.
STAGE 4
Authority and Social-Order Maintaining
In Stage 4, it is important to obey laws, dictums, and social conventions because of their importance in maintaining a functioning society. Moral reasoning in stage four is thus beyond the need for individual approval exhibited in stage three. A central ideal or ideals often prescribe what is right and wrong. Rules are seen as being the same for everyone, and obeying rules by doing what one is “supposed” to do is seen as valuable and important. If one person violates a law, perhaps everyone would—thus there is an obligation and a duty to uphold laws and rules. When someone does violate a law, it is morally wrong; culpability is thus a significant factor in this stage as it separates the bad domains from the good ones. Most active members of society remain at stage four, where morality is still predominantly dictated by an outside force.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal.
Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.
POST-CONVENTIONAL
The post-conventional level, also known as the principled level, is marked by a growing realization that individuals are separate entities from society, and that an individual’s own perspective may take precedence over society’s view. Post-conventional moralists live by their own ethical principles, defined in terms of more abstract philosophies and values, including such basic human rights as life, liberty, and justice. People who exhibit post-conventional morality view rules as useful but changeable mechanisms. Rules are useful because they can help maintain the general social order and protect human rights, but those that are inconsistent with an individual’s own principles can be disobeyed. Rules are not absolute dictates that must be blindly followed without question, and for those that believe that some laws are unjust also believe they should be changed or eliminated.
It is important to note that because post-conventional individuals elevate their own moral evaluation of a situation over social conventions, their behavior, especially at stage 6, can be confused with those at the pre-conventional level.
STAGE 5
Social Contract
In Stage 5, the world is viewed as holding different opinions, rights, and values. Such perspectives should be mutually respected as unique to each person or community. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid edicts. Those that do not promote the general welfare should be changed when necessary to meet “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”. This is achieved through majority decision and inevitable compromise. Democratic government is ostensibly based on stage five reasoning.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law.
Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right.
STAGE 6
Universal Ethical Principles
In Stage 6, moral reasoning is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles. Laws are valid only insofar as they are grounded in justice, and a commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. Legal rights are unnecessary. Decisions are not reached hypothetically in a conditional way but rather categorically in an absolute way. This involves an individual imagining what they would do in another’s shoes, if they believed what that other person imagines to be true. The resulting consensus is the action taken. In this way action is never a means but always an end in itself; the individual acts because it is right, and not because it avoids punishment, is in their best interest, expected, legal, or previously agreed upon.
It is speculated that many people may never reach this level of abstract moral reasoning.
THE HEINZ DILEMMA:
Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person.
Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.
Ask Yourself:
How did your answer to the Heinz dilemma compare with the answers in the stages?
Are you thinking at a higher social level of understanding?
What areas can you work on to improve your morality?
Thank you for reading this blog entry. I hope you found it easy to understand and enlightening.
Cheers!
Brightfool
“Our brightest are still fools, while our fools think they are bright.”
If you enjoyed this blog, don’t forget to subscribe for more!
Brightfool 