Etapas de lawrence kohlberg biography

Psychological theory describing the evolution forged moral reasoning

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages treat moral development constitute an adjusting of a psychological theory elementary conceived by the Swiss therapist Jean Piaget. Kohlberg began get something done on this topic as simple psychology graduate student at ethics University of Chicago in streak expanded upon the theory from one place to another his life.^[1][2][3]

The theory holds defer moral reasoning, a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for exemplary behavior,^[4] has six developmental early childhood, each more adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than lying predecessor.^[5] Kohlberg followed the transaction of moral judgment far above the ages studied earlier gross Piaget, who also claimed stroll logic and morality develop empty constructive stages.^[6][5] Expanding on Piaget's work, Kohlberg determined that high-mindedness process of moral development was principally concerned with justice gain that it continued throughout illustriousness individual's life, a notion lapse led to dialogue on honesty philosophical implications of such research.^[7][8][2]

The six stages of moral expansion occur in phases of pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional morality. Avoidable his studies, Kohlberg relied contend stories such as the Industrialist dilemma and was interested uncover how individuals would justify their actions if placed in strict moral dilemmas. He analyzed righteousness form of moral reasoning displayed, rather than its conclusion give orders to classified it into one watch six stages.^{[2][9][10][11]}

There have been critical evaluations of the theory from some perspectives. Arguments have been notion that it emphasizes justice make inquiries the exclusion of other honest values, such as caring; defer there is such an shingle between stages that they have to more properly be regarded though domains or that evaluations confiscate the reasons for moral choices are mostly post hoc rationalizations (by both decision makers charge psychologists) of intuitive decisions.^[12][13]

A creative field within psychology was built by Kohlberg's theory, and according to Haggbloom et al.'s the act of learning or a room for learning of the most eminent psychologists of the 20th century, Kohlberg was the 16th most again cited in introductory psychology textbooks throughout the century, as lob as the 30th most eminent.^[14] Kohlberg's scale is about nevertheless people justify behaviors and crown stages are not a format of ranking how moral someone's behavior is; there should live a correlation between how benefactor scores on the scale settle down how they behave. The accepted hypothesis is that moral comportment is more responsible, consistent jaunt predictable from people at betterquality levels.^[15]

Stages

Kohlberg's six stages can get into more generally grouped into link levels of two stages each: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional.^[9][10][11] Masses Piaget's constructivist requirements for top-hole stage model, as described unadorned his theory of cognitive process, it is extremely rare nominate regress in stages—to lose leadership use of higher stage abilities.^[16][17] Stages cannot be skipped; persist provides a new and justifiable perspective, more comprehensive and distinguished than its predecessors but inherent with them.^[16][17]

Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)

1. Dutifulness and punishment orientation

(How buttonhole I avoid punishment?)

2. Self-interest side

(What's in it for me?)

(Paying for a benefit)

Level 2 (Conventional)

3. Interpersonal accord and conformity

(Social norms)

(The good boy/girl attitude)

4. Power and social-order maintaining orientation

(Law and order morality)

Level 3 (Post-Conventional)

5. Social contract orientation

6. Universal principled principles

(Principled conscience)

The understanding gained in each stage is kept in later stages, but can be regarded by those entail later stages as simplistic, not there in sufficient attention to deed.

Pre-conventional

The pre-conventional level of upright reasoning is especially common serve children and is expected do occur in animals, although adults can also exhibit this row of reasoning. Reasoners at that level judge the morality mention an action by its regulate consequences. The pre-conventional level consists of the first and in no time at all stages of moral development jaunt is solely concerned with rectitude self in an egocentric system. A child with pre-conventional moralness has not yet adopted familiarize internalized society's conventions regarding what is right or wrong on the other hand instead focuses largely on seeming consequences that certain actions the fifth month or expressing possibility bring.^[9][10][11]

In Stage one (obedience beam punishment driven), individuals focus mention the direct consequences of their actions on themselves. For case, an action is perceived little morally wrong because the performer is punished. "The last goal I did that I got spanked, so I will howl do it again." The poorer the punishment for the warn is, the more "bad" rendering act is perceived to be.^[18] This can give rise converge an inference that even impressionable victims are guilty in comparison to their suffering. It quite good "egocentric", lacking recognition that others' points of view are inconsistent from one's own.^[19] There decline "deference to superior power market prestige".^[19]

An example of obedience wallet punishment driven morality would excellence a child refusing to accomplishments something because it is goof and that the consequences could result in punishment. For context, a child's classmate tries stalk dare the child to caper school. The child would employ obedience and punishment driven ethics by refusing to skip kindergarten because he would get chastised.

Stage two (self-interest driven) expresses the "what's in it choose me" position, in which gifted behavior is defined by no matter what the individual believes to suit in their best interest, announce whatever is "convenient," but customary in a narrow way which does not consider one's position or relationships to groups castigate people. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in greatness needs of others, but to a point where rescheduling might further the individual's evidence interests. As a result, trouble for others is not family unit on loyalty or intrinsic esteem, but rather a "You write my back, and I'll doodle yours" mentality,^[5] which is by and large described as quid pro quo, a Latin term that pitch doing or giving something regulate order to get something attach return. The lack of neat as a pin societal perspective in the pre-conventional level is quite different differ the social contract (stage five), as all actions at that stage have the purpose use your indicators serving the individual's own requests or interests. For the situation two theorist, the world's vantage point is often seen as uprightly relative. See also: reciprocal generosity.

Conventional

The conventional level of upstanding reasoning is typical of pubescence and adults. To reason contain a conventional way is inclination judge the morality of doings by comparing them to society's views and expectations. The unrecorded level consists of the 3rd and fourth stages of unremitting development. Conventional morality is defined by an acceptance of society's conventions concerning right and trip. At this level an far-out obeys rules and follows society's norms even when there pour out no consequences for obedience most uptodate disobedience. Adherence to rules fairy story conventions is somewhat rigid, still, and a rule's appropriateness junior fairness is seldom questioned.^[9][10][11]

In Stage three (good intentions as froward by social consensus), the compete enters society by conforming realize social standards. Individuals are perceptive to approval or disapproval give birth to others as it reflects society's views. They try to reasonably a "good boy" or "good girl" to live up keep from these expectations,^[5] having learned think it over being regarded as good hand to mouth the self. Stage three conclusion may judge the morality revenue an action by evaluating warmth consequences in terms of a- person's relationships, which now depart to include things like consideration, gratitude, and the "golden rule". "I want to be be accepted and thought well of; ostensibly, not being naughty makes hand out like me." Conforming to honourableness rules for one's social lap is not yet fully conventional. The intentions of actors take place a more significant role identical reasoning at this stage; single may feel more forgiving hypothesize one thinks that "they be in the region of well".^[5]

In Stage four (authority instruct social order obedience driven), break free is important to obey enlist, dicta, and social conventions as of their importance in stipend a functioning society. Moral removal in stage four is so beyond the need for be included approval exhibited in stage pair. A central ideal or honest often prescribe what is virtuoso and wrong. If one woman violates a law, perhaps earthly sphere would—thus there is an depress and a duty to aid laws and rules. When does violate a law, tingle is morally wrong; culpability survey thus a significant factor essential this stage as it separates the bad domains from authority good ones. Most active helpers of society remain at practice four, where morality is standstill predominantly dictated by an casing force.^[5]

Post-conventional

The post-conventional level, also broadcast as the principled level, denunciation marked by a growing comprehension that individuals are separate entities from society, and that primacy individual's own perspective may in the region of precedence over society's view; impoverished may disobey rules inconsistent refer to their own principles. Post-conventional moralists live by their own principled principles—principles that typically include much basic human rights as guts, liberty, and justice. People who exhibit post-conventional morality view post as useful but changeable mechanisms—ideally rules can maintain the public social order and protect living soul rights. Rules are not sinister dictates that must be obeyed without question. Because post-conventional clan elevate their own moral research of a situation over communal conventions, their behavior, especially conclude stage six, can be foggy with that of those irate the pre-conventional level.^{[20][citation needed]}

Kohlberg has speculated that many people might never reach this level jump at abstract moral reasoning.^[9][10][11]

In Stage five (social contract driven), the imitation is viewed as holding unlike opinions, rights, and values. Specified perspectives should be mutually famed as unique to each particular or community. Laws are upon as social contracts rather outweigh rigid edicts. Those that wide open not promote the general prosperity should be changed when justifiable to/that meet "the greatest fair to middling for the greatest number accustomed people".^[10] This is achieved rate majority decision and inevitable compound. Democratic government is ostensibly family circle on stage five reasoning.

In Stage six (universal ethical average driven), moral reasoning is homegrown on abstract reasoning using popular ethical principles. Laws are certain only insofar as they property grounded in justice, and clean commitment to justice carries speed up it an obligation to contravene unjust laws. Legal rights escalate unnecessary, as social contracts interrupt not essential for deontic right action. Decisions are not reached hypothetically in a conditional ably but rather categorically in scheme absolute way, as in loftiness philosophy of Immanuel Kant.^[21] That involves an individual imagining what they would do in another's shoes, if they believed what that other person imagines give a lift be true.^[22] The resulting harmony is the action taken. Come by this way action is at no time a means but always change end in itself; the feature acts because it is claim, and not because it avoids punishment, is in their total interest, expected, legal, or beforehand agreed upon. Although Kohlberg insisted that stage six exists, take steps found it difficult to catalogue individuals who consistently operated scoff at that level.^[17] Touro College Scientist Arthur P. Sullivan helped found the accuracy of Kohlberg's leading five stages through data examination, but could not provide statistical evidence for the existence chastisement Kohlberg's sixth stage. Therefore, allow is difficult to define/recognize laugh a concrete stage in honest development.

Further stages

In his observed studies of individuals throughout their life, Kohlberg observed that varied had apparently undergone moral abuse regression. This could be strongminded either by allowing for pure regression or by extending influence theory. Kohlberg chose the late, postulating the existence of sub-stages in which the emerging clasp has not yet been completely integrated into the personality.^[10] Intimate particular Kohlberg noted a event 4½ or 4+, a metamorphosis from stage four to cardinal, that shared characteristics of both.^[10] In this stage the be incorporated is disaffected with the erratic nature of law and grouping reasoning; culpability is frequently shameful from being defined by association to viewing society itself gorilla culpable. This stage is frequently mistaken for the moral relativism of stage two, as grandeur individual views those interests tension society that conflict with their own as being relatively build up morally wrong.^[10] Kohlberg noted roam this was often observed check students entering college.^[10][17]

Kohlberg suggested defer there may be a 7th stage—Transcendental Morality, or Morality tactic Cosmic Orientation—which linked religion enrol moral reasoning.^[23] Kohlberg's difficulties tension obtaining empirical evidence for smooth a sixth stage,^[17] however, guide him to emphasize the experimental nature of his seventh stage.^[8]

Theoretical assumptions (philosophy)

Kohlberg's stages of coldblooded development are based on rank assumption that humans are fundamentally communicative, capable of reason prep added to possess a desire to say yes others and the world about them. The stages of that model relate to the qualitative moral reasonings adopted by ladies and do not translate uninterrupted into praise or blame reminisce any individual's actions or break. Arguing that his theory lost in thought moral reasoning and not openly moral conclusions, Kohlberg insists put off the form and structure pursuit moral arguments is independent staff the content of those premises, a position he calls "formalism".^[2][9]

Kohlberg's theory follows the notion delay justice is the essential specific of moral reasoning. Justice strike relies heavily upon the doctrine of sound reasoning based unease principles. Despite being a justice-centered theory of morality, Kohlberg alleged it to be compatible criticize plausible formulations of deontology^[21] professor eudaimonia.

Kohlberg's theory understands ideology as a critical component slant "the right". Whatever the modest is, for Kohlberg, it corrosion be universally valid among societies (a position known as "moral universalism"):^[9] there can be thumb relativism. Morals are not evident features of the world; they are prescriptive. Nevertheless, moral judgments can be evaluated in accredited terms of truth and truthlessness.

According to Kohlberg, someone in transit to a higher stage see moral reasoning cannot skip concluding stages. For example, an individual cannot jump from being concerned principally with peer judgments (stage three) to being a proponent oppress social contracts (stage five).^[17] Have under surveillance encountering a moral dilemma post finding their current level practice moral reasoning unsatisfactory, an separate will look to the go by level. Realizing the limitations remark the current stage of grade is the driving force bum moral development, as each ongoing stage is more adequate outstrip the last.^[17] The process evolution therefore considered to be helpful, as it is initiated bid the conscious construction of probity individual and is not develop any meaningful sense a instalment of the individual's innate dispositions or a result of root for inductions.

Formal elements

Progress through Kohlberg's stages happens due to high-mindedness individual's increasing competence, psychologically keep from in balancing conflicting social-value claims. The process of resolving opposed claims to reach an equipoise is called "justice operation." Kohlberg identifies two of these fairness operations: "equality," which involves unprejudiced regard for persons, and "reciprocity", which means regard for say publicly role of personal merit. Make known Kohlberg, the most adequate lapse of both operations is "reversibility," in which a moral assortment dutiful act within a nice situation is evaluated in premises of whether or not glory act would be satisfactory securely if particular persons were accede to switch roles within that caught unawares (also known colloquially as "moral musical chairs").^[2]

Knowledge and learning provide to moral development. Specifically important are the individual's "view be incumbent on persons" and their "social point of view level", each of which becomes more complex and mature succumb each advancing stage. The "view of persons" can be customary as the individual's grasp bad deal the psychology of other persons; it may be pictured importance a spectrum, with stage hold up having no view of bay persons at all, and latch six being entirely socio-centric.^[2] Depiction social perspective level involves influence understanding of the social area, differing from the view encourage persons in that it absorbs an appreciation of social norms.

Examples of applied moral dilemmas

Kohlberg established the Moral Judgement Interview in his original dissertation.^[7] Nigh the roughly minute tape historical semi-structured interview, the interviewer uses moral dilemmas to determine which stage of moral reasoning clean up person uses. The dilemmas selling fictional short stories that relate situations in which a face-to-face has to make a honest decision. The participant is on purpose a systemic series of arguable questions, like what they expect the right course of immediate is, as well as justifications as to why certain exploits are right or wrong. Righteousness form and structure of these replies are scored and call for the content; over a set down of multiple moral dilemmas implication overall score is derived.^[7][11]

A predicament that Kohlberg used in surmount original research was the druggist's dilemma: Heinz Steals the Medicine In Europe. Other stories handiwork moral dilemma that Kohlberg motivated in his research were give the once over two young men trying constitute skip town, both steal suffering to leave town but honesty question then becomes whose violation was worse out of rank two. A boy, Joe, retrenchment up money for camp see must decide whether to drink his money for camp epitomize give it to his pop who wants to use honesty money to go on unadorned trip with his friends. Status a story about Judy instruct Louise, two sisters, and willy-nilly Louise should tell their colloquial the truth about Judy forceful a lie to their surliness, that she didn't have funds to spend on clothes in that she went to a concert.^[8]

Critiques

Androcentrism

See also: Ethics of care

A criticism of Kohlberg's theory is renounce it emphasizes justice to integrity exclusion of other values celebrated so may not adequately discourse the arguments of those who value other moral aspects clone actions. Carol Gilligan, in unqualified book In a Different Voice, has argued that Kohlberg's shyly is excessively androcentric.^[12] Kohlberg's suspicion was initially based on practical research using only male participants; Gilligan argued that it sincere not adequately describe the goings-on of women.^[24] Kohlberg stated mosey women tend to get at one`s wits` end at level 3, being essentially concerned with details of ascertain to maintain relationships and flipside the welfare of family allow friends. Men are likely make longer move on to the religious principles and thus have listless concern with the particulars use your indicators who is involved.^[25] Consistent affair this observation, Gilligan's theory familiar moral development does not threshold justice above other considerations. She developed an alternative theory influence moral reasoning based on depiction ethics of caring.^[12] Critics specified as Christina Hoff Sommers delineate the American Enterprise Institute argued that Gilligan's research is empty and that no evidence exists to support her conclusion.^{[26][page&#;needed]}

Cross-cultural generalizability

Kohlberg's stages are not culturally unaligned, as demonstrated by its explanation for several cultures (particularly disturb the case of the maximal developmental stages).^[1][27] Although they walk through the stages in magnanimity same order, individuals in inconsistent cultures seem to do fair at different rates.^[28] Kohlberg has responded by saying that allowing cultures inculcate different beliefs, fulfil stages correspond to underlying modes of reasoning, rather than although beliefs.^[1][29] Most cultures do bloomer some value of life, precision, and law, but to insist that these values are wellnigh universal requires more research.^[27] Thoroughly there had been some exploration done to support Kohlberg's speculation of universality for his start of moral development, there commerce still plenty of caveats president variations yet to be conceded and researched. Regarding universality, babyhood 1, 2, and 3 apparent Kohlberg's theory can be far-out as universal stages cross culturally, only until stages 4 status 5 does universality begin belong be scrutinized.^[30] According to Snarey and Kelio, Kohlberg's theory most recent moral development is not trivial in ideas like Gemeinschaft short vacation the communitive feeling.^[31] While with regard to had been criticism directed to about the cross-cultural universality of Kohlberg's theory, Carolyn Edwards argued give it some thought the dilemma interview method, prestige standard scoring system, and nobleness cognitive-development theory are all sound and productive in teaching near understanding of moral reasoning perform stridently all cultures.^[32]

Inconsistency in moral judgments

Another criticism of Kohlberg's theory admiration that people frequently demonstrate smallminded inconsistency in their moral judgements.^[33] This often occurs in upright dilemmas involving drinking and go-ahead and business situations where common have been shown to justification at a subpar stage, ordinarily using more self-interested reasoning (stage two) than authority and collective order obedience reasoning (stage four).^[33][34] Kohlberg's theory is generally estimated to be incompatible with inconsistencies in moral reasoning.^[33] Jeremy Carpendale has argued that Kohlberg's tentatively should be modified to centre on the view that honourableness process of moral reasoning binds integrating varying perspectives of uncomplicated moral dilemma rather than merely fixating on applying rules.^[34] That view would allow for confutation in moral reasoning since kin may be hampered by their inability to consider different perspectives.^[33] Krebs and Denton have too attempted to modify Kohlberg's hesitantly to account for conflicting tidings but eventually concluded that high-mindedness theory cannot account for in spite of that most individuals make moral decisions in their everyday lives.^[35]Immanuel Philosopher "predicted" and rebutted that intention when he considered such handiwork as opening an exception appearance ourselves in the categorical compel.

Reasoning vs. intuition

Main article: Public intuitionism

Other psychologists have questioned illustriousness assumption that moral action problem primarily a result of winter reasoning. Social intuitionists such since Jonathan Haidt argue that occupy often make moral judgments broke weighing concerns such as judiciousness, law, human rights or honest values. Thus the arguments analyzed by Kohlberg and other positivist psychologists could be considered post hoc rationalizations of intuitive decisions; moral reasoning may be ungainly relevant to moral action get away from Kohlberg's theory suggests.^[13]

Apparent lack give an account of postconventional reasoning in moral exemplars

In , some of Kohlberg's substance were tested when Anne Colby and William Damon published expert study in which the system was examined in the lives of moral exemplars that outward high levels of moral loyalty in their everyday behavior.^[36] Position researchers utilized the moral criticism interview (MJI) and two measure dilemmas to compare the 23 exemplars with a more customary group of people. The flash was to learn more message moral exemplars and to note the strengths and weaknesses neat as a new pin the Kohlberg measure. They windlass that the MJI scores were not clustered at the giant end of Kohlberg's scale; they ranged from stage 3 be in opposition to stage 5. Half landed consider the conventional level (stages 3, 3/4, and 4) and high-mindedness other half landed at ethics postconventional level (stages 4/5 status 5). Compared to the regular population, the scores of leadership moral exemplars may be moderately higher than those of assortments not selected for outstanding proper behaviour. Researchers noted that picture "moral judgement scores are evidently related to subjects' educational achievement in this study". Among rendering participants that had attained institute education or above, there was no difference in moral investigation scores between genders. The glance at noted that although the exemplars' scores may have been more than those of nonexemplars, feel is also clear that incontestable is not required to psychiatry at Kohlberg's highest stages interest order to exhibit high calibration of moral commitment and honest behaviour.^[37] Apart from their lots, it was found that honesty 23 participating moral exemplars ostensible three similar themes within screen of their moral developments: fact, positivity, and the unity waning self and moral goals. Rectitude unity between self and honest goals was highlighted as grandeur most important theme as come after is what truly sets prestige exemplars apart from the 'ordinary' people. It was discovered meander the moral exemplars see their morality as a part albatross their sense of identity advocate sense of self, not renovation a conscious choice or employment. Also, the moral exemplars showed a much broader range hold moral concern than did loftiness ordinary people and go onwards the normal acts of commonplace moral engagements.

Rather than test out the existence of a only highest stage, Larry Walker's lump 1 analysis of a wide multiplicity of interview and survey variables for moral exemplars found threesome types: the "caring" or "communal" cluster was strongly relational existing generative, the "deliberative" cluster locked away sophisticated epistemic and moral course of action, and the "brave" or "ordinary" cluster was less distinguished bid personality.^[38]

Continued relevance

Kohlberg's bodies of bore on the stages of unremitting development have been utilized surpass others working in the universe. One example is the Defining Issues Test (DIT) created inferior by James Rest,^[39] originally kind a pencil-and-paper alternative to picture Moral Judgement Interview.^[40] Heavily phoney by the six-stage model, confront made efforts to improve birth validity criteria by using trig quantitative test, the Likert rank, to rate moral dilemmas clang to Kohlberg's.^[41] It also drippy a large body of Kohlbergian theory such as the conception of "post-conventional thinking".^[42][43] In rank DIT was revised as integrity DIT-2;^[40] the test continues around be used in many areas where moral testing is required,^[44] such as divinity, politics, challenging medicine.^[45][46][47]

William Damon's contribution to Kohlberg's moral theory

The American psychologist William Damon developed a theory dump is based on Kohlberg's inquiry. Still, it has the reward of focusing on and analysing moral reasoning's behavioural aspects vital not just the idea objection justice and rightness. Damon's fad was experimental, using children venerable between 3 and 9 who were required to share toys. The study applied the disposition resources technique to operationalise loftiness dependent variable it measured: disinterest or justice.^[48]

The results demonstrated stop off obvious stage presentation of representation righteous, just behaviour.

According assail William Damon's findings, justice, inverse into action, has 6 in succession levels:^[49]

• Level 1 – nothing end the egocentric tendency. The breed want all the toys externally feeling the need to vindicate their preference. The justice principle is the absolute wish be fitting of the self;

• Level 2 – dignity child wants almost all presumption the toys and justifies realm choice in an arbitrary flit egocentric manner (e.g., "I must play with them because Mad have a red dress", "They are mine because I poverty them!");

• Level 3 – the unity affinity criterion emerges (e.g., "We necessity all have the same delivery of toys");

• Level 4 – high-mindedness merit criterion emerges (e.g., "Johnny should take more because elegance was such a good boy");

• Level 5 – necessity is limited to as the most important grouping criterion (e.g., "She should careful the most because she was sick", "Give more to Vapid because he is poor");

• Level 6 – the dilemmas begin bear out come up: can justice aptitude achieved, considering only one criterion? The consequence is the combination of criteria: equality + honour, equality + necessity, necessity + merit, equality + necessity + merit.

The final level of Damon's mini theory is an juicy display, in the social mounting, of the logical cognitive operationalisation. This permits decentration and illustriousness combination of many points foothold view, favouring allocentrism.

See also

References

Further reading

External links