Transcript Document
Moral Development Kohlberg Gilligan HE 551 Unit 7 Seminar Check in How are things going? KOHLBERG'S THEORY OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT Kohlberg believed much of Piaget's theory but thought it should be extended into adolescence and adulthood. MORAL DILEMMAS. Each dilemma presented required the individual to choose between: (A) obeying a rule, law, or authority figure, or (B) taking some action which conflicts with these rules or commands while serving the welfare of others. Kohlberg was less interested in what the subject's decision was (e.g. what Heinz should do), than in the underlying rationale. What is important is HOW they EXPLAINED their judgments. 1) Like Piaget, Kohlberg developed stages of Moral development which follow some invariant sequence. 2) Because each successive stage is built upon the foundation of an earlier one, each stage must be followed in a particular order. 3) Again, according to Kohlberg, each stage represents a METHOD OF THINKING about a moral dilemma rather than a particular TYPE of moral decision. Heinz dilemma In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that 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 $2000, or 10 times the cost of the drug, for a small (possibly life-saving dose). Heinz, the sick woman's husband, borrowed all the money he could, about $1000, or half of what he needed. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell the drug cheaper, or to let him pay later. The druggist replied “No, I discovered the drug, and I'm going to make money from it”. Heinz then became desperate and broke into the store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have done that? Kohlberg proposed 3 stages of moral development, with each stage consisting of 2 distinct substages. LEVEL 1: PRECONVENTION MORALITY at this level children conform to rules imposed by authority figures in order to obtain rewards and avoid punishment. Moral decisions are based on CONSEQUENCES of an act, not intentionality Stage 1: punishment and obedience orientation a) goodness or badness of an act are based on its consequences. b) child will defer to authority figure and obey their commands in order to avoid punishment (BUT there is no true conception of rules--> it is only bad if you get caught). Stage 2: instrumental orientation a) person conforms to rules in order to gain rewards or to satisfy personal needs, b) doing things for others is “right” if the actor will benefit in the long run LEVEL 2: CONVENTIONAL MORALITY -- at this level, the individual strives to obey the rules set forth by others in order to win praise and recognition or to maintain social order. Stage 3: “Good-boy / good-girl” orientation a) moral behavior is that which pleases, helps, or is approved by others. b) actions are evaluated on the basis of intent c) one objective is to be thought of as a “nice” person Stage 4: Authority and social-order-maintaining morality a) accepts and conforms to social rules and conventions because of a belief that rules and laws maintain an order which is judged good or moral. LAW AND ORDER MENTALITY LEVEL 3: POST-CONVENTIONAL MORALITY --moral standards are internalized and become the person's own. Stage 5: Social contract morality. a) flexibility begins in moral reasoning b) moral actions are those that express the will of the majority of individuals c) a sense of having to live up to the law, but an understanding that laws can be wrong. Stage 6: Universal ethical principles a) “highest” stage of moral reasoning b) right and wrong defined on a personal belief or self-chosen ethics c) belief in abstract principles which override all others (life, liberty, equality) d) risk jail or social ostracism rather than violate personal ethics This last stage is often considered to be a HYPOTHETICAL CONSTRUCT because very few people ever demonstrate this level of “saintliness”. CRITICISMS: scoring disagreements ( ~25% of time). rankings may reflect verbal abilities more so than moral level attained (young kids cannot express themselves) Reflect a number of Biases: political bias-- liberals tend to rank higher in this hierarchy (5 & 6) conservatives --> who believe in law and order are left in stage 4 historical/generational bias Validity questions: Questions which are asked are hypothetical and somewhat artificial. The dilemmas are not REAL to the subjects. Moral talk vs. action gender bias: Kohlberg only tested males Adult females are at stage 3, whereas adult males are at stage 4 Are women less moral? YES -- Kohlberg (1971)-- suggests that women define the good as “what pleases or helps others” and is approved by them --Stage 3 YES -- Freud (1925)-- Women show less sense of justice than men, that they are less ready to submit to the great urgency of life, that they are more often influenced in their judgments by feelings of affection or hostility. YES -- Piaget (1965)-- the legal sense if far less developed in girls than in boys Carol Gilligan Argues that the alleged inferiority of women has more to do with the standard by which moral development is measured rather than the quality of female's thinking. In terms of development, girls are taught and trained to be more nurturing, empathetic, etc than males. According to Kohlberg's model, the highest stages of moral development are defined in terms of traditional MASCULINE values: individuality, rationality, detachment, impersonality The traditionally FEMININE values of caring, responsibility, welfare of others automatically force them to stay at level 3 and 4 because the dilemmas that are presented. Gilligan suggests that women are trained to be more interpersonal-bound whereas men are raised to be more rule-bound. can be resolved through LOGIC. Women would view this dilemma as a fracture in human relationships that should be resolved through communication. WOMAN: world held together by human relationships and caring In the Heinz dilemma Men would view it as a problem of competing rights. LIFE VS. PROPERTY HEINZ VS. DRUGGIST MAN: world held together by a system of rules and consensus Rather than treat the problem in an abstract fashion, she focuses on the CONTEXT of the problem. A woman would consider Heinz's relationship with his wife, her need for him, and the needs of the druggist. Kohlberg’s scoring system does not take any of this into account. Gilligan concludes that women follow a different moral pathway than men. Responsibility and concern for others precedes and overrides concern for individual rights. WOMEN ARE NOT MORE OR LESS MORAL THAN MEN, THEY ARE MORAL IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN MEN. Gilligan’s research also provided “hypothetical but realistic” dilemmas to reason about (pregnant women-- keep baby or abortion). Came up with 3 levels of moral development. LEVEL 1: Orientation to individual survival at this stage the woman's thoughts on abortion centers on her own needs and desires. Want an abortion so she can finish last year of high school TRANSITION 1: selfishness to responsibility conflict arises between their own wants and what is ”right” Transitional conflict between selfishness and responsibility necessary to move on. Level 2: Goodness as self-sacrifice women have adopted traditional feminine values and evaluate themselves in terms of interpersonal relationships. Orientation to please others, even if it causes a personal sacrifice. TRANSITION 2: goodness to truth question logic of self sacrifice. In spite of consequences, it is not always right to hurt oneself in the name of morality Level 3: Morality of non-violence an injunction against hurting becomes the basic premise underlying all moral judgments. Looking after the welfare of people is now self-chosen and UNIVERSAL obligation. Personal and interpersonal obligations are noted. Criticisms: Are women and men really different?? Aren’t her dilemma just as biased (albeit in the other direction) as Kohlberg? Final questions?