We have all developed our own non-transferable morality: values that not only separate ” triumph” in the abstract world, but also influence our behaviors, perceptions and thoughts, you could even say that it can be so internalized that it can influence our emotions One of the most important and influential models that try to explain the development of our morality is Kohlberg’s theory of moral development.
On the other hand, when we all have our own morals, the establishment of a universal has always been one of the great themes that have troubled many philosophers and thinkers, and we can observe the Kantian perspectives of morality, based on collective profit, with utilitarian perspectives, inspired by the individual good.
- Psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg wanted to move away from the content of morality and study its development in people.
- He didn’t care what was good or bad.
- It mattered how we realized this idea of good or evil.
- Studies.
- Noted that moral building increases as children grow.
- As with other skills.
- Such as language or the ability to rationalize.
In Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, the conclusion is that moral development goes through three levels: preconventional, conventional, and post-convenional, each divided into two states. It is important to understand that not everyone goes through all states and that not everyone reaches the last level of development, below we explain in detail each of the states.
This state of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development is part of the preconventional level, here we meet the person who delegates moral responsibility to an authority, the criteria of what is right or wrong are given by the rewards or punishments bestowed by authority. A child may think that not doing homework is bad because his parents punish him if he doesn’t.
This thought prevents us from assuming that there can be moral dilemmas: statements that do not have a morally clear answer, because everything is seen from a point of view, which is that of authority, that of the legitimate person. at the simplest level of moral development, where differences in interests and behavioural intentions are not take into account. In this state, all that matters are the consequences: price or punishment.
In this state of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, the idea already appears that interests vary from individual to individual, and although the criteria for deciding what is wrong or are always the consequences of acts, others are not. You’ll think that anything that gives you an advantage will be good, and what will bring you a loss or discomfort will be bad.
Sometimes, despite the selfish view of this state of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, the individual may think that it is good to meet the needs of others, but only when there is pragmatic reciprocity or guarantees. In other words, the thought that if I do something for each other, the other will have to do something for me. This state is more complex than the previous one, since the individual no longer delegates to the other the construction of his morals, even if the reasons remain simple and selfish.
In this state begins the conventional stage of moral development, as the individual begins to have increasingly complex relationships and must abandon the selfishness of the previous stage, the important thing now is to be accepted by the group and morality will revolve around that.
For the person in this state the right thing to do will be what will please or help others, here what matters are the good intentions of the behaviors and the degree to which they are approved by others. it is based on being a “good person”, loyal, respectable, collaborative and pleasant.
There is a very curious test that detects when children reach this state and consists of watching two videos:
Children who have included intent as a modulating variable in their moral judgments will say that what made it worse was the child who wanted to cause harm, even if it was less. On the other hand, children in previous states of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development say that the worst child is the one who did the most harm, whether unintentionally or not.
The individual no longer has a group vision to move on to a vision of society, no matter what the groups or people around him like, the proof of what is good or bad is based on an assessment of whether or not the behavior is maintained weakens the social order. The important thing is that society is stable and that there is no chaos.
Here there is a strong respect for law and authority, since they limit the freedom of the individual in favor of the social order for the greater good, morality goes beyond personal reasons and is linked to the current legality, which must not be disobeyed, in order to maintain a social order.
Here we enter the last level of moral development, a stage that few individuals reach throughout their lives, here morality begins to be understood as something flexible and variable, for these individuals good or evil exists because society has created a contract that establishes morality. Criteria.
The people of this state understand why the laws and, on that basis, criticize or defend them, moreover, these laws for them are not eternal and are likely to be improved. For people or children in this state, morality involves voluntary participation. in an acceptable social system, because the creation of a social contract is better for them and for others than their needs.
This state of Kohlberg’s theory of moral development is the most complex of moral development, where it is the individual who creates his own ethical principles that are complete, rational and universally applicable, these principles go beyond laws, they are abstract moral concepts that are difficult to explain. The person builds his morals according to how he believes he should exist and not as society requires it.
An important aspect of this state is the universality of the application, the individual applies the same criteria to others and himself, and treats others, or tries, as you would like to be treated, if this is not achieved, we would be at a much simpler level, similar to the state of orientation towards individualism.
Now, since we know how morality develops in people according to Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, we have the opportunity to make a personal reflection, what state of moral development are we in?