More handpicked essays just for you.
Kohlberg's stages of moral development essays
Parenting styles and developmental psychology
Kohlberg's stages of moral development essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Carol Gilligan is one of the first to address gender differences in psychology. She argued that the sexes think differently, notably when dealing with moral problems.Her most popular addition to modern psychology was her rework of Lawrence Kohlberg 's theory of moral development. Gilligan challenged that differences were based on social influences and gender attitude, this often disesteemed women 's way of thinking. With her theories of female moral development and decision-making, she focused on studies in both children and college students. While there has been criticism of her works, Carol Gilligan has changed the modern psychology with her feminist views. She has paved the women in the field and the research of psychology Daughter of William E. Friedman, a lawyer and Mabel Friedman, a teacher, Carol Gilligan was born on November 28, 1936, in New York City. She attended Swarthmore College, graduating summa cum …show more content…
Similar to Kohlberg 's theory and stages of moral development, Gilligan has three major stages. In the Pre-conventional morality stage self interest and an individuals survival are key. Children typically show selfishness and no responsibility. This stage can also be compared to Freud 's Oral Stage which highlighted the infants need for attention and inability to express what they needed. With transition into the Conventional stage an individual becomes more responsible and learns selflessness. The Conventional stages primary goal is learning to care for others and not the self. An example of this may be a mother or care giver. The Post-conventional stage transition includes the idea of taking responsibility and gaining control of their own lives. Caring for others is a major key of this stage of moral development and some people never make it to this
Carol Tavris was born in 1944 and received her Ph.D. in Social Psychology from the University of Michigan. She has published mental health issues and taught courses in psychology. Her articles have been published in magazines like Science Digest, Harpers, Redbook, and the New York Times. She has also published Anger: the Misunderstood Emotion, and The Mismeasure of Woman. For the reason Tavris has a Ph.D. in Social Psychology her intelligence shows through her work. Through this article, one can tell she is very dedicated and interested in her work. Tavris writes to any audience, however, the impact from the article will only be possessed in the persons who have the traits of the people she is writing about. This article is a full attack on human nature and people may feel a little judged after reading it. This is exactly what Tavris wants; she wants people to take a look at their own lives. She expects the audience to change the way they act...
The primary issue that was addressed in the Journal article, “Moral Reasoning of MSW Social Workers and the Influence of Education” written by Laura Kaplan, was that social workers make critical decisions on a daily basis that effect others. They influence their clients’ lives through giving timely and appropriate funding to them and their families, through deciding should a family stay together or should they have a better life with another family, or connecting the client with appropriate resources that can enhance their lives. The article addresses data from an array of students from various universities. The researcher posed these questions; “Would social workers use moral reasoning (what is right and what is wrong) more prevalent if it was taught through an individual class during your MSW graduate studies, or if you obtain any other undergraduate degree, or if the ethic course was integrated in the curriculum?”
Mary Whiton Calkins was the first woman to be elected as president of the American Psychological Association in 1905. The majority of her adult life was dedicated to her work in the development of “psychology of selves.” She was very passionate about the relatively ‘new’ world of psychology and was highly active in the field of philosophy. Mary Whiton Calkins was not deterred in her ambitions because she was a woman, instead she used her struggles to gain a voice and to speak out against the oppression of women during the 1920’s.
Sally’s prescriptive moral theory combines two separate and unrelated principles to create an all-encompassing moral theory to be followed by moral agents at all times. The first is rooted in consequentialism and is as follows: 1. Moral agents should cause moral pain or suffering only when the pain or suffering is justified by a moral consideration that is more important than the pain or suffering caused. The second is an autonomous theory, where other’s autonomy must be respected, it is 2. Moral agents should respect the autonomy of moral agents. This requires always taking into account the rational goals of moral agents when making decisions that may affect them. The more important the goals are to the agents, the greater the importance of not obstructing them. Since Sally’s theory has two separate principles, she accounts for the possibility that they will overlap. To do so, she includes an option on how to resolve the conflicts. According to the theory, if the principles lead to conflicting actions, then moral agents should resolve the conflict on a case-by-case basis by deciding which principle should be followed given the proposed actions and circumstances.
Williams, Juanita H.; Psychology of Women NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 1987 Works Cited American Psychoanalytic Association. (Online). Available http://www.APSAA.com Appignanesi, Richard.
(4) Gilligan. C, (1982). In a different voice, psychological theory and women's development. Harward University Press, Cambridge, MA.
James Rachels expresses his thoughts on what a satisfactory moral theory would be like. Rachels says a “satisfactory theory would be realistic about where human beings fit in the grand scheme of things” (Rachels, 173). Even though there is an existing theory on how humans came into this world there is not enough evidence to prove the theory to be correct. In addition to his belief of knowing how our existence came into play, he also has a view on the way we treat people and the consequences of our actions. My idea of a satisfactory moral theory would be treating people the way we wish to be treated, thinking of what results from our doings, as well as living according to the best plan.
Sigmund Freud believed that society has instilled morality upon us, exterminating our individualism. This morality eventually leads to neurosis, in which it becomes more difficult for us to maintain ourselves through the stress of society’s morality. I disagree with Freud, because I believe that morality isn’t forced on us externally, but internally through reason. As humans developed reason, we also developed a sense of morality through that reason. Freud believes that humans should do what they want because we shouldn’t restrict ourselves on society 's behalf. However, I believe that restriction is an essential part of our character, and allows humanity to advance further than any other race. Morality, like reason, keeps us safe from the
Lawrence Kohlberg conducted research on the moral development of children. He wanted to understand how they develop a sense of right or wrong and how justice is served. Kohlberg used surveys in which he included moral dilemmas where he asked the subjects to evaluate a moral conflict. Through his studies, Kohlberg observed that moral growth and development precedes through stages such as those of Piaget’s stages of cognitive development. He theorized that moral growth begins at the beginning of life and continues until the day one dies. He believed that people proceed through each stage of moral development consecutively without skipping or going back to a previous stage. The stages of thought processing, implying qualitatively different modes of thinking and of problem solving are included in the three levels of pre-conventional, conventional and post conventional development. (2)
THE SUBJECTIVITY OF MORALITY The problem of moral subjectivity is one that is being discussed by many philosophers around the world. It would seem intuitive to the layman that morality should be subjective, based on what an individual values. Sam Harris, however, would disagree. In his book, The Moral Landscape, Harris argues that morality is, in fact, objective in nature.
The moral development of children can depend on many factors. Parenting and upbringing of the child, their environment, social environment, gender, and race are all aspects that can contribute to how a child develops their moral standards and expectations. Many psychologists have tried for several years to develop a theory of how morality is developed. One in particular is Lawrence Kohlberg (1958). His moral development theory is based on the cognitive development of children and it is thought that moral development proceeds and changes as cognitive development occurs (Arnett, 2012).
Shields, S. 1975. Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women. American Psychologist, 30(7) (1935-990X), pp. 739-754. Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.hope.ac.uk/ehost/detail?sid=3fc226ef-3f32-4b57-9f0c-89acb4bcade1%40sessionmgr111&vid=4&hid=4101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=pdh&AN=1975-29522-001 [Accessed: 10th Jan 2014].
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: the nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
As human beings grow, we somehow develop the ability to assess what is right or wrong, called Stages of the Ethics of Care. To clarify that, we develop morality and individual behavior used to evaluate situations and behavior as good or bad. Gilligan found that morality develops by looking at much more than justice.
Weisstein, N. (1993). Psychology constructs the female; or, The fantasy life of the male psychologist (with some attention to the fantasies of his friends, the male biologist and the male anthropologist). Feminism & Psychology, 3(2), 195-210.