PHILO 1O1

Standards and Dilemmas

➢ The term “right” is abstract .
➢ The frame of reference include – etiquette, law, economics religion, self- interest,
fascism,( belief in a natural social hierarchy by a dictatorial leader) marxism,(theory and
practice of communism), sexism (member of one sex are less able), and racism,
(discrimination by an individual or a person).
➢ Evaluating and dieting conduct, different frames of reference have emerged that contain
criteria for appraising conduct as right and wrong in different areas.
➢ Such prescriptions can do conflict with laws that prohibit discrimination.
➢ Morally right and wrong clearly often conflicts with what is right and wrong from other
perspectives.
Differences between Moral and Non-moral Standards
Morality – the standards that an individual or a group has about what is right and wrong, or
good and evil.
Morality – is an informal public system applying to all rational persons, governing behavior that
affects others, and has the lessening of evil or harm as its goal.
Morality is a complex of concepts and philosophical beliefs which an individual determines
whether his or her actions are right and wrong.
“Conformity to such codification is called morality.”
“Moral” may refer to as general summary of a moral principle.
1. Moral standards refer to the norms which we have about the types of actions which we
believe to be morally acceptable.
➢ Moral standards deal with matters which can either seriously harm or seriously benefit
human beings.
➢ Moral standards equated to moral values and moral principles.
➢ Rules are a stabilizing force that enhances the survivability of individuals, families, and
nations.
➢ It is important to remember that the moral development of young people depends on
the ethical capacities of the adults who interact with them on a daily basis- especially
parents, teachers,and adults in the community.
➢ Every young person needs both a role model to inspire them and environment that
holds up good values.
 2. Non- moral standards refer to rules or standards that are unrelated to moral or ethical
considerations. Either these standards are not necessarily linked to morality or lack of
ethical sense.
Examples of non-moral standards- fashion standards, rules in games, and various house
rules.
➢ Laws and ordinances – are non-moral principles, though they can be ethically relevant
depending on some factors and contexts.
➢ Etiquette -refers to norms of correct conduct in polite society or to any special code of
social behavior courtesy.
➢ The rules of etiquette are prescriptions for social behavior or courtesy. If you violate
them, you are likely to be considered ill-mannered, impolite, or uncivilized, but not
necessarily immoral.
➢ “That if you want to fit in, get along with others and must observe the common rules of
politeness or etiquette.”
➢ Statutes are laws enacted by legislative bodies. The law that prohibits theft is a statute.
“People sometimes confuse legality and morality, - breaking the law is not always or necessarily
immoral. The legality of an action does not guarantee that it is morally right.
Not all the Rules of a professional code are purely moral in character, and even when they are,
the fact that a rule is officially enshrined as part of the code of profession does not guarantee
that it is a sound moral principle.
HOW MORAL STANDARDS Formed?
➢ It is influenced by the following:
1. moral principles we accept as part of our up bringing,
2. values passed on to us through heritage and legacy,
3. the religious values that we have inherited from childhood,
4. the values that were showcased during the period of our education,
5. the behavior patterns of those who are around us,
6. the implicit standards of our culture, and our experiences.
Characteristics of Moral Standard
1. Moral standards involve serious wrongs or significant benefits- matters which seriously
impact, that is, injure or benefit human beings.

Ex. Violating some basketball rules – may matter in basketball games but does not
necessarily affect one’s life or well-being.
2. Moral standards ought to be preferred to other values, “states that a person has the
moral obligation to do something, then he is supposed to do that even if it conflicts with
other non-moral standards and even with self- interest.
2.1. when a particular law becomes seriously immoral, it may be people’s moral duty to
exercise civil disobedience or it may be prudent to lie to save one’s dignity.
2.2. when a particular law becomes seriously immoral, it may be people’s moral duty to
exercise civil disobedience.
3. Moral standards are not established by authority figures or somebody in authority
has publish them, moral standards cannot be changed nor nullified by a particular
authoritative body. Its validity lies on the soundness or adequacy of the reasons that are
considered to support and justify them. Example : Catholic church.
4. Moral standards have the trait of universalizability. It means that everyone must live
up to mora standards. Example: the Golden Rule, “ Do unto others what you would them
do unto you”
Universalizability - is an extension of the principle of consistency.” Consistency about
one’s value judgements.
5. Moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Moral standards do not
evaluate standards based on the interests of a certain person or group but one goes
beyond personal interests.
Impartiality in morality requires that we give equal and/or adequate considerations to
the interests of all concerned parties.
6. Moral standards are associated with special emotions and vocabulary.
Prescriptively indicates the practical nature of moral standards such as, “Do not kill”
Do no harm and love your neighbor”
 MORAL DILEMMAS
A moral dilemma is also called an ethical dilemma and refers to a situation where an individual needs to
make a choice but faces a conflicting situation between one or more alternatives. Ideally, the choice they
make presents a dilemma because every available option may be wrong or incorrect.

Why is moral dilemma important?

Moral dilemmas are helpful for individuals to interrogate who they really are as individuals. It helps them
in making choices that they consider correct even when others deem them as incorrect.

What are some good moral dilemmas?

Dilemmas related to family, friends and issues of close interest to an individual present situations where
a dilemma arises. It becomes difficult to make choices when a person needs to pick between friends,
family members, or careers and general life situations.

What is an example of a moral dilemma?

A rich family member has been on life support for over 10 years. Amber is next in line to
inherit the family's posh palatial home and two splendid cars. She is the person with the
authority to sign a doctor's consent to end life support for the family member, which will
result in that person's death, or to allow them to remain on life support and continue living
for possibly five more years. At present, Amber is homeless and lives with a relative. What
should Amber do?

How do you solve a moral dilemma?

A moral dilemma can be resolved when someone makes a choice that is deemed the best
regardless of the situation. Based upon their morals, a person's actions can help in solving
the dilemma. However, it is not always true that the choice made resolves the dilemma as
it can hurt all parties involved

What is your definition of a moral dilemma?

A situation that calls for a person to make a choice where any alternative picked results in
the same repercussions. There is no better alternative in this case.

Another definition could be the dilemma between correct and incorrect choices.
Examples:

The boyfriend of a friend is with another girl on the beach. The boyfriend of a friend is with
another girl on the beach.

1. Scarlet decides to take a walk on the beach. On the way, as it starts getting dark, she spots her
best friend's boyfriend getting too close with a good friend of hers. She is shocked and starts
going back very quickly so that they do Moral Dilemma in Action.

2. Imagine you are walking to a store with your friend Gia. She tells you that Kayla, a student at
your school, stole money from the cafeteria and blamed Gia for it. As a result, Gia was
suspended for two weeks and had to pay the money back.
As you and Gia walk into the store, you see Kayla. Gia pushes Kayla slightly and drops a pair of
earrings into Kayla's purse. The alarm sounds once Kayla tries to walk out of the store. She is
pulled aside by security for shoplifting, and they call the police. Kayla tells them that she is
innocent and that Gia dropped the earrings in her purse. Gia calls Kayla a liar and asks you to
back her up.

If you tell the truth, Gia will get in trouble again and will face consequences from the law and her
parents. Kayla will go unpunished for originally stealing money from the cafeteria. If you do not
tell the truth, Kayla will finally be punished for stealing, and Gia will have her revenge. However,
you may be committing a crime by lying to the police officers, and Kayla's punishment will be
more severe than it would have been for stealing money in the cafeteria.

The police arrive and ask for your version of the story. What do you say?

What is a Moral Dilemma?

In the situation with Gia and Kayla, you have a moral dilemma. By moral, I am referring to our standards
for judging right and wrong. A moral dilemma is a situation where:

You are presented with two or more actions, all of which you could perform.

There are moral reasons for you to choose each of the actions.
 You cannot perform all the actions and must choose which action, or actions when there are three or
more choices, to perform.

Since there are moral reasons for you to choose each action, and you cannot choose them all, it follows
that no matter what choice you make, you will be failing to follow your morals. In other words, someone
or something will suffer no matter what choice you make.

For example, Gia will suffer if you tell the truth, and you will likely lose your friendship. But if you don't
tell the truth, you will be a liar and possibly a lawbreaker, and Kayla will get arrested for a crime she did
not commit.

What should Scarlet do?

What is Kohlberg's Preconventional stage?

Kohlberg's preconventional stage refers to moral decisions being made in response
to consequence - punishment and reward. Children in this stage obey authority
figures to avoid punishment and encourage reward.

Why is Kohlberg's theory of moral development important?

Kohlberg's theory of moral development is important in providing insight into the
decision-making process when individuals are presented with moral choices. It
further promotes interest and investigation into the domain of moral psychology.

What are Kohlberg's six stages of moral development?

Kohlberg's six stages of moral development is a theory that posits three levels of
morality, each comprised of two stages. It attempts to explain an individual's
approach to moral dilemmas.
Lawrence Kohlberg began his career as a professor of developmental psychology at Harvard
University. He later segued into the study of moral education, conducting most of his research in
this area. Influenced by stage theorists like Jean Piaget, Kohlberg proposed that humans
develop moral reasoning by means of progressive succession. Moral reasoning refers to the
cognitive process that takes place as an individual decides on a course of action that may be right
or wrong. Kohlberg's investigation into moral development entailed providing his subjects with
a moral dilemma and examining their response. He was less interested in their actual response
than the moral persuasion leading to their conclusion.
It was at Harvard Center for Moral Education that Kohlberg advanced his theory of moral
development by suggesting that humans undergo three levels of moral reasoning, each comprised
of two stages. The three levels are comprised of the pre-conventional level,
the conventional level, and the post-conventional level of moral development. Embodied in
these three levels are six phases of sequential growth: obedience and punishment, instrumental
purpose, good boy nice girl, law and order, social contract and universal ethical principle. These
three levels and six stages of moral development are the fundamental structure of Kohlberg's
theory.

Pre-Conventional Level of Moral Reasoning

The pre-conventional level of moral reasoning takes place up to age 9, approximately, during
which time children comply with external directives and decisions are made to gain authoritative
approval and avoid punishment. This level is typified by two stages:
Stage 1: Obedience-and-Punishment Orientation
During stage one, the earliest stage of moral development, a child's moral compass is dictated
by obedience and punishment, with behavior closely linked to compliance with rules in order to
avoid punishment. Rules are not often challenged, and behavior is therefore shaped by
consequence. A child in this stage will do chores for fear of being punished.
Stage 2: Instrumental Purpose Orientation
Stage two is sometimes referred to as the Individualism and Exchange stage. During this period,
children continue to be self-centered in avoiding punishment but also begin to focus on the
rewards of good behavior, not simply punishment for bad behavior. A child in this stage will do
well on a math test to be rewarded by a sleepover.

Kohlberg's Stages Criticisms

Kohlberg's theory of moral development has sustained criticism on several fronts, the least not
being the fact that his studies were conducted on boys between the ages of 10-16. This reduces
the generalizability of his findings due to age and gender bias. In other words, it would be
difficult to predict that subjects outside that age group, or girls, would respond likewise. Perhaps

Kohlberg’s 6 Stages of Moral

Development
Posted OnJanuary 22, 2021 By Jonas Koblin
Lawrence Kohlberg, an American psychologist, was among the pioneers of
moral development research. Building on from the original propositions
of Jean Piaget, Kohlberg theories that humans develop their moral
judgements in 6 stages. To confirm his theory, Kohlberg interviewed boys
between the ages of 10 and 16. He then analyzed how they would justify their
decision when confronted with different hypothetical moral dilemmas.
Superimposing the participants’ argumentation onto their cognitive
development, Kohlberg postulated, that humans progress through the
stages in a hierarchical order, as their cognitive abilities develop. To see how it
works and try it yourself, read on!

THE FULL STORY

Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory claims that our development of moral reasoning
happens in six stages. The stages themselves are structured in three levels:
Pre-Conventional, Conventional and Post-Conventional. To understand this
better, imagine a conflict at school.
There is a fight in the schoolyard. Two ninth-graders are beating up Tom.
Those who watch the fight are at different stages of moral development. Let’s
see what they do and how they justify their behavior.

STAGE 1: OBEDIENCE AND PUNISHMENT

At stage one, we make moral judgments based on obedience and
punishment. Finn’s sense of good and bad is directly linked to whether he
gets punished or not. Finn sees what is happening to his friend and wants to
help. He doesn’t, however, because he is afraid the teacher may punish him if
he gets caught fighting. He asks himself, how can I avoid punishment?

STAGE 2: SELF-INTEREST
At stage two, we are motivated by self-interest. Mary decides to intervene and
help Tom. She knows that she might get punished, but she also knows that
she could become a victim herself, someday. If she helps Tom now, he might
help her in the future. She is asking herself: What’s in it for me?

STAGE 3: INTERPERSONAL ACCORD AND CONFORMITY

At stage three, interpersonal accord and conformity guide our moral
judgments. Betty sees the fight and wants to intervene, but when she realizes
that all the others are just watching, she decides not to get involved. She
wants others to see that she is a good girl, who is conforming with the ethics
of the community. She asks herself: What do others think of me?

STAGE 4: AUTHORITY AND MAINTAINING SOCIAL ORDER

At stage four, we value authority and want to maintain social-order. When the
teacher sees the group fighting, he immediately steps in and shouts: “Stop,
fighting at school is forbidden!”. He feels that, above all, it is important to
follow the rules, otherwise chaos breaks out and that it is his duty to uphold
the rules that sustain a functioning society. The teacher at that moment asks
himself: How can I maintain law and order?

STAGE 5: SOCIAL CONTRACT

At stage five, we understand rules as a social contract as opposed to a strict
order. Jessy, who watches from afar, is not sure how she feels about this. To
her, rules make sense only if they serve the right purpose. Obviously, the
school rules prohibit fighting, but maybe Tom deserves to finally learn his
lesson. Just yesterday he punched a young girl from grade one. She asks
herself: Does a rule truly serve all members of the community?

STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

At stage six, we are guided by universal ethical principles. All those involved
now have to face the headmaster. He first explains the school rules, and why
they exist. He then clarifies that rules are valid only if they are grounded in
justice. The commitment to justice carries with it an obligation to disobey
unjust rules. The headmaster’s highest moral principle is compassion. He
believes that all people should learn to understand each other’s viewpoints
and that they don’t feel alone with their feelings. He asks: What are the
abstract ethical principles that serve my understandings of justice?

PRE-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL
At the pre-conventional level, Finn is driven by fear and Mary by self-interest.
Both judge what is right or wrong by the direct consequences they expect for
themselves, and not by social norms. This form of reasoning is common
among children.

CONVENTIONAL LEVEL
At the conventional level, Betty responds to peer pressure, and the teacher
follows the rules. Their morality is centered around what society regards as
right. At this level, the fairness of rules is seldom questioned. It is common to
think like this during adolescence and adulthood.

POST-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL
At the post-conventional level, Jessy knows that things are complicated
because individuals may disobey rules inconsistent with their own morality.
The headmaster follows a universal ethical idea, at complete disconnect with
what society thinks or the rules say. To him everything is solved through
compassion. The right behavior in his opinion, is therefore never a means to
an end, but always an end in itself. Not every person reaches this level.