Transcript Kohlberg and Morality - University of Dallas

Kohlberg and Morality
Presented by Tom Fogerty
Lawrence Kohlberg
•
•
•
•
•
•
Born in 1927, growing up in
Bronxville, New York
Attended Andover Academy in
Massachusetts, a demanding
private high school
After high school worked as an
engineer while helping in the
Israeli cause.
He then attended the University of
Chicago for undergrad and
graduate studies
Taught at the University of
Chicago and Harvard.
Published his dissertation in 1958
at the University of Chicago
Kohlberg’s Study
• Kohlberg studied Piaget in the study of moral judgment
and moral philosophy. However Kohlberg thought it was
incomplete and worked to develop more.
• Kohlberg study was of children in the Chicago area. He
would pose dilemmas and use their answers and
reasoning behind the answer to determine the moral
development.
• Kohlberg changed from Piaget’s two-stage theory and
created his six-stage theory.
Level 1- Preconventional Morality
Stage 1- Obedience and Punishment
Orientation
 Morality based on punishments and rewards.
 Judgment formed according to external authorities
Stage 2- Individualism and Exchange
 Morality is now reciprocal.
 Seek individuals best interest, only help if it is in our best
interest
Level 2- Conventional Morality
Stage 3- Good Interpersonal Relationships
 Desire to be “good” in family and communities eyes
 Good motives and good feelings; love, trust, etc.
Stage 4-Maintaining the Social Order
 Concerned with society as a whole
 Obeying laws, respecting authority
Level 3- Postconventional Morality
Stage 5- Social Contract and Individual Rights
 Think of society in a theoretical way, ask why is this
good for society?
 Want certain rights and freedoms
Stage 6- Universal Principles
 The principles by which we achieve justice
Question:
Will athletes be classified at a lower moral development
than non athletes?
My Study
Kohlberg’s study used children 10-16 to determine the different levels
of moral development. Kohlberg posed 8 dilemmas with the
questions and used the answers received to determine moral
development.
As an athlete and the University of Dallas I find that often I receive a
bad reputation from different faculty and students because they
assume as an athlete I do not meet the standard of the normal UD
student. I’ve been accused of being less moral than those students
who do not participate in athletics. My study will use two of
Kohlberg’s dilemmas given to athletes and non athletes to determine
if there is a different level of moral development between the two
groups.
Hypothesis
As an athlete I will have obvious bias,
however I do not believe that one group
will be of a higher moral development than
the other. I think that they will both be
equal and will cover a range of the moral
developments.
The First Dilemma
Two young men, brothers, had 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.
Questions
• 1a. Which is worse, stealing like Karl or cheating like Bob? 1b. Why
is that worse?
• 2. What do you think is the worst thing about cheating the old man?
• 2a. why is that the worst thing?
• 3. In general, why should a promise be kept?
• 4. Is it important to keep a promise to someone you don't know well
or will never see again?
• 4a. Why or why not?
• 5. Why shouldn't someone steal from a store?
• 6. What is the value or importance of property rights?
• 7. Should people do everything they can to obey the law?
• 7a. Why or why not?
• 8. Was the old man being irresponsible by lending Bob the money?
• 8a. Why or why not?
Terms for Assessment
• Value- Modes of attributing moral value to acts and persons. Modes of
assessing value-consequences in the situation.
• Choice- The methods taken to resolve the conflict. The chosen
outcome in the situation.
• Rule- The Concept of duty or moral compulsion.
• Good Self- The Role of the good person, the act of cheating.
• Justice- Concern for the relation of one event to another, standards of
exchange and punishment and reward.
• Laws – The reasoning behind why laws are followed or why the laws
are needed.
Dilemma Coding Forms
Athletes Final Stages
Athlete Number
Value
Cheating/Good
Self
Rule
Choice
Justice
Laws
Final Stage
1
0
4
0
1
4
4
3
2
0
4
0
3
4
4
4
3
0
2
0
2
4
4
3
4
3
2
0
2
4
4
4
5
0
2
0
5
4
4
4
Non Athletes
Non Athlete Number
Value
Choice
Cheating/Good
Self
Rule
Justice
Final
Stag
e
Laws
1
0
4
0
2
1
4
3
2
0
2
0
4
5
4
4
3
0
2
2
2
5
3
3
4
0
2
0
4
5
3
3
5
0
2
0
4
5
4
4
Conclusion
My hypothesis was correct because both
groups had a number of 3’s and number of
4’s. This is also in the middle of the moral
development stages.
Limitations
Problems with my research is that I did not
have a very large group of people, I would
like to survey a much larger group of
people. Also if possible I would like to ask
all of the same dilemmas that Kohlberg
asked.