However, since resistance abounds, we will only focus on some of them in a very basic way, beginning with two general criticisms, identified by Lapsley as the 'naturalistic fallacy' and the 'aretaic judgments' problem 2. Because of stage 1 individuals' undeveloped reasoning, they are found to be less adequate for making moral choices than people on stage 6, or, for that matter, less Kolhberg s moral development.
In the time of Moses, the "law" of cause and effect might not have been so understood by a nation of slaves. Justice distributed proportionate to circumstances and need. Some critics claim the use of moral dilemmas measures abstract rather than concrete reasoning.
Christ's teaching and example of Sabbath keeping provides another example of the superiority of principles over rule keeping. The big brother, who can just take the pie and get away with it, is less likely to look for a better solution than the younger brother who will get none and probably a beating in the struggle.
The bigger, stronger brother will probably get it. Individual vengeance is not allowed.
The morality of an action depends heavily on peer approval. George Boeree's terriffic web site.
This may explain why highly educated persons may have very primitive theological notions, or why successful business men or even educators may not be able to relate to their own children at home.
Right action tends to be defined in terms of general individual rights, and in terms of standards that have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole society--e. It begins with a stake in certain perspectives in meta-ethics.
In stage development, movement is effected when cognitive dissonance occurs Along a similar vein, laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid dictums. Despite being a justice-centered theory of morality, Kohlberg considered it to be compatible with plausible formulations of deontology  and eudaimonia.
The next stage four is maintaining the social order, obeying the laws, and social conventions. Individuals have natural or inalienable rights and liberties that are prior to society and must be protected by society. To them "good" was more to eat and not being punished.
By the same token, justice relies heavily upon the notion of sound reasoning upon principles. Stage two espouses the what's in it for me position, right behavior being defined by what is in one's own best interest. According to Kohlberg, a person who progresses to a higher stage of moral reasoning cannot skip stages.Kohlberg's idea and development of "just communities" were greatly influenced by his time living in an Israeli kibbutz when he was a young adult in and when he was doing longitudinal cross-cultural research of moral development in another Israeli kibbutz.
Given Kohlberg?s levels and stages of moral development, how would you interpret the respective positions taken by your neighbors? 2.
To the best of your ability, indicate which of Kohlberg?s stages of moral development might best explain the moral reasoning involved in the following.
Kohlberg’s theory on moral development 1. Kohlberg’s Theory on Moral Development Adolescent Psychology 2.
Biography • Lawerence Kohlberg born in • Grew up in Bronxville, New York • Died on January 17th, at the age of 59 • Kohlberg became a professor of education and social psychology at Harvard in • His book on moral development is used by teachers around the.
Lawrence Kohlberg () agreed with Piaget's () theory of moral development in principle but wanted to develop his ideas further. He used Piaget’s storytelling technique to tell people stories involving moral dilemmas.
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development (pages of Psych textbook) Part A: Read in your textbook and fill in the blanks over the stages of moral development as described by Lawrence Kohlberg.
You may write on this sheet.
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development also seems to have a troubling normative aspect – that is, it seems to suggest that certain kinds of moral reasoning are better than others. This, of course, presupposes certain moral assumptions, and so from a philosophical perspective Kohlberg’s argument is circular.Download