STRUCTURALISM: MORAL DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: WHERE DOES NOVELTY COME FROM? HOW DOES A CHILD DEVELOP A SYSTEM OF MORALS?

STRUCTURALISM: MORAL DEVELOPMENT

QUESTION: WHERE DOES NOVELTY COME FROM?

HOW DOES A CHILD DEVELOP A SYSTEM OF MORALS?

THREE METAPHORS FOR ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION

CHILD BORN GOOD ROUSSEAU ROLE OF SOCIETY: DON’T CORRUPT

CHILD BORN EVIL ORIGINAL SIN FREUD ROLE OF SOCIETY: PUT CONTROLS ON CHILD

CHILD BORN NEUTRAL SKINNER ROLE OF SOCIETY: PROVIDE POSITIVE

ENVIRONMENT THAT GETS INTERNALIZED

KOHLBERG

STRUCTURALIST APPROACH TO MORAL DEVELOPMENT

WHAT ARE THE BASIC TENETS OF THE STRUCTURALIS APPROACH?


UNIVERSAL DEVELOPMENT INVARIANT SEQUENCE OF

STRUCTURES QUALITATIVE DIFFERENCES

BETWEEN STRUCTURES


PROBLEM WITH UNIVERSAL MORAL DEVELOPMENT?

ENORMOUS DIVERSITY WHERE IS UNIVERSALITY?


KOHLBERG ARGUES THAT THERE ARE 25 UNIVERSAL ASPECTS TO MORAL JUDGMENTS COMMON TO ALL CULTURES

PROPERTY RIGHTS PUNISHMENT CONSIDERING MOTIVES IN JUDGING ACTIONS CONSIDERING CONSEQUENCES IN JUDGING ACTIONS CONTRACT

METHODOLOGY

GIVE A PERSON A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION IN STORY FORM STORY CONTAINS A MORAL DILEMMA

ASK THE PERSON TO JUDGE ANOTHER’S ACTIONS (JUDGMENT)

ASK THE PERSON TO JUSTIFY HIS/HER JUDGMENT WHY DO YOU THINK …?

METHODOLOGY

PEOPLE’S DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE IS DETERMINED BY THEIR JUSTIFICATIONS

EXAMPLE OF METHODOLOGY

HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION:

In Europe, a woman was near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The druggist was charging $2,000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could get together about half of what it cost.


HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION (continued)

He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay it later. But the druggist said, “no.” The husband got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.


MORAL DILEMMA: STEALING VERSUS SAVING A LIFE

JUDGMENT: SHOULD THE HUSBAND HAVE STOLEN?

JUSTIFICATION: WHY DO YOU THINK HE SHOULD HAVE/SHOULD NOT HAVE STOLEN?


IF KOHLBERG BASED HIS STAGE ANALYSIS ON JUDGMENTS, THERE WOULD BE TWO STAGES YES STEAL NO STEALING

KOHLBERG BASED STAGE ANALYSIS ON PEOPLE’S JUSTIFICATIONS PEOPLE AT DIFFERENT STAGES OF MORAL

DEVELOPMENT COULD GIVE THE SAME JUDGMENT BUT JUSTIFY IT WITH DIFFERENT LEVEL JUSTIFICATIONS

LEVELS AND STAGES OF MORAL REASONING

THREE LEVELS AND SIX STAGES

LEVEL 1 STAGE 1 STAGE 2



LEVELS AND STAGES OF MORAL REASONING: STAGE 1

LEVEL 1: MORAL VALUE RESIDES IN EXTERNAL EVENTS OR PHYSICAL NEEDS RATHER THAN IN PEOPLE AND STANDARDS

STAGE 1: ORIENTATION TO OBEDIENCE AND PUNISHMENT

DEFERENCE TO SUPERIOR POWER OR PRESTIGE AVOID TROUBLE SO AS NOT TO BE IN A POSITION

WHERE YOU CAN BE PUNISHED RESPONSIBILITY IN OBJECTIVE SITUATION (RESULTS)

NOT IN SUBJECTIVE INTENTIONS


TYPICAL STAGE 1 JUSTIFICATIONS, RELATING TO ACTION MOTIVATED BY AVOIDANCE OF PUNISHMENT

PRO: If you let your wife die, you will get into trouble. You’ll be blamed for not spending your money to save her and there will be an investigation of you and the druggist for your wife’s death.

CON: You should not steal the drug because you’ll be caught and sent to jail if you do. If you do get away, your conscience would bother you thinking how the police would catch you at any minute.


STAGE 2: NAIVELY EGOISTIC ORIENTATION

CORRECT ACTION TO TAKE IS ONE THAT SERVES ONE’S NEEDS AND OCCASIONALLY OTHERS’

SOME AWARENESS OF RELATIVITY OF VALUES EACH PERSON’S NEEDS OTHERS’ PERSPECTIVES

QUASI-EGALITARIANISM AND ORIENTATION TO EXCHANGE AND RECIPROCITY


TYPICAL STAGE 2 JUSTIFICATIONS, RELATING TO ACTION MOTIVATED BY DESIRE FOR REWARD OR BENEFIT. POSSIBLE GUILT REACTIONS ARE IGNORED AND PUNISHMENT IS VIEWED IN A PRAGMATIC MANNER. DIFFERENTIATES OWN FEAR, PLEASURE, OR PAIN FROM PUNISHMENT-CONSEQUENCES

PRO: If you do happen to get caught you could give the drug back and you wouldn’t get much of a sentence. It wouldn’t bother you much to serve a little jail term if you have your wife when you get out.

CON: He may not get much of a jail term if steals the drug, but his wife will probably die before he gets out so it won’t do him much good. If his wife dies, he shouldn’t blame himself. It wasn’t his fault that she has cancer.


LEVEL 2 MORAL VALUES RESIDING IN

PERFORMANCE OF GOOD AND RIGHT ROLES MAINTAINING THE CONVENTIONAL ORDER MAINTAINING EXPECTANCIES OF OTHERS

STAGE 3: GOOD BOY ORIENTATION ORIENTATION TO APPROVAL AND PLEASING AND

HELPING OTHERS CONFORMITY TO STEREOTYPICAL IMAGES OF THE

MAJORITY JUDGMENTS MADE ACCORDING TO INTENTIONS


TYPICAL JUSTIFICATION OF STAGE 3 INDIVIDUALS WHERE ACTION IS MOTIVATED BY DISAPPROVAL OF OTHERS, ACTUAL OR HYPOTHETICAL (GUILT)

THERE IS A DIFFERENTIATION OF DISAPPROVAL FROM PUNISHMENT, FEAR, OR PAIN


PRO: Nobody will think you’re bad if you steal the drug but your family will think you’re an inhuman husband if you don’t. If you let your wife die, you’ll never be able to look anybody in the face again.

CON: It isn’t just the druggist who will think you are a criminal, everyone else will, too. After you steal it, you’ll feel bad thinking about how you’ve brought dishonor on your family and yourself. You won’t be able to face anyone again.


STAGE 4: AUTHORITY AND SOCIAL ORDER MAINTAINING ORIENTATION

ORIENTATION TO DOING ONE’S DUTY AND TO SHOW RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY

MAINTAINING THE SOCIAL ORDER FOR ITS OWN SAKE

REGARD FOR EARNED EXPECTATIONS OF OTHERS


TYPICAL JUSTIFICATIONS FOR STAGE 4, WHERE ACTION IS MOTIVATED BY

ANTICIPATION OF DISHONOR INSTITUTIONAL BLAME FOR FAILURE OF DUTY

GUILT OVER CONCRETE HARM DONE TO OTHERS

DIFFERENTIATES FORMAL DISHONOR FROM INFORMAL DISAPPROVAL

DIFFERENTIATES GUILT FOR BAD CONSEQUENCES FROM DISAPPROVAL


PRO: If you have any sense of honor, you won’t let your wife die because you’re afraid to do the only thing that will save her. You’ll always feel guilty that you caused her death if you don’t do your duty to her.

CON: You’re desperate and you may not know you’re doing wrong when you steal the drug. But you’ll know you did wrong after you’re punished and sent to jail. You’ll always feel guilty for your dishonesty and lawbreaking

LEVEL 3

LEVEL 3 HAS MORAL VALUES RESIDING IN CONFORMITY BY THE SELF TO SHARED OR SHAREABLE STANDARDS, RIGHTS, OR DUTIES

LEVELS AND STAGES OFMORAL REASONING: STAGE 5

STAGE 5: CONTRACTUAL, LEGALISTIC ORIENTATION RECOGNITION OF ARBITRARY ELEMENT OR

STARTING POINT IN RULES OR EXPECTATIONS FOR THE SAKE OF AGREEMENT

DUTY DEFINED IN TERMS OF CONTRACT GENERAL AVOIDANCE OF THE WILL OR RIGHTS

OF OTHERS MAJORITY WILL AND WELFARE IS AIMED

TOWARDS

STAGE 5 JUSTIFICATIONS

PRO: The law wasn’t set up for these circumstances. Taking the drug in this situation isn’t really right, but it’s justified to do it.

CON: You can’t completely blame someone for stealing but extreme circumstances don’t really justify taking the law in your own hands. You can’t have everyone stealing whenever they get desperate. The end may be good, but the ends don’t justify the means.


CONSCIENCE OR PRINCIPLE ORIENTATION

ORIENTATION NOT ONLY TO ACTUAL SOCIAL RULES BUT TO PRINCIPLES OF CHOICE INVOLVING APPEAL TO LOGICAL UNIVERSALITY AND CONSISTENCY

ORIENTATION TO CONSCIENCE AS A DIRECTING AGENT

DIRECTING AGENT MUTUAL RESPECT AND TRUST

STAGE 6 JUSTIFICATIONS

PRO: This is a situation which forces him to choose between stealing and letting his wife die. In a situation where the choice must be made, it is morally right to steal. He has to act in terms if the principle of preserving and respecting life.

CON: Heinz is faced with the decision of whether to consider the other people who need the drug just as badly as his wife. Heinz ought to act not according to his particular feelings toward his wife, but considering the value of all the loves involved.

PROGRESSION BETWEEN LEVELS

LEVEL 1 PEOPLE ATTEND TO THEMSELVES

LEVEL 2 PEOPLE ATTEND TO OTHERS AND WHAT OTHERS THINK OF THEM

LEVEL 3 PEOPLE ATTEND TO SOCIETY’S STANDARDS AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THEM AND TO THEIR OWN PRINCIPLES

MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPMENT

WHAT DOES KOHLBERG, A STRUCTURALIST, CLAIM ABOUT THE MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPMENT?

MECHANISMS OF DEVELOPMENT

DISEQULIBRIUM

ADAPTATIONAL

ORGANIZATIONAL

RELATIONS BETWEEN PIAGET AND KOHLBERG

PIAGET POSITS COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENTAL STRUCTURES ABOUT LOGICO-MATHEMATICAL AND PHYSICAL DOMAINS

KOHLBERG POSITS COGNITIVE STRUCTURES ABOUT MORAL REASONING


THE DOMAINS OF LOGICO-MATHMATICAL AND PHYSICAL REASONING DEAL WITH THE WORLD OF THE MIND AND OBJECTS

THE DOMAIN OF MORAL REASONING DEALS WITH INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS


KOHLBERG BELIEVED THAT AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT THAT ALSO SEPARATES IT FROM THE PHYSICAL AND MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES IS:

EMPATHY AND INDENTIFICATION

THE ABILITY TO TAKE ANOTHER’S POINT OF VIEW AND TO FEEL AS IF YOU WERE THAT PERSON


Langer, Kuhn, and Hahn (1969)

TESTED CHILDREN AT DIFFERENT AGES

PIAGETIAN TASKS KOHLBERG TASKS


FOUND THAT PIAGETIAN STAGES ARE A NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT CONDITION FOR KOHLBERG’S STAGES

EXAMPLE:

A STAGE 5 PERSON IN KOHLBERG’S SYSTEM “MUST BE” IN PIAGET’S FORMAL OPERATIONS STAGE BUT

A FORMAL OPERATIONS STAGE PERSON COULD BE IN ANY OF KOHLBERG’S STAGES

TURIEL

THOUGHT THAT KOHLBERG MERGED THE MORAL DOMAIN AND SOCIAL CONVENTIONS

TURIEL IS A STRUCTURALIST WHO WORKED ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL CONVENTIONS

TURIEL

THREE KINDS OF SOCIAL ACTION (MAX WEBER)

CUSTOM A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR

EATING BREAKFAST FOOD IN THE MORNING

TURIEL

CONVENTION

A PART OF CUSTOM THAT IS CONSIDERED BINDING

REGULATED BY SANCTIONS OF DISAPPROVAL

MODES OF DRESS FORMS OF GREETING

TURIEL

ETHICAL

VALIDLY ESTABLISHED SYSTEM

Documents

STRUCTURALISM: MORAL DEVELOPMENT QUESTION: WHERE DOES NOVELTY COME FROM? HOW DOES A CHILD DEVELOP A SYSTEM OF MORALS?