Analysis Of Kohlbergs And Piaget's Morality

Introduction The purpose of this paper is to find evidence of Kohlberg 's and Piagets moral stages for adolecents. We are going to ask a teenager a series of different questions in an interview in order to find out where exactly they fit in Kohlberg’s and Piaget’s moral stages and if the fall in the one designated for teenagers, Postconventional and Autonomous morality respectivly. According to these theorist, adolescents are starting to form their own ideas of what is right and wrong and using their ideals to see what they would do in certain situations. For this experiment we asked Norma Tapia to interview her to find out where exactly she lies in Kohlberg and Piagets moral stages. She is a seventeen year old high school senior who

She has a high sense of trying to maintain order and does not believe that Heinz should not steal to drug to break the law. According to Piaget’s stages of morality she is in Heteronomous Morality. She believes that we have to obey the laws of this land since they are the absolute and that emanate from morally correct people and God himself. My Hypothesis for Kohlberg we wrong due to the fact that I believed that she only did things she thought was expected of her from her family and society as a whole which means she is in conventional not the post conventional stage.. She does not do things based on what her parents and what is expected of her because she herself believed in upholding society’s laws since she believed that they were the right thing to do. My Piaget’s Hypothesis was correct since she falls in Heteronomous morality where she seems to be heavily influenced by the authority people in her life to base her morality stance. Norma did not fall under the normal teenager stages for morality in america for both Piaget and Kohlberg. She was not in autonomous morality where she did what she herself believed was right according to Piaget and she was not in postconventional where she thought of her own standered of