Kohlberg

1. Kohlberg Six Stages of Moral Development

2. Biographical Information -Kohlberg was born in 1927 and grew up in New York. He attended Andover Academy, a private school for bright and typically wealthy students. -In 1948, Kohlberg attended The University of Chicago, where he scored extremely high on the admission test. He scored so high that he only had to take a few courses to receive his bachelors degree. He did this in one year! -He soon became interested in Jean Piaget and began interviewing children and adolescents on moral issues.

3. Jean Piaget -Piaget identified two basic moral stages of judgment. They fit into two age categories: younger than 10 or 11 and older than 10 or 11. -Basically Piaget believed that younger children regard rules as fixed and absolute. These rules are handed down by adults and they cannot change them! Younger children base their actions on consequences. Older children base their judgments on intentions. These children will base their judgment based on the terms of the motives underlying the act. -Ex: You tell the children a story about a boy who broke 15 cups trying to help his mother and then another boy who broke 1 cup stealing a cookie. The younger child will consider the first boy as being the worst because he broke more cups whereas, the older boy will judge the motives behind the act. -Piaget essentially found a series of changes that occur between the ages of 10 and 12, just when the child is entering the stage of formal operations.

4. Kohlberg • Kohlberg took Piaget’s theory and expanded on it. • Kohlberg started interviewing boys and eventually girls between the ages of 10 and 16. • He would conduct a basic interview that consisted of a series of dilemmas.

5. Sample Interview Dilemma For example: In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was 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 make. 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 store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that? (Kohlberg, 1963, p. 19) Kohlberg was not interested in a yes or no answer but more of an underlying reasoning behind the answer. After asking a series of questions and proving ample dilemmas, the subject’s moral thinking would be identified into a category.

6. The Six Stages Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation (Reward and Punishment) This stage is similar to Piaget’s first stage. The child assumes that all rules are non-negotiable and handed to them by a higher power. “Blind Obedience” Motivation- fear of punishment A child would respond to the sample interview question by saying, “it is wrong to steal” or “Its against the law” When asked to elaborate the child would say that it is bad to steal you’ll get punished.

7. The Six Stages Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange (Personal Usefulness) Only thinks of needs of others if something personal can be obtained. They also recognize that there is not just one right view handed down by authorities. Motivation- satisfaction of my own needs. There are many ways a child could respond to the sample interview question. One child might say that Heinz stole the drugs because maybe he had children and he might need someone at home to look after the kids. But maybe he shouldn’t steal it because they might put him in prison for more years than he could stand. WHAT IS RIGHT FOR HEINZ, THEN, IS WHAT MEETS HIS OWN SELF INTERESTS. Both stage one and two talk about punishment. However, it is perceived very differently at each stage. At stage one, punishment is tied up in the child’s mind with wrongness. At stage 2, punishment is a risk that one would simply want to avoid.

8. The Six Stages Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships (Conform for Approval) Children are now typically in their teen years. Good behavior means having good motives and interpersonal feelings. They believe people should live up to the expectations of the family and community. Motivation: Acceptance and approval of a social group. An example of a response of the interview question might be that the whole ordeal was the druggist fault. He was being unfair, and trying to charge way too much money. I think anybody who loved their wife, would do that for her. I think that the judge would see all sides and not put him in jail.

9. The Six Stages Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order (Law and Duty) The respondent becomes more concerned with society as a whole. Upholding authority (right or wrong); follows fixed rules or social order. Motivation: Doing one’s duty as set by the prevailing law. In response to the Heinz dilemma, many subjects might say that they understand Heinz’s motives were good but they can’t condone theft. What would happen if we all started breaking the law? Are stage one and four similar? ABSOLUTELY! Stage one children cannot explain why its wrong, they just know that its wrong… stage four, older children can explain why they believe its wrong!

10. The Six Stages Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights (Society’s good) At stage 5, people begin to ask, what makes for a good society? One may work to change the law for the good of society. Motivation: To preserve the general values of the whole society. Stage 5 respondents will make it clear that they do not favor breaking the law. Nevertheless, the wife’s right to live is a moral right that must be protected. Therefore, they may respond with strong statements. For example, “It is the husbands duty to save his wife. The fact that her life is in danger transcends every other standard you might use to judge this action. Life is more important than property.”

11. The Six Stages Stage 6: Universal Principles (Personal Conscience) Only 4% of people reach this stage. They suggest we need to protect certain individual rights and settle disputes through democratic processes. Motivation: Preserve universal principles of justice and equality of human rights. In the Heinz dilemma, all parties would be able to take the roles of others. To do this in an impartial manner, people can assume a "veil of ignorance" (Rawls, 1971), acting as if they do not know which role they will eventually occupy. If the druggist did this, even he would recognize that life must take priority over property; for he wouldn't want to risk finding himself in the wife's shoes with property valued over life. Thus, they would all agree that the wife must be saved--this would be the fair solution. Such a solution, we must note, requires not only impartiality, but the principle that everyone is given full and equal respect. If the wife were considered of less value than the others, a just solution could not be reached.