1.

Kohlberg's theory of moral development

2. Lawrence Kohlberg
3. YEAR EVENT October 15, 1927 born in Bronxville, New York
1948 enters The University of Chicago and completes his bachelor’s degree in Psychology in one year
1949 begins his doctoral work at The University of Chicago
1957- 1958 completes his doctoral dissertation research on the moral development of children
1968 As a result of his dissertation research, Kohlberg found professional fame
1969 influenced by the kibbutz in his travel in Israel, Kohlberg returns to US and founds several “just
communities”
1971 While conducting cross-cultural work in Belize, Kohlberg contracts a tropical disease that plague
him physically and mentally for the next sixteen years
1987 On leave from a Massachusetts hospital where he is seeking treatment for the above illness,
Kohlberg commits suicide by drowning himself in Boston Harbor. He was 59 years old

Theory of moral development

Kohlberg extended Piaget's theory;
proposed that moral development is a continual process that occurs throughout the lifespan.
used Piaget’s story-telling technique to tell people stories involving moral dilemmas.
He based his theory upon research and interviews with groups of young children.
A series of moral dilemmas were presented to these participants and they were also interviewed to
determine the reasoning behind their judgments of each scenario.
One of the best known stories of Kohlberg’s (1958) concerns a man called Heinz who lived somewhere
in Europe.
10. 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 $2,000.00, 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 only get together about 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." The husband got
desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done
that? .... Why do you think so?

3 Levels of Moral Reasoning

1 Preconventional 2 Conventional 3 Post-Conventional
Pre conventional- Stage 1 Obedience and punishment
Stage 2- Individualism and exchange
Conventional- Stage 3interpersonal relationships
Stage 4- maintaining social order
Post conventional- Stage 5 Social contract and individual rights
Stage 6- universal principles

1. Pre conventional morality

(age 4 - 10) a person is motivated by obedience to authority.
commonly associated with young children
involves little thought about morality.
moral code is shaped by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their
rules.
14. A. Stage 1 - Obedience & Punishment
earliest stage of moral development
common in young children
children see rules as fixed and absolute.
Obeying the rules is important to avoid punishment.
morality is motivated solely by punishment
15. B. Stage 2 - Individualism & Exchange
children account individual points of view
 judge actions based on how they serve individual needs.
Reciprocity is possible but only if it serves one's own interests.
16. B. Stage 2 - Individualism & Exchange
children recognize that there is not just one right view and that different individuals have different
viewpoints.
focuses on individualism and different perspectives,
the goal is to avoid punishment.
17. EXAMPLES: Stage 1: “I will keep quiet so that teacher won’t get mad at me.” Stage 2: “I will let you
copy mine if you do my homework.”

2. Conventional morality
(age 10 - 13) people focus on following social norms and customs.
begin to internalize the moral standards of valued adult role models.
Reasoning is based on the norms of the group to which the person belongs.
19. C. Stage 3 - Interpersonal Relationships
Also known as "good boy-good girl" orientation
focused on living up to social expectations and roles
emphasis on conformity, being "nice,"
 consider how choices influence relationships.
20. C. Stage 3 - Interpersonal Relationships
emphasizes the maintenance happy interpersonal relationships and pleasing others.
a need to avoid rejection, disaffection, or disapproval from others.
21. D. Stage 4 - Maintaining Social Order
consider society as a whole when making judgments
focus is on maintaining law and order by following the rules, doing one’s duty and respecting authority.
22. D. Stage 4 - Maintaining Social Order
please individuals to maintaining social order by following social norms, customs, and laws.
becomes aware of the wider rules of society to avoid guilt.
a need to not be criticized by a true authority figure
23. EXAMPLES: Stage 3: “I will buy that dress so that my friends will like me.” Stage 4: “You should not
cut the class because it’s against school rules.”

3. Post conventional Morality (adolescence - adulthood)

people look beyond convention to determine moral norms and appropriate social interactions.
judgment is based on self-chosen principles
moral reasoning is based on individual rights and justice
25. E. Stage 5 - Social Contract & Individual Rights
begin to account the differing values, opinions and beliefs of other people.
Laws are important but members of the society should agree upon these standards.
26. E. Stage 5 - Social Contract & Individual Rights
becomes aware there are times when they will work against rules or the interest of particular
individuals
emphasis on the social contract and the maintenance of individual rights
27. F. Stage 6 - Universal Principles
reasoning is based on universal ethical principles and abstract reasoning
follow these internalized principles of justice, even if its against the law
moral judgment is motivated by one's own conscience
28. F. Stage 6 - Universal Principles
People have developed their own set of moral guidelines which may or may not fit the law.
search for universal principles.
29. EXAMPLES: Stage 5: “It is her own decision, we should just respect that.” Stage 6: “If abortion
became legal in our country, I will be one of the people who will be against it because it’s against God’s
Law.”
2. Aristotle’s Ethics Virtue Ethics

Greek Philosophers (500BC – 200BC) Timeline The Great Three

Plato, 20, meets Socrates, 60
Aristotle, 17, meets Plato, 62
Plato (429 - 347) 500 BC 200 BC Socrates (469 - 399) Aristotle (384 - 322)

Aristotle’s Ethics
The Nichomachean Ethics is a collection of Aristotle’s notes, apparently edited by his son, Nichomachus.
The work is famous for being accessible, if not well organized. Modern ethics is focused on rights and
duties Aristotle is interested in them too (indirectly), but he is more interested in • what is good for
humans, and • how we ought to live

Foundational Experience
Aristotle does not provide any arguments to show that courage, temperance, generosity, etc., are good.
He does, however, assert early in NE (1095b4-6) that one must have experience of good to comprehend
ethics: For example, someone raised in a meth house will have so little experience of the subject matter
that arguments about the goodness of a virtue will be unintelligible.

Some Goods Better than Others

Aristotle begins the NE considering all the disagreement among us about what is best of all the goods:
pleasure, honor, love, wealth, fame, glory, etc. He uses a distinction between instrumental and intrinsic
goods to find the best, highest good.

Instrumental and Intrinsic Good

Instrumental good =df something good as a means to something else
• Having a tan? Good for getting a date • Having a date? Good for falling in love • Being in love? Good
for its own sake (intrinsically), and for happiness (as a means to happiness) • Being happy? Good for its
own sake, and as a means to …

The Highest Good

• NOTHING. It seems that happiness is not desired for anything other than itself. It is intrinsically
desirable but not instrumentally so.
Is that true of anything else? Try out … • Honor? Good for its own sake, but also as a means to
happiness. • Fame? Good for its own sake, but also as a means to happiness. Happiness, then, seems to
be the highest good for humans. We desire it for its own sake, but never, seemingly, for anything else. It
seems self-sufficient.

Human Nature
The Instrumental/Intrinsic good distinction leads us to conclude the good for humans is happiness.
There is, however, another method for identifying the good of something that Aristotle employs …
He says that the good of a thing is its unique function: • the good of the eye is seeing, and it’s a good eye
if it sees well • the good of a pen is writing, and it’s a good pen if it writes well
Aristotle then asks, what is the good of human beings? • the good of a human is reason, and it’s a good
human if it reasons well.
Humans are rational animals (common definition of humans in ancient Greece).

Definition of Happiness
We have seen that • THE GOOD is happiness (most desired), and • THE GOOD is reasoning well (by
analogical argument)
Aristotle produces his definition of happiness from those 2 lines of reasoning (since happiness and
reasoning well must be the same somehow):
HAPPINESS = REASONING WELL … or, in Aristotle’s own words:
HAPPINESS =df an activity of the soul (reasoning) in conformity with virtue (reasoning well)
so, • happiness is NOT a feeling • happiness is NOT a condition or state of mind • happiness is NOT
desire-satisfaction (getting what you want) • happiness is NOT something you can receive
Virtue 
Happiness In Book I, Chapter 13 of the Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle says: Since happiness is an activity
of the soul in accordance with perfect virtue, we must consider the nature of virtue; for perhaps we shall
thus see better the nature of happiness. So, let’s look! …

Virtue
Aristotle: to understand happiness, we must understand virtue… Doing something well or with
excellence is one definition of a virtue.
• Things are said to have virtue when they perform the function proper to them well … the function that
is proper to a thing is called it’s “work
• Screwdrivers drive screws; that is their work, or, loosely speaking, their virtue
• Also, a thing’s “work” is what only it can do, or what nothing else can do so well (Plato, Republic, 352-
3)

Intellectual Virtues
For Humans this “work” is reason (we are rationalanimals), composed of
• theoretical wisdom (sophia)
• scientific reasoning (episteme, gk; scientia, latin), and
• intuitive understanding (nous)
• practical wisdom/practical reason, prudence (phronesis)
• craft knowledge, skill, art (techne) Note that, though tradition calls these kinds of reasoning ‘virtues’
they are not, except perhaps for the first, virtues strictly speaking. Can you see why? All 5 are
intellectual virtues, NOT moral virtues

Moral Virtues (And One Intellectual Virtue)

Aristotle identifies 11 moral virtues, all governed by one intellectual virtue, prudence—good
deliberation
• Courage • Temperance • Generosity • Magnificence (generosity with wealth) • Magnanimity (proper
pride) • Right ambition • Good temper • Friendliness • Truthfulness • Wit • Justice All except Justice are
a “mean” between extremes

Anatomy of a Moral Virtue

Cowardliness -------- Courage ---Rashness
Courage is the mean between being a coward and being rash. A popular example: When running into
battle, the coward lags behind, and the brash or rash person runs ahead. The courageous person keeps
with his or her mates. Notice that ‘courage’ above, is not in the middle between the extremes. That is
because prudence, the intellectual virtue that finds the mean, tells us that being courageous is more like
being rash than it is like being cowardly. In fact, all the virtues depend on prudence for their existence …
we couldn’t discover the moral virtues without skillful deliberation. For an example of prudence
determining the mean, see Book 3, chapters 6 and 8 (check this link or google for it):

For Moral Virtue, Reason Must Rule

If a person is courageous or temperate by nature they have moral virtue, but not in a strict sense; being
morally virtuous requires submitting one’s feelings and actions to reason:
• as situations change or more information arrives, understanding changes and reason adjusts the
actions (hollering at your kids, say, becomes coaxing, or vice versa) and passions (anger, say, becomes
consternation, or vice versa)

How are Moral Virtues Acquired?

Virtues are attained or acquired by practice and habit • We become just by doing just acts, generous by
generous acts, temperate by temperate acts, etc. So, if virtues are attained by practice and habit (we
must do just acts to become just, and friendly acts to become friendly, etc.), how do we know what acts
are just or friendly in the first place? • We learn by observation (look back to slide 3) • We ask a virtuous
person • We use prudence to find the mean, or • the right amount of an action, • the right time for an
action, • the right object (immediate and or distant object) for an action, • the right manner of acting,
etc.

Dispositions, not Habits

Moral virtues are not habits; they are: • dispositions to act that are acquired by habituation. • purposive
dispositions, lying in a mean determined by reason To posses a virtue is • to hold a complex mental
framework of the right feelings, attitudes, understanding, insight, experience, etc. … • to have a multi-
track disposition, unlike a simple habit such as being a tea drinker or coffee drinker.

Multi-Track Dispositions
Take truthfulness: A truthful person … • tells the truth (but not indiscreetly) • raises kids to do so •
encourages other to do so • doesn’t find jokes about dishonesty funny • is surprised and saddened by
dishonesty in friends • doesn’t provide the truth to those intending to misuse it • cares about truth for
its own sake (values it above personal feelings, say) • Etcetera

To Sum Up Moral Virtue

A morally virtuous person, then, ideally, • Has all eleven moral virtues • Each virtue is established by
practice and habit, subjecting feelings and actions to reason • Each virtue is settled between excess and
deficiency by comprehensive understanding, or multi-track assessment

Getting and Keeping Moral Virtues

Possessing the virtues is a matter of degree, and few if any possess them all or equally. Since a virtue is a
multi-track disposition to do what is right—a disposition that “goes all the way down”—we only find it
hard to do what is right when our disposition does not go all the way down.
• If we do what is right due to a disposition established by practice and habit, Aristotle calls our
condition virtuous.
• If we do what is right despite contrary inclination, Aristotle calls our condition continent, something
inferior to virtuous.
• If we try but fail to do what we know we should, we are called incontinent.
• If we have no interest even in trying to do what we know we should, we are called vicious.

Virtue or Continence is Best?

We ordinarily praise folks for overcoming their desires or temptations in order to do what is right. Don’t
continent people deserve praise then, perhaps even more than the virtuous? Perhaps, according to
Hursthouse (slide 17), depending on what makes doing what is right hard: • Giving back a lost wallet full
of money is easy for a virtuous person • If it is hard because you are in dire need of money, then
returning it is praiseworthy • But, if it is hard because you don’t care about other people, its return is
less praiseworthy Is this right?

Moral Virtue
Virtues make their possessor good, but what do we make of courage in, say, a thief? Recall that some
virtues we might have by nature, but unless they are multi-track, and settled by comprehensive
understanding, they aren’t virtues strictly speaking. Does a thief overcome the correct fears for the right
reasons? If not, the thief only has something like the virtue of courage.

Back to Happiness…
If happiness is “an activity of the soul in conformity with virtue,” what virtue is meant, intellectual virtue,
or moral virtue? Aristotle’s answer is “both,” but in Book X he says • since happiness is virtuous activity,
it’s only natural that it be in conformity with the highest virtue • the highest virtue (theoretical wisdom)
is intellectual, and so
• happiness is primarily intellectual activity
• secondarily moral activity Notice, the title of chapter 8, Book X: Moral Activity is Secondary Happiness
Question: So, who is happier … Einstein or Bono? _____
Happiness, Again
Why is theoretical reason highest?
• It has little in common with animal nature
• It is more god-like
• Practical reason exists for its sake
What is so great about the life of contemplation?
• Its pleasure is enduring (we can enjoy its constant, mild pleasure continuously)
• Its pleasure is certain (if concepts provide your enjoyment, no one can take your toys away)
The last points, Aristotle says, agree with the common view that true happiness is a stable, enduring
quality

Why Be Moral?
Joe Sachs, writing for the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The word the translators are afraid of is
to kalon, the beautiful. Aristotle singles out as the distinguishing mark of courage, for example, that it is
always “for the sake of the beautiful, for this is the end of virtue” … Of magnificence, or large-scale
philanthropy, he says it is “for the sake of the beautiful, for this is common to the virtues.” And he
[Aristotle] explicitly compares the well made work of art to an act that springs from moral virtue.… An
action is right in the same way a painting might get everything just right. – Joe Sachs

3. Basic Framework of Normative Ethics

Normative Ethics
• ‘Normative’ means something that ‘guides’ or ‘controls’
• Aims to discover what should be the moral standards that are supported by the best reasons

Normative Ethics in Management

Teleological Theory- Altruism, Ethical, Egoism, Utilitarian Principle, Distributive Justice
Deontological Theory- Kantianism, Universalism

Teleological theory
• Derived from Greek word ‘telos’ means end
• Determine ethics of an act by looking to the consequences of the decision (The Ends)
• Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice are based on teleological approach

Ethical Egoism
• An action is good if it produces result to maximize person’s self-interest at the expense of others.
• It denies that a person should help others when the person will get nothing out of it.
• Enlightened egoism is enlightened self interest – considers the long range perspective of other or
humanity on the whole.

Utilitarian Principle
Utilitarian principle- Consequentialism, Universalism, Hedonism, Maximalism

Strengths & Weaknesses of Teleological theory

• They provide a relatively precise and objective method for moral decision making
• They are in accord with much of our ordinary moral reasoning; An action would provide some benefit
or inflict harm. This is morally relevant reason for or against performing it.
• Some moral reasoning are non-teleological in character

Deontological Theory
• Derived from greek word ‘deon’ means duty
• This approach believes we have a duty not to do bad
• Bribery is wrong by its very nature regardless of the consequences
• It is non-consequential theory
• Determine the ethics of an act by looking at the process of the decision (The means)
• Kantianism is based on deontological approach

Deontology vs Utilitarianism

Kantianism- Immanuel Kant (nasa ppt)

• For Bentham it is Happiness, for Kant it is goodwill
• An action is morally right only if the person performing it is motivated by a good will and vice-versa.
• A good will means action done for reasons of principle from a sense of duty, nothing else.

Kantianism vs Utilitarianism (nasa ppt)

Strengths of Deontological Theory

• This theory makes more sense in cases where consequences seem to be irrelevant
• It is the way they account for the role of motives in evaluating actions

Weaknesses of Deontological theory

• Failure to provide a plausible account of how our moral obligations and resolve problems of moral
conflict
• Rules in Ross’s theory is plausible; No reason is provided in accepting these rule
• Ross’s rules are open to ethnocentrism • There is no order of priority to guide in cases where they
conflict

Virtue Ethics- Aristotle

• It asks What kind of person should we be?
• It does three things:
• It defines the concept of virtue
• It must offer some list of virtues
• It offers some justification of that list and explain how we define what are virtues and vices

Virtue Ethics
• Emphasizes on role of individual traits
• Virtue is defined as a character trait that manifests itself in habitual action
• For Greeks virtue means Excellence
• Virtue Ethics= Excellence of Human Character

Strengths
• Help to resolve Ethical Dilemmas
• It takes into account the importance of relationships.

Ethical Relativism
• There is no universal set of principles by which to judge morality
• Each society has its rules and it is inappropriate to compare ethical rules of one society with that of
another
• Relativists thus rule out possibility of discussion across societies on ethical issues.

4. Lawrence Kohlberg’s Moral Development (1927-1987)

Lawrence Kohlberg 1927-1987 Stages of Moral Development
Level 1 Pre Conventional = Reward/punishment =Self Interest
Level 2 Conventional = Pleasing others =Law and order
Level 3 Post Conventional = Social Contract =Principle

Stage 1: Reward/Punishment
Right or wrong are determined by the reward or punishment that accompanies the action.
Children associate right with “yes” actions (hug, kiss, treat, smile) and wrong with “no” actions (scowl,
sent to room, taking something away).
Good therefore, means earning a reward and avoiding punishment (“It’s good as long as I don’t get
caught”).
Basic criminal mentality.
Examples: Cheating on a test as long as there is no risk of getting caught Not reporting hitting a parked
car if no one saw it Having sex as long as protection is used
** Many teenagers and adults operate at this level of moral development.

Stage 2: Self-Interest
“Me First” attitude
Right is based on what makes “me” feel good (satisfied, gratified, pleasure); wrong is based on what
makes “me” feel bad (discomfort, hurt, dissatisfied).
Basis for moral decisions is essentially selfish  the needs of others are considered only insofar as they
affect the individual (“If I do this for you, what will I get in return?”).
Reverse Golden Rule Examples: Not “picking on” others so as not to be picked on
** Many adults will operate at this level of moral development for the rest of their lives.

Stage 3: Pleasing Others

Right or wrong depends mainly on what pleases or displeases others.
“Good boy” / “Good girl” mentality
When a decision receives approval, it is right; when a decision is disapproved, it is wrong.
“Everybody does it” / peer pressure
Highly pronounced level of morality for teenagers (acceptance).
Examples: Skipping school because friends are Partying to be part of the “in” crowd Having sex with
boyfriend/girlfriend to “keep” them
** According to Kohlberg’s research, many adults never even reach this stage!

Stage 4: Law and Order

Right is based on obedience to the law and legitimate authority.
Something that is legally right must be morally right.
The law mentality translates into any group or society to which the individual belongs (ie. religion,
community, government).
Limited room for individual thought process or judgment.
Examples: Ok to drink if parents approve Ok to have sexual intercourse if parents do not mind

Stage 5: Social Contract

“What society stands for”
Looks to those generally agreed upon norms and rights upon which society is based.
If the laws support these standards, then laws are to be obeyed; but if laws contradict these standards,
then grounds for civil disobedience.
Laws are not norms in and of themselves; they are capable of being changed for the sake of the greater,
common purpose.
Many do not reach this stage...examples: Vandalism at school – social concern or against school rules?
Not speeding – right to life or fear of being caught?

Stage 6: Principle
Highest level of moral development.
People operate morally based on universal ethical principles.
Not concrete rules or commandments, but rather the basis of laws and commandments – they are good
in and of themselves.
Right is viewed as following one’s informed conscience which follows guidelines that go beyond the
good of the individual or the good of society – rooted in love and compassion (agape).
Complete respect and understanding for the dignity of all humanity and creation.
Willing to risk punishment when seeking the greater good; set aside self-interest.
Golden Rule
Think About It:
 People move from stage to stage of moral growth as they mature.
 No one skips stages; people move from one to another. A person may slip back a stage or two in
certain areas of decision making or when under stress.
 Some people never move beyond Stage 1 or 2.
 Learning to make good choices now and growing in Christ will help a person reach Stage 6, which is a
level of deep, personal maturity and freedom.