Morality, as stated in the
dictionary is a good moral conduct; it is a kind of medieval drama, containing
a moral lesson. It is one of the most significant aspect of human life, wherein
psychologist traditionally avoided studying it especially value judgement are
involved because of the degree of difficulty in solving it. But Lawrence
Kohlberg's interest in Moral Development didn't hinder him to study about it.
He was fascinated by Piaget's studies of moral reasoning development and
decided to expand Piaget's theory. He used different dilemmas contained in
short story and asks children and adults to solve it. Most popular dilemma is
Heinz' story.
In Kolberg's theory of moral
development contains three levels and in each level contain 2 stages. In level
1, Pre-conventional Morality- this typical of children up to age 9. It is
called pre-conventional because the children do not really understand the
conventions or rules of society. Under the first level are the two stages which
is: Obedience and punishment and Individualism and exchange. The next level is
the Conventional Morality-this level, the 9 yrs-20 yrs old adapt to the
convention of society because they are rules to be obeyed. Under this level are
the two stages which is the Interpersonal relationship and the Authority and
social order. The last level is the Post conventional Morality- it is from 20
yrs old and above. It is called post conventional because the conventions of
the society are understood as well as he moral principles behind them. Under
the last level is the Social contract and the Universal principle.
The levels and stages of Kohlberg's
theory can understand better with the use of Heinz Dilemma:
In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer.
There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of
radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was
expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost
him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of
the drug.
The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the
money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it
cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it
cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the
drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and
broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband
have done that?
Kohlberg was not interested in the
answer to the question what Heinz should do but it interested him about the
justification the participants offer. We used example, answers given by our
Child and Adolescent Psychology Professor. Below are example of possible
arguments that belong to the six stages. It is possible that a participant
reaches a completely different conclusion using the same stage of reasoning. It
is important to keep in mind that the arguments are only examples.
- STAGE 1 (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will be put in jail.
- STAGE 2 (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.
- STAGE 3 (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it.
- STAGE 4 (law and order): Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing.
- STAGE 5 (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to live, regardless of the law.
- STAGE 6 (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the prop. rights of another person.
According to the given answers, the
participants have different judgement about Heinz dilemma, it may be based on
what they believe is right and on their principle. We all have the right to
live, the rights to be with the one we love and the rights on law. No one wants
to disobey the law because the law and order are made for the people to have
equal rights that we can defend on but
sometimes it is our principle that hinders to obey the rules. And like Heinz,
it is his wife that needs the medicine and life is involved in this dilemma so
we can't blame him of what he did. In the story, the druggist are like corrupts
nowadays. They are only thinking of themselves not considering the others.
While most of the Filipinos are dying in hunger most of them squander their
money for luxurious things. We have laws to oblige but the poor systems lead
most of the Filipinos to wrong. How can they have their rights if the others
bind the truth? From the start there is no equal justice between the rich and
poor. How can they have justice and have the help of the authority if they are
the one who takes it away from them? Is it possible for the Filipino to
progress without discipline? If only most of us have morality in their mind and
in their act, there will be no oppressed and oppressant. The Kohlberg theory of
moral development shows how an individual justify or reasons out how morality
should takes place.
Sources:
