Moral Development Values and Religion Chapter 13 Module

Moral Development, Values and Religion Chapter 13

Module Objectives What is moral development? How do we develop prosocial behavior? How do we develop antisocial behavior?

Think on your own… What does it mean to have morals? What is moral development? How do you know if you have morals?

Moral development involves changes in thoughts, feelings and behaviors regarding standards of right and wrong This involves an interpersonal and intrapersonal dimension

Moral development involves 4 questions: 1. How do individuals reason or think about moral decisions? 2. How do individuals actually behave in moral circumstances? 3. How do individuals feel about moral matters? 4. What characterizes an individuals moral personality?

Piaget concluded that children go through two stages of how they think about morality Younger children (4 -7) display heteronomous morality Older children (10 and older) display autonomous morality

Piaget’s Theory of Moral Development Heteronymous morality Autonomous morality Immanent justice Justice and rules are conceived of as unchangeable properties of the world, removed from the control of people (4 -7 years) Becomes aware that rules and laws are created by people; in judging an action, one should consider actor’s intentions as well as consequences (10 years and older) If a rule is broken, punishment will be meted out immediately

Piaget’s Theory of Moral Judgment Heteronomous thinking is typical of children younger than 7 - or 8 -years-old ‐ These children regard rules and duties to others as unchangeable “givens” ‐ Justice is whatever authorities say is right ‐ Authorities’ punishments are always justified Whether an action is good or bad is determined by the consequence of the action, not the motives or intentions behind it ‐ Acts that are not consistent with the rules are “bad” ‐ Acts that are consistent with the rules are “good”

Piaget’s Theory of Moral Judgment Autonomous morality (Moral relativism) is typical of children 12 -years-old and older ‐ Children understand that rules are products of social interaction and agreement and can be changed if the majority of the group agrees to do so ‐ Punishments should fit the crime and punishments delivered by adults is not necessarily fair ‐ They consider the motives and intentions when evaluating whether an action is good or bad

On your own activity… Consider the following Story, who is right or wrong? WHY?

If you are 6: Which girl do you think was more bad, Olivia or Melissa? If you are 10: Which girl do you think was more bad, Olivia or Melissa? One day, a girl named Olivia was playing with her mommy. Olivia decided that it would be fun to have a tea party with her mommy and her dolls. So, Olivia went into the kitchen and got a box of crackers and six tea cups. Olivia carefully arranged the tea cups on a tray, but while she reached for the box of crackers, the tray accidentally slipped out of her hands and the six cups smashed into pieces on the floor. Another girl, one named Melissa, was playing with her daddy. Melissa wanted to play marching band in the kitchen by clanging pot lids together. When her daddy said the he didn’t want to play marching band because it was too loud, Melissa became very upset. She was so angry that she grabbed a cup off the counter and threw it onto the floor, smashing it into pieces.

According to Piaget, young children who are in a stage of moral realism, judge right and wrong by the consequences of one’s actions. Therefore, young children should say that Olivia is more bad because she broke more cups.

These objective judgments give way to subjective judgments when children (around age 8) enter the stage of moral relativism. In this advanced stage, children consider motives when judging one’s actions

Moral Reasoning – Kohlberg’s Theory Moral development progresses through a series of stages that are discontinuous and hierarchical ‐ Each new stage reflects a qualitatively different, more adequate way of thinking than the one before it

Older and more advanced thinkers SHOULD, on average, be more advanced in their moral development

Higher-level moral reasoning Like Piaget, age-related advances in cognitive skills (especially perspective taking) are believed to underlie the development of higher-level moral judgments. ‐ People who have higher-level cognitive skills are better educated and exhibit higher-level moral judgment. Children who exhibit higher-levels of perspective taking than their peers score higher in their moral judgment.

On your own activity… Read the following moral dilemma and reflect on why this was right or wrong. Also what reasoning can use apply to this story? Would you always have thought the way you do right now? What has changed?

Heinz, had a wife who was dying of cancer. A drug that might save her had been discovered by a local pharmacist, but he was charging $2000, ten times what the drug cost to make. It was far more money than Heinz had. Heinz went to everyone he knew to borrow the money but he could only get together about half of what the drug cost. He told the druggist 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.

Was this moral? Which response is more advanced in terms of moral reasoning? ‐He shouldn’t steal the drug because he’ll probably get caught and put in jail. ‐He should steal the drug because he wants his wife to feel better and to live.

Were you right? Which response is more advanced in terms of moral reasoning? ‐He shouldn’t steal the drug because he’ll probably get caught and put in jail. ‐He should steal the drug because he wants his wife to feel better and to live.

How is stealing moral? The second would be a display of higher levels of moral reasoning. In the early stages, moral reasoning is based on external forces, such as the promise of reward or the threat of punishment. The most advanced stages, moral reasoning is based on a personal, internal moral code and is unaffected by others’ views or society’s expectations.

Stages in Kohlberg’s Theory Preconventional Level Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation Stage 2: Instrumental and Exchange Orientation Conventional Level Stage 3: Mutual Interpersonal Expectations, Relationships, and Interpersonal Conformity Stage 4: Social System and Conscience Orientation Postconventional Level Stage 5: Social Contract or Individual Right Orientation Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles

Stage 1 Punishment and Obedience Orientation Pro-stealing: If you let your wife die, you will get in trouble. You’ll be blamed for not spending the money to help her and there’ll be an investigation of you and the druggist for your wife’s death Anti-stealing: You shouldn’t steal the drug because you’ll be caught and sent to jail if you do. If you do get away, you’d be scared that the police would catch up with you any minute.

During stage 1 people believe that adults know what is right and wrong. Consequently, a person should do what adults say is right to avoid being punished. Child does not consider the interests of others or recognize that they differ from his or her own interests. People in this stage exhibit blind obedience to authority.

Stage 2 Naïve Hedonism Prostealing: The druggist can do what he wants and Heinz can do what he wants to do… But if Heinz decides to risk jail to save his wife, it’s his life he’s risking; he can do what he wants with it. And the same goes for the druggist; it’s up to him to decide what he wants to do. Antistealing: [Heinz] is running more risk than it’s worth to save a wife who is near death.

In Stage 2 people look out for their own needs. They often are nice to others because they expect the favor to be returned in the future. So it is a tit-for-tat exchange of benefits. “You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”

Stage 3 “Good Boy” or “Good Girl” Orientation Prostealing: No one will think you’re bad if you steal the drug, but your family will think you’re an inhuman husband if you don’t. If you let your wife die, you’ll never be able to look anyone in the face again. Antistealing: It isn’t just the druggist who will think you’re a criminal, everyone else will too. After you steal it, you’ll feel bad thinking how you’ve brought dishonor on your family and yourself.

Stage 3: Adolescents and adults believe they should act according to others’ expectations. The aim is to win the approval of others by behaving like “good boys” and “good girls. ” Being good is important in itself and means having good motives, showing concern about others, and maintaining good relationships with others. People are judged by their intentions…meaning well is valued and being nice is important.

Stage 4 Social-Order Maintaining Morality Prostealing: He should steal it. Heinz has a duty to protect his wife’s life; it’s a vow he took in marriage. But it’s wrong to steal, so he would have to take the drug with the idea of paying the druggist for it and accepting the penalty for breaking the law later. Antistealing: It’s a natural thing for Heinz to want to save his wife, but… Even if his wife is dying, it’s still his duty as a citizen to obey the law. No one else is allowed to steal, why should he be? If everyone starts breaking the law in a jam, there’d be no civilization, just crime and violence.

Stage 4: Adolescents and adults believe that social roles, expectations, and laws exist to maintain order within society and to promote the good of all people. The individual is motivated to keep the social system going and to avoid a breakdown in its functioning. What is right is what conforms to the rules of legal authority –the reason for conforming is not fear of punishment but a belief that rules and laws maintaining a social order that is worth preserving.

Stage 5 Social-Contract Orientation Prostealing: Although there is a law against stealing, the law wasn’t meant to violate a person’s right to life. Taking the drug does violate the law, but Heinz is justified in stealing in this instance. If Heinz is prosecuted for stealing, the law needs to be reinterpreted to take into account situations in which it goes against people’s natural right to keep on living.

Stage 5: Adults agree that members of cultural groups adhere to a “social contract” because a common set of expectations and laws benefit all group members. If these expectations and laws no longer promote the welfare of individuals, they become invalid The greatest good for the greatest number… Some values and rights are universal and must be upheld regardless of the majority such as life and liberty.

Stage 6 Morality of Individual Principles of Conscience Pro-stealing: If Heinz does not do everything he can do to save his wife, then he is putting some value higher than the value of life. It doesn’t make sense to put respect for property above respect for life itself. [People] could live together without private property at all. Respect for human life and personality is absolute and accordingly [people] have a mutual duty to save one another from dying.

Stage 6: Abstract principles like justice (equality of human rights, respect for the dignity of each human being), compassion, and equality form the basis of a personal moral code that may sometimes conflict with society’s expectations and laws. When laws violate principles, the individual should act on principles not the law. Right and wrong are determined on the basis of self-chosen ethical principles. Principles are not concrete rules – they are abstract moral guidelines of universal justice and respect for the rights of all human beings. These principles transcend any law or social contract that is in conflict with them.

Three Levels of Moral Judgment Preconventional Self-centered ‐ Focuses on getting rewards and avoiding punishments ‐ Conventional Centered on social relationships ‐ Focuses on compliance with social duties and laws ‐ Postconventional (Principled) Centered on ideals ‐ Focuses on moral principles ‐

Do you understand Kohlberg’s stages of moral development? Test your knowledge with the following activity

Shaking her head and frowning disapprovingly at the teenager who was slipping a candy bar from the shelf into the pocket of his jacket, a shopper lectured, “You know as well as I do that shoplifting is against the law. What if everyone just did what they wanted? ” What level of moral reasoning is demonstrated by the shopper?

The shopper is in Stage 4 Fulfilling duties and upholding the law to maintain social order. They are motivated to keep the social system going and to avoid a breakdown in its functioning.

Amy’s mother has insisted that Amy not eat snacks between meals. Now, if Amy should eat this Twinkie before dinner, she should be unhappy when thinking about how she would be disappointing her mother. What level of moral reasoning does this demonstrate?

Amy is in stage 3…she has to be a “good girl. ” Her good behavior is doing what is expected by people who are close to the person or what people generally expect of someone in a given role.

Well, Amy ate the Twinkie. When talking with a friend about it the next day, Amy’s friend told her that she (Amy) was bad because her mother caught her eating snacks between meals and punished her for it. Amy’s friend is using what level of moral reasoning?

Amy’s friend is in Stage 1…she is being obedient. The conscience is made up of fear of punishment and the moral action is motivated by the avoidance of punishment. The child does not consider the interests of others or see how someone else’s interests are different from their own.

You are distressed when your boss asks you to charge a late fee to customers who miss the deadline. You believe that a late fee is clearly unjustified; late orders cause no real difficulty and cost the company no more to process than early orders. While you recognize the right of the company to make a profit, you insist that a late fee is not fair to the customer. What level of moral reasoning are you demonstrating?

You are in Stage 5 - being right involves upholding rules that are in the best interest of the group. Rules should be impartial, and agreed upon by the group. If the rule no longer promotes the welfare of individuals, then the rules become invalid.

Conversation overheard in a cafeteria line: “Why should I want to report the guy for failing to submit all the money we collected for the charity fund? Sure he kept some of it, but he shared it with me. ” What level of moral reasoning does this demonstrate?

This person is in Stage 2 - what is right is based on the “tit-for-tat” principle. It involves an equal exchange between people. People look out for their own needs. They are nice to others because they expect the favor to be returned.

People with higher-level moral reasoning Are more likely to assist others ‐ Are less likely to engage in delinquent activities ‐ Are more likely to behave in a moral manner ‐ Individuals at the preconventional and conventional levels would act morally when external forces demand, but otherwise they might not Individuals at the postconventional level would act morally even when external forces may not favor it

Criticisms of Kohlberg’s Theory It is culturally biased ‐ Does not apply to cultures outside a constitutional democracy ‐ Does not incorporate the concerns and experiences of non-Western people It is considered sexist ‐ Gilligan believes that he places women at a lower level of moral reasoning (stage 3, approval) than he does men (stage 4, law and order)

Gilligan’s Ethic of Caring Proposed a developmental progression in which individuals gain greater understanding of caring and responsibility ‐ First stage ‐ Children ‐ are preoccupied with their own needs Second stage ‐ People care for others, particularly those who are less able to care for themselves (like infants and aged) ‐ Third stage ‐ People care in all human relationships (with others and oneself)

Think about this Moral Dilemma Two young men, brothers got into serious trouble. They were secretly leaving town in a hurry and needed money. Karl, the older one, broke into a store and stole a thousand dollars. Bob, the younger one, went to a retired old man who was known to help people in town. He told the man that he was very sick and that he needed a thousand dollars to pay for an operation. Bob asked the old man to lend him the money and promised that he would pay him back when he recovered. Really Bob wasn't sick at all, and he had no intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didn't know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl skipped town, each with a thousand dollars. Think on your own…which is worse, stealing like Karl or cheating like Bob? Why?

When Does Aggression Emerge?

Social Understanding Children in this age begin to develop social understanding or social cognition, which is their understanding of the social world. This is a person’s awareness and understanding of human personality, emotions, intentions and actions. They start to realize that people are motivated by thoughts and emotions that are different than their own.

Empathy A person’s understanding of the emotions of another, including the ability to figure out what would make that person feel better. The child must be able to identify the emotions of others (to at least some degree) and understand that another person is feeling an emotion or is in some kind of need. ‐ This indicates a level of understanding of the self, usually not evident until age 4.

At a city playground, 4 -year-old Ezra sees his playmate Ned trip, fall, and begin to cry. Ezra goes to Ned, telling him not to feel bad, and offers to push him on a swing. In order for Ezra to understand that Ned needed comforting, it was necessary for Ezra to feel empathy with Ned’s unhappiness. ‐ To realize that he was hurt and warranted sympathy.

How Empathic Are You? Answer on a scale of 0 to 4 0: Does not describe me very well --- 4: Describes me very well 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in his or her place. If I’m sure I’m right about something, I don’t waste much time listening to other people’s arguments. I sometimes try to understand my friends better by imagining how things look from their perspective. I believe that there are two sides to every question and try to look at them both. I sometimes find it difficult to see things from the “other guy’s” point of view. I try to look at everybody’s side of a disagreement before I make a decision. When I’m upset at someone, I usually try to “put myself in his shoes” for a while. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. When I see someone being taken advantage of, I feel kind of protective toward him. When I see someone being treated unfairly, I sometimes don’t feel much pity for him. I often have tender, concerned feelings for people less fortunate than me. I would describe myself as a pretty softhearted person. Sometimes I don’t feel very sorry for other people when they have problems. Other people’s misfortunes do not usually disturb me a great deal. I am often quite touched by things that I see happen.