Kohlber's Moral Development Case Study

The first two stages of Kohlber’s moral development fall under “Preconventional Morality” which is the first level (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). These stages focus on children from ages one to ten (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). I basically agree with the concept of these stages because young children are clearly responsive to learning right and wrong through the use of some form of punishment (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). However, these two initial stages (punishment and obedience orientation & instrumental purpose and exchange orientation) must have competent authority figures, which are normally going to be the parents for children those ages. In the absence of competent authority figures, which is realism for many children, I believe these two

This is where children approximately age 10 begin to understand that right and wrong deals with conforming to society (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). At stage 3, (interpersonal expectations and conformity) kids 10-16 years old learn to be nice in order to please the authority figures in their daily lives (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). Stage 4 (Law and order / Social system maintenance) is where the kids ages 16 to mid 20’s begin to understand the need for social order and to respect the system of justice (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). I agree with these stages as long as the first two stages were implemented. I believe kids at the respective ages have the ability to understand the importance of doing morally right and accepting the rules of society. Kohlber’s work showed this 4th stage to be the last stage of a natural process of learning and most never need go beyond to stages 5 & 6 (Williams & Arrigo,

Approximately 20-25% of people in their mid 20’s reach stage 5 (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). This stage (Social contract / legalism) is where the courage to question if a law or rule is just for society well being (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). An extremely few amount of folks in their middle ages will achieve stage 6 (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). This stage is called “Universal ethical principles” and considered the highest level of moral reasoning (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). The folks believe that the institutionalized sets of laws in society are inferior to their own set of ethics, beliefs, and reasoning (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). I agree with these final stages on moral development and one example helped me to understand and come to that conclusion. The authors pointed out how some people would not participate in going to war after being drafted because it conflicts with their moral beliefs (Williams & Arrigo, 2012). This was evident during the conflict in Vietnam and those who refused were also willing to accept the consequences for their actions because of their deep-rooted belief in killing people was morally