More handpicked essays just for you.
Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development
Criticism of Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development
Criticism of Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are many theories associated with developmental psychology, which studies the scientific process and cause of human development over the course of our lives. Developmental psychologists study a wide range of theoretical areas, such as biological, social, emotional, and cognitive processes (McLeod, S. A., 2012). Two theories of developmental psychology that I will be discussing will be the theory of moral development by Lawrence Kohlberg, and Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development.
According to Kohlberg, individuals progress through a series of stages in the evolution of their sense of justice and in the kind of reasoning that they utilize to make moral judgments (Feldman, R., 2013, p. 426). His work modified and expanded from Jean Piaget’s previous work to form a theory of cognitive development that explained how pre-adolescent children develop moral reasoning (Cherry, K., 2014, October 12). Kohlberg’s theory of moral development focuses on children’s ability to distinguish right from wrong based on their perception. His theory claims that individuals progress through the levels morality in a fixed order and
…show more content…
The obedience and punishment orientation is the earliest stage of moral development and is also very common in young children; however, adults are also capable of expressing this stage of reasoning. In this stage, young children perceive rules to be fixed and absolute and that obeying them is a necessary means to avoid punishment (McLeod, S.A., 2013). The individualism and exchange orientation is the second stage of pre-conventional morality. At this stage, children take into account individual points of view and judge their actions based on how they serve individual needs (Cherry, K., 2014, October
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development shows the different stages of morality as people change as they get older (McLeod). He had three levels which broke down his stages
moral development. In these stages, Kohlberg concentrates on the reasons why people act the way they do; not the way they think about their actions or what action they take, but the reasoning behind their actions.
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development is three levels consisting of two stages in each. Kohlberg’s Theory explains how a human’s mind morally develops. Level one is typically common in younger children. The two stages in level one are pre-conventional stages. Stage one is obedience and punishment driven; one will judge an action by the consequences given. Stage two is out of self interest. Level two is mostly common in teenagers. The stages in this level
They are able of solving problems using reasoning and logic. They can organize facts and events in mature fashion and figure out possible moves and their outcomes. They can also deal with proportions and analogies and reflect on their own thinking. One of the major themes of development is moral development. The most influential research on development was done by Lawrence Kohlberg. It was influenced by Piaget’s cognitive developmental approach. Kohlberg divided Moral development into 6 stages. The first stage is called Preconventional level. During this stage individuals recognize labels of “good” and “bad”, right and wrong, but do not interpret these labels in terms of social standards. The next stage is called Conventional level. During this level individuals make moral judgments based on expectations, whether the expectations are coming from family or society. This level of morality is shown mainly by adolescents and adults. The next level is the post conventional level. During this stage individuals accept and stand by society’s rules and laws but tend to view them in terms of the underlying principles. Individuals may also follow personal ethical principles. This is where they take into account human rights or life and
The biological theory refers to the focus of genetic factors that assist the child in adjusting to their environment. The theory highlights the importance of maturation of children’s bodies and their motor skills. The restriction of the biological theory however, is that it discounts the impact of children’s experiences. Behaviorism theory concentrates on children’s behavioral and emotional responses to changes in the environment. The argument against behaviorism is that it focuses on children’s visible behavior and ignores their thought process. The social learning theory interprets children’s beliefs and goals as affecting their behavior by what they learn when they observe others. In the psychodynamic theory, emphasis is on the interaction between internal conflict, early childhood experiences and the environment. Theorists focus on the personality development and how these early experiences play a role later in life. In cognitive-development theories, the concentration is on how the thinking process changes over time. Although it promotes adults to recognize children as curious minds trying to make sense of their environment, the theories lack clear stages that a child’s thought process goes through. Cognitive process theories similarly, also focus on thought process but more so on how people decipher information they see and hear. Sociocultural theories emphasize the affect of social
One of the most persistently asked and perpetually unanswered questions in psychology is the question of morality. What is it, how does it develop, and where does it come from? A basic definition of morality is “beliefs about what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior” (Merriam-Webster). Based on the definition, the question then becomes even more complicated; How do people decide what is right and what is wrong? Research has examined this from many different angles, and two distinct schools of thought have emerged. One centers on the Lockian idea of children as blank slates who must be taught the difference between right and wrong and what it means to be moral, while the other espouses a more Chomskian perspective of a preset system of basic rules and guidelines that needs only to be activated. So what does this mean for humans and humanity? Are we born tabula rasa or are we born with an innate sense of good and evil? For those researching this topic, the question then becomes how to most effectively theorize, experiment and interpret human morality.
For this assignment I have chosen Jean Piaget’s cognitive development theory and Erik Erikson’s psychosocial development theory.
It is inevitable, children and adults constantly evolve and the evolution of this population requires an ongoing scientific investigation (Eberbach & Crowley, 2009). The scientific investigation of the evolution of children and adults is described as developmental psychology. Developmental psychologists establish theories of developmental trajectories, interpersonal, intrapersonal, emotional, and cognitive processing. Moreover, developmental psychologists endeavor to provide descriptive and expository research to enhance client and professional development (Machery, 2011).
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 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).
Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: the nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Moral development “focuses on the emergence, change, and understanding of morality from infancy through adulthood. In the field of moral development, morality is defined as principles for how individuals ought to treat one another, with respect to justice, others ' welfare, and rights.” (Citation) Essential to the success of every society is moral development. Lawrence Kohlberg cultivated and advanced the framework of Piaget’s life’s work in the area of moral development. He theorized that we formulate ways of thinking through our experiences. Such experiences included but weren’t limited to an understanding of the moral concepts of human welfare, rights, equality and justice. Through his research Kohlberg ascertained that we go through various
Many researchers have written about child development, but none are quite as well known as Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg. Jean Piaget’s cognitive development theory and Lawrence Kohlberg’s moral development theory have been essential for researchers to gain a better understanding of child development. While these theories are unique in explaining different types of child development, they have many similarities and differences as well.
Part One:The criticisms of Kohlberg's moral development stages seem to center around three major points, his research methods, the "regression" of stage four, and finally his goals.The first criticism that I would like to address is that of his research methods. Kohlberg is often criticized for not only his subject selection, but also the methods by which he tries to extricate data from those subjects. His initial study consisted of school boys from a private institution in Chicago. The problem with this is fairly obvious, that this does not represent a significant portion of the population to allow for generalized conclusions. In other words, how can we test some boys from Chicago and ascertain that this is how all people develop worldwide?I believe that the answer to this criticism comes from the theory that it relates to.
For years, the matter of morality has been a widespread topic of discussion, debating whether it is a product of our chemical composition or our free will. Before I get started, I will provide you with what I believe morality exactly is. Ethics is a “code of conduct,” much like a University’s student handbook, but applied to the expected morality of a larger group or society. Morals are how individuals choose to interpret and follow such code. Just as a student may not always act in complete obedience with the student handbook, humans also deviate from their ethical codes of conduct. Therefore, morals are the set of a person’s specific values and opinions formed by their interpretation of their society’s code of ethics. With this version of the meaning of morality, I believe that individual free-will and the neurological hardwiring in which we are born with both significantly influence the development of our mature human morality due to a variety of factors including: human brain development, differences in our upbringing and education, which give rise to disparities in matters such as what is considered right or wrong, decision-making processes, and our ultimate behavioral choices, and lastly, because morality cannot exist if based solely on human nature, it must also involve our own self-determination. My position that morality is not the product of one side of the debate or the other, but rather arises through the integration of both components, allows for a complete demonstration of morality in its entirety. In this system, the ambiguities present in the one-sided arguments are removed, making it easy to link any individual’s action to their personal moral accountability.