Moral Reasoning Lawrence Kohlberg 1963 Heinz Dilemma or

Moral Reasoning Lawrence Kohlberg 1963

Heinz Dilemma (or ‘Heinz Steals the Drug’) 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 to let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make

Discussion Questions 1. Should Heinz have stolen the drug? 2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife? 3. What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any difference? 4. Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman died?

Life Boat Morality Exercise: The ship is sinking and the seas are rough. All but one lifeboat has been destroyed. The lifeboat holds a maximum of 6 people. The four individuals who do not board the boat will certainly die. • Woman who is six weeks pregnant • Lifeguard • Two young adults who recently married • Senior citizen who has fifteen grandchildren • Elementary school teacher • Thirteen year old twins • Veteran nurse • Captain of the ship

Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development • Original study was 1962, 72 Boys in Chicago suburbs aged 10, 13, 16, half of each age was in upper or lower middle class, 2 hour interviews • Defined 6 stages in 3 levels of morality based on interviews • Level 1: Pre-Moral or Pre-Conventional • Level 2: Conventional Role-Conformity • Level 3: Self-Accepted Moral Principles or Post-Conventional

Pre-Conventional: Stage 1 • Punishment and obedience orientation • Consequences for right and wrong • Be good or be punished • If punished you must be bad

Stage 2 • Most 9 -year olds and under are in these stages • Individualism and Exchange • There is not one right view determined by authority • Individuals’ viewpoints vary • Satisfaction of one’s needs defines what is good

Level 2: Conventional, Stage 3: • Good inter-personal relationships • Approval seeking orientation • Good girl-good boy mindset • What pleases others is good

Stage 4 • Most adolescents and adults end up in these stages • Maintaining the Social Order • Maintain law and order • Doing one’s duty is good • Upholding laws is good • Avoids guilt

Level 3: Post-Conventional, Stage 5 • According to Kohlberg, only 10 -15% of people are capable of abstract reasoning to reach these stages • Social Contract and Individual Rights • Morality of agreement and democratically determined law • Societal values and individual rights determine right and wrong

Stage 6 • People at this stage have developed their own set of moral guidelines according to universal principles which may or may not fit the law. • e. g. , human rights, justice, and equality. The person will be prepared to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the process and having to pay the consequences of disapproval and or imprisonment. • Kohlberg doubted few people reached this stage.

Evaluation • Just because one says something is moral does not mean one will behave accordingly • Does not adequately address situational factors • Kohlberg addresses these – it’s a theory of moral reasoning • Dilemmas are artificial and hypothetical • Lack ecological validity • Cross-sectional sample rather than longitudinal

Evaluation • Are they etic? • Snarey (1987) did a meta-analysis on 27 cultures and found universal processing through the stages, but some cultures showed reasoning not included in Kohlberg’s model focusing on community welfare • Application to males and females? • Carol Gilligan (1982) found women reason more on interpersonal relations and responsibility to others and thus ‘score lower’, whereas men care more about justice and ‘score higher’. Un-replicated by others but she says they can reason higher but they don’t act at the higher levels.

TED – Iyad Rahwan (13: 30) https: //www. ted. com/talks/iyad_rahwan_what_moral_decisions_should_driverless_cars_make