Week 12 Flashcards
Piagets stages of moral development
Map onto cognitive development
Piaget: Premoral stage
(2-4 yrs): moral sensibility not yet developed. Morality is abstract- these questions don’t mean anything beyond the physical representation (eg dolls dont transfer to people)
Piaget: Moral realism
(5-7 yrs): rules must be followed; cannot be changed. Immanent justice (breaking rules always leads to punishment- nor necessary direct). Severity of punishment= importance of rule. Heteronomous morality: others determine rules and punishment
A 6 yr old would say the person that eg broke more plates even if it was an accident- since intentions are not yet considered
Piaget: Moral relativism
(8-10 yrs and beyond): rules= arbitrary guidelines created by people to help get along (eg setblets). Autonomous morality: morality based on free will- able to consider the intention for the rules (since actual rules are arbitrary). Cognitive development allows children to progress from simple to complex moral reasoning- more cognitive flexibility)
Piaget;s view today:
-underestimates young children’s ability- preschoolers don’t believe adults have absolute authority in certain contexts- know pushing is wrong even if adults say it’s ok.
Valid: Moral reasoning progresses through stages through concurrent cognitive development- can’t reason if don’t have cognitive skills/flexibility
Kohlberg and moral reasoning
Presented with moral dilemmas in which any action leads to a negative consequence- to children, adolescents and adults to and asked to explain their thoruhgts. Developed theory describing how moral reasoning changes with age. The choice is not as important as the rationale
Kohlberg: Level 1: preconventional
-explanation does not match social conventions
Kohlberg: Level 1: preconventional
Stage 1:
Stage 1: obedience orientation
No reference to social conventions
Follow the riles. Punished if you break them
Good: drug is worth 200$ which Heinz had, and he tried to pay for it
Bad: taking drug without paying is illegal. Heinz could go to jail
Kohlberg: Level 1: preconventional
Stage 2:
Stage 2: instrumental orientation
Considered wife needs
Naively egocentric; ok to act to satisfy need
Good: wife really needs it; Heinz can pay him back later
Bad: If Heinz goes to jail, wife will be more desperate
Kohlberg: Level 2: conventional
-considers societal conventions; most adolescents and adults
Kohlberg: Level 2: conventional
Stage 3:
Stage 3: interpersonal norms
Good-boy-good-girl; act according to other people’s (society) expectations
Good: stealing is a crime, but Heinz should save his wife to be a good husband (what people expect)
Bad: stealing is a crime and Heinz’s family will be dishonored because of his actions
Kohlberg: Level 2: conventional
Stage 4:
Stage 4: Social system morality:
Reference to law and order exists for the good of everyone
Good: Heinz has a duty to save his wife (society expects from a good husband)
Bad: if we all took the law into our own hands, civilization would degeneration into chaos
Kohlberg: Level 3: postconventional
-Beyond societal conventions; some adults >25 yrs
Kohlberg: Level 3: postconventional
Stage 5
Stage 5: social contract orientation
Balance individual needs with society’s needs
Good: it’s complicated because laws must be obeyed but he needs to save his wife
Bead: while I can empathize with Heinz, we must abide by our laws
Reference system and personal needs
Kohlberg: Level 3: postconventional
Stage 6
Stage 6: Universal ethical principles orientation
Personal morality based on justice, compassion, equality (beyond laws and expectations)
Good: law conflicts with the sanctity of human life (laws aren’t perfect)
Bad: we must make sacrifices to do what is right (understand why he did it but need to make sacrifice for good of society)
Many individuals do not reach this stage- not that aren’t capable- it’s just not their first
Empirical evidence to support Kohlberg:
-Longitudinal studies show that stages are invariant (do develop through these stages); children develop through stages without skipping any (sart at 1 and go in order). May stay at stage for a long time. No evidence of regression
-Adolescent that partake in social protests tend to be more advanced in Kohlberg stages
Empirical Evidence against kohlberg:
-Variability within individual depending on contexts; shows conventional reasoning for some dilemmas but postconventional for others
-Culture specific, not universal: bias for Judeo-christian theology (upper middle class white men). SOme cultures value duty and responsibility to others over individual rights and justice→ conventional stage may be considered the most advanced in those cultures and postconventional that relies on personal moral code may be less advanced.
Cultural differences in “social” lies
-Lie to help others- needed social skill to help interpersonal relations
Eg telling your friend who is a terrible singer there is no space left (lying for the collective) or lie to the whole team and let friend join (lying for friend). In canada acros 7-11 lie more for friend vs china 7 equally like to lie for friend vs collective but as they get older more likely to lie for collective. Consistent with Kohlberg theory that children learn to consider not just individual
