KOHLBERG'S STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
Lawrence Kohlberg was a moral philosopher and student of
child development. He was director of Harvard's Center for Moral Education. His
special area of interest is the moral development of children - how they
develop a sense of right, wrong, and justice.
Kohlberg observed that growing children advance through
definite stages of moral development in a manner similar to their progression
through Piaget's well-known stages of cognitive development. His observations
and testing of children and adults, led him to theorize that human beings
progress consecutively from one stage to the next in an invariant sequence, not
skipping any stage or going back to any previous stage. These are stages of
thought processing, implying qualitatively different modes of thinking and of
problem solving at each stage.
These conclusions have been verified in cross-cultural
studies done in
An outline of these developmental stages follows:
A.
PREMORAL OR PRECONVENTIONAL STAGES:
FOCUS: Self
AGES: Up to 10-13 years of age, most
prisoners
Behavior
motivated by anticipation of pleasure or pain.
STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE: Might
Makes Right
Avoidance of physical punishment and deference to power.
Punishment is an
automatic
response of physical retaliation. The immediate physical
consequences of an action
determine its goodness or badness. The atrocities carried
out by soldiers during the
holocaust who were simply "carrying out orders"
under threat of punishment, illustrate that
adults as well as children may function at stage one level.
"Might makes right."
QUESTIONS: What must I do to avoid
punishment? What can I do to force my will upon
others?
STAGE 2: INSTRUMENTAL EXCHANGE: The
Egoist
Marketplace
exchange of favors or blows. "You scratch my back, I'll
scratch yours." Justice
is: "Do unto
others as they do unto you." Individual does what is necessary, makes
concessions only as necessary to satisfy his own desires.
Right action consists of what
instrumentally satisfies one's own needs. Vengeance is
considered a moral duty. People
are valued in terms of their utility. "An
eye for an eye."
QUESTIONS: What's in it for me? What
must I do to avoid pain, gain pleasure?
B.
CONVENTIONAL MORALITY:
FOCUS: Significant Others,
"Tyranny of the They" (They say….)
AGES: Beginning in middle school, up to
middle age - most people end up here
Acceptance of the rules and standards of one's group.
STAGE 3: INTERPERSONAL (TRIBAL)
CONFORMITY: Good Boy/Good Girl
Right is conformity to the
stereotypical behavioral, values expectations of one's society or
peers. Individual acts to gain approval of others. Good
behavior is that which pleases or
helps others within the group. Everybody is doing it."
Majority understanding ("common
sense") is seen as "natural." One earns
approval by being conventionally "respectable" and
"nice." Peer pressure makes being different the
unforgivable sin. Self sacrifice to group
demands is expected. Values based in conformity, loyalty to
group. Sin is a breach of
the
expectations of one's immediate social order (confuses sin
with group, class norms).
Retribution,
however, at this stage is collective. Individual vengeance is not allowed.
Forgiveness
is preferable to revenge. Punishment is mainly for deterrence. Failure to
punish is "unfair." "If he can get away with
it, why can't I?" Many religious people end up
here.
QUESTION: What must I do to be seen as
a good boy/girl (socially acceptable)?
STAGE 4: LAW AND ORDER (SOCIETAL
CONFORMITY): The Good Citizen
Respect for fixed rules,
laws and properly constituted authority. Defense of the given social
and institutional order for its own sake. Responsibility
toward the welfare of others in the
society. "Justice" normally refers to criminal
justice. Justice demands that the wrongdoer
be punished, that he "pay his debt to society," and
that law abiders be rewarded. "A good
day's pay for a good day's work." Injustice is failing
to reward work or punish demerit. Right
behavior consists of maintaining the social order for its
own sake. Self-sacrifice to larger
social order is expected. Authority figures are seldom
questioned. "He must be right. He's
the Pope (or the President, or the Judge, or God)." Consistency and precedent must be
maintained. For most adults, this is the highest stage they
will attain.
QUESTION: What if everyone did that?
STAGE 4 ½: The Cynic
Between the conventional
stages and the post-conventional Levels 5 and 6, there is a
transitional stage. Some college-age students who come to
see conventional morality as
socially constructed, thus, relative and arbitrary, but have
not yet discovered universal
ethical principles, may drop into a hedonistic ethic of
"do your own thing." This was well
noted in the hippie culture of the l960's. Disrespect for
conventional morality was especially
infuriating to the Stage 4 mentality, and indeed was
calculated to be so. Kohlberg found
that some people get "stuck" in this in-between
stage marked by egoism and skepticism,
never able to completely leave behind conventional reasoning
even after recognizing its
inadequacies. Such people are often marked by uncritical
cynicism ("All politicians are
crooks…nothing really matters anyway"), disillusionment
and alienation.
QUESTION: Why should I believe
anything?
C.
POSTCONVENTIONAL OR PRINCIPLED MORALITY:
FOCUS: Justice, Dignity for all life,
Common Good
AGES: Few reach this stage, most not
prior to middle age
STAGE 5: PRIOR RIGHTS AND SOCIAL CONTRACT: The Philosopher/King
Moral action
in a specific situation is not defined by reference to a checklist of rules,
but
from logical application of universal, abstract, moral
principles. Individuals have natural or
inalienable rights and liberties that are prior to society
and must be protected by society.
Retributive
justice is repudiated as counterproductive, violative
of notions of human rights.
Justice
distributed proportionate to circumstances and need. "Situation
ethics." The
statement, "Justice demands punishment," which is
a self-evident truism to the Stage 4
mind, is just as self-evidently nonsense at Stage 5.
Retributive punishment is neither
rational nor just, because it does not promote the rights
and welfare of the individual and
inflicts further violence upon society. Only legal sanctions
that fulfill that purpose are
imposed-- protection of future victims, deterrence, and
rehabilitation. Individual acts out of
mutual obligation and a sense of public good. 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.g. the Constitution. The
freedom of the individual
should be limited by society only when it infringes upon
someone else's freedom.
Conventional
authorities are increasingly rejected in favor of critical reasoning. Laws are
challenged by questions of justice.
QUESTIONS: What is the just thing to do
given all the circumstances? What will bring the
most good to the largest number of people?
STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES: The
Prophet/Messiah
An individual who reaches
this stage acts out of universal principles based upon the
equality and worth of all living beings. Persons are never
means to an end, but are ends in
themselves. Having rights means more than individual
liberties. It means that every
individual is due consideration of his dignity interests in every situation, those
interests
being of equal importance with one's own. This is the
"Golden Rule" model. A list of rules
inscribed in stone is no longer necessary. At this level, God is understood to
say what is
right because it is right; His sayings are not right, just
because it is God who said them.
Abstract
principles are the basis for moral decision making, not concrete rules. Stage
6
individuals are rare, often value their principles
more than their own life, often seen as
incarnating the highest human potential. Thus they are often
martyred by those of lower
stages shamed by seeing realized human potential compared
with their own partially
realized levels of development. (Stoning
the prophets, killing the messenger). Examples:
Mohandas
Gandhi, Jesus of
Hamerskjold
QUESTIONS: What will foster life in its fullest for all living
beings? What is justice for all?
THE
FOLLOWING ARE OBSERVATIONS THAT WERE MADE BY KOHLBERG FURTHER EXPLAINING HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
IN STAGES.
1. STAGE
DEVELOPMENT IS INVARIANT AND SEQUENTIAL.
One must progress through the stages in order, and one
cannot get to a higher
stage without passing through the stage immediately preceding it.
Higher stages incorporate the thinking and experience of all
lower stages of reasoning into current levels of reasoning but transcends
them for higher levels. (e.g, Stage Four reasoning will understand the
reasoning of Stages 1-3 but will reason at a higher level) A belief that a leap
into moral maturity is possible is in sharp contrast to the facts of
developmental research. Moral development is growth, and like all growth, takes
place according to a pre-determined sequence. To expect someone to grow into
high moral maturity overnight would be like expecting someone to walk before he
crawls.
2. IN
STAGE DEVELOPMENT, SUBJECTS CANNOT COMPREHEND MORAL REASONING AT A STAGE MORE
THAN ONE STAGE BEYOND THEIR OWN.
If Johnny is oriented to see good almost exclusively as that
which brings him satisfaction, how will he understand a concept of good in
which the "good" may bring him no tangible pleasure at all. The moral maxim "It is better to give than to
receive" reflects a high level of development. The child
who honestly asks you why it is better to give than to receive, does so because
he does not and cannot understand such thinking. To him,
"better" means better for him. And how can it be better for him to
give, than to get. Thus, higher stages can comprehend lower stages of reasoning
though they find it less compelling. But lower stages cannot comprehend higher
stages of reasoning.
3. IN
STAGE DEVELOPMENT INDIVIDUALS ARE COGNITIVELY ATTRACTED TO REASONING ONE LEVEL
ABOVE THEIR OWN PRESENT PREDOMINANT LEVEL.
The person has questions and problems the solutions for
which are less satisfying at his present level. Since reasoning at one stage
higher is intelligible and since it makes more sense and resolves more
difficulties, it is more attractive. For example, two brothers both want the
last piece of pie. The bigger, stronger brother will probably get it. The
little brother suggests they share it. He is thinking at level two, rather than
at level one. The solution for him is more attractive: getting some rather than
none. An adult who functions at level one consistently will end up in prison or
dead.
4. IN
STAGE DEVELOPMENT, MOVEMENT THROUGH THE STAGES IS EFFECTED WHEN COGNITIVE
DISEQUILIBRIUM IS CREATED, THAT IS, WHEN A PERSON'S COGNITIVE OUTLOOK IS NOT
ADEQUATE TO COPE WITH A GIVEN MORAL DILEMMA.
The person who is growing, will
look for more and more adequate ways of solving problems. If he has no
problems, no dilemmas, he is not likely to look for solutions. He will not grow
morally. (The Hero, prior to his calling, lives in
comfortable stagnation. Small towns are notorious for their low level
"provincial" reasoning). In the apple pie example.
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. Life crises often present opportunities for
moral development. These include loss of one's job, moving to another location,
death of a significant other, unforeseen tragedies and disasters.
5. IT IS
QUITE POSSIBLE FOR A HUMAN BEING TO BE PHYSICALLY MATURE BUT NOT
MORALLY MATURE
Development of moral reasoning is not automatic. It does not
simply occur in tandem with chronological aging. If a child is spoiled, never
having to accommodate for others needs, if he is raised in an environment where
level two thinking by others gets the job done, he may never generate enough
questions to propel him to a higher level of moral reasoning. People who live
in small towns or enclaves within larger cities and never encounter those
outside their tribal boundaries are unlikely to have cause to develop morally.
One key factor in development of moral reasoning is the regularity with which
one encounters moral dilemmas, even if only hypothetically. Kohlberg found that
the vast majority of adults never develop past conventional moral reasoning,
the bulk of them coming to rest in either Stage 3 Tribal or Stage 4 Social
Conventional stages. This is partly because the reinforcement mechanisms of the
"common sense" of everyday life provided little reason or opportunity
to confront moral dilemmas and thus one's own moral reasoning.
CRITICISMS OF KOHLBERG'S THEORY:
A. Carol
Gilligan, In a
Different Voice
- Women are socialized
differently from men.
- Concerns
for the other (nurturing, serving behaviors connected to socially dictated
female roles) prevent women from developing moral reasoning
per
Kohlberg's
model
- Gilligan proposes three level of female development
A.
FOCUS ON SELF TO EXCLUSION OF OTHER
B.
FOCUS ON OTHER TO EXCLUSION, DETRIMENT OF SELF
C.
FOCUS ON ALL WHICH INCLUDES SELF
- BUT,
these levels seem to parallel Kohlberg's pre-conventional, conventional and
post-
conventional levels
- Gilligan
also produced little data to support her critique of Kohlberg, her former
mentor at
Harvard
B. Charles
Bailey, UCF
- Kohlberg's model is
biased against conservative worldviews, values in favor of liberal
worldviews
- But
Kohlberg's model does not consider content of reasoning, only process
- Some
conservatives reason at post-conventional levels, some radicals at pre-
conventional
levels
- BUT,
ongoing studies of Kohlberg's model by James Rest at
have documented both the regularity of more liberal
worldviews found in higher
levels of moral development as well as the potential for
conservative content to be
argued at post-conventional levels