I'd like to say a bit or two on Lawrence Kohlberg, and his fantastical ladder of moral wonders!!
Well, okay. It's not called that, but it DOES follow a ladder structure and is ideas, while decievingly simple, evoke a great deal of debate on the ideas of morality.
I see the ladder as follows, based off of a diagram I looked over back in my high school Psych course from a Myers Psychology text:
As can be seen in the diagram, the first level of morality according to Kohlberg is the pre-conventional level. This basicly entails a level of morality that is composed of two seperate stages, which are Obedience and Punishment, followed by Hedonism. As is implied, obedience and punishment follow a reasoning that only does things due to the rewards, or avoids doing something for fear of punishment. Hedonism implies that one's actions are to seek personal pleasure or satisfaction.
The next level of the ladder is Conventional morality, which includes the stages "Good boy/girl" and Law and Order respectively. The "Good boy/girl" stage states that people act a certain way to mantain societies positive views and norms. Rather, one does something to look "good" or be viewed as right and a good person. Law and Order implies that in this stage of moral development the laws and rules placed by those with authority and percieved control are the reasons behind doing/ not doing something.
Lastly we have postconventional, which is comrpised of the "Social Contract" idea followed by the extremely rare Universal Ethical stage. In Social Contract, people are motivated by the idea of a whole community, or being a part of a community. Even the planet as a whole (humanity) can be seen this way. The action is done because the person doing it believes it is the best thing to do for humanity/ the community, and they are doing their part, or "Good deeds" to the best they can. Universal Ethical is a full belief in going to extreme lengths to bring about what is ethically right for ALL people, even at the risk personal harm to one self. Ghandi and his hunger strikes exemplify his moral standing in his willingness to starve himself to work towards making life better for millions of Indian people.
Kohlbergs theories ring true, and we can see them in everyday actions/societry, especially our own! I do believe on a final note that we must be careful not to oversimplify, in that decisions often have complex and multi-faceted reasons behind them, which can be drawn from a variety of Kohlberg's levels, each with different amounts of influence. Either way, his framework is a good one for the motivation behind human morality.
That's a great diagram, Zach.
ReplyDeleteHere is a more comprehensive model, at the college level:
Foundations of Ethics