Kohlbergs Six Stages of Moral Development Level 1

Kohlberg's Six Stages of Moral Development

Level 1. Preconventional Stage One: The "obedience and punishment" stage. We all begin our lives at this stage, by obeying those in authority, or, more precisely, to those with the power to punish. Primary motivation: to avoid punishment; motivation and the actual act itself are both irrelevant to the ethical decision-making. When a student swears in the classroom, he or she has to complete a list of consequences developed by the teacher earlier in the year

Stage Two: The "individualism and reciprocity" stage. Right or wrong decisions are made on the basis of what is best for the person making the decision, though some negotiation with others may be necessary to attain what I want. Primary motivation: my self-interest; meeting one's own needs is the primary concern, not the rightness or wrongness of the act or its consequences. A student refrains from arguing with her classmate so she is able to participate in group work later in the period

Level II. Conventional Stage Three: The "interpersonal conformity" stage or the "good boy/nice girl" stage. Right or wrong is determined by what others close to us expect of us. Primary motivation: to be a good team player. Did the person "mean well"; was the person doing the act basically a "good person"? A student agrees to throw out the gum she is chewing to please the teacher

Stage Four: The "law-and-order" stage. An individual has a part to play in a society which is to do one's duty and to obey the rules and laws. There are fixed rules and duties that one must honor. Kohlberg thought that most adult Canadians were "stuck" at this stage of moral development. Primary motivation: to keep society as a whole going, motives and consequences are irrelevant in judging an action; an act is always right or wrong depending on the laws and duties. “Wear appropriate shoes on the gym floor". Public property must be protected in the schools

Level III. Postconventional Stage Five: The "social contract" stage. Here the individual moves beyond the fixed rules, duties, and laws to think about wider values and responsibilities: life, liberty, etc. The utilitarian appeal of "greatest good for the greatest number" often is invoked in this stage. Primary motivation: "what could all of us in principle agree to? "; generally, means do not justify the ends. A class makes its own rules during the first month of the year according to a class meeting where students discuss what is proper and improper behavior in the classroom and why a particular behavior is inappropriate

Stage Six: The stage of "universal ethical principles. " Now, instead of thinking what is best for the greatest number, higher ethical laws are invoked. Concerns such as respect for the dignity of each person, basic equality for all, and treating people as ends not means are prevalent concepts in this stage Primary motivation: following these higher ethical principles; good motives do not make an act right (or not wrong). “I have only one rule in this classroom and that rule is not negotiable: Respect yourself and everyone else in this room. ”

Heinz Dilemma As an Example

A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2, 000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1, 000, which is 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, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it. " So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Stage One (obedience): Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person. Or: Heinz should steal the medicine because if he doesn’t his wife, family , and friends will hate him and shun him for the rest of his life.

Stage Two (self-interest): Heinz should steal the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would probably languish over a jail cell more than his wife's death.

Stage Three (conformity): Heinz should steal the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband. Or: Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he tried to do everything he could without breaking the law, you cannot blame him.

Stage Four (law-and-order): Heinz should not steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal. Or: Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.

Stage Five (human rights): Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right.

Stage Six (universal human ethics): Heinz should steal the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person. Or: Heinz should not steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.