Moral Development

Development Is based on the changes in our thoughts, feelings and our behavior. If the change is lasting or relatively permanent, it is considered to be a developmental change. The environment can also influence our behavior, feelings or thoughts, and change our development. Genetics can also be a factor In development. Moral development Involves the gradual development of an Individual’s concept of right and wrong. It includes the development of conscience religious values, social attitudes ad certain behavior.

Research undertaken by Laurence Kohlrabi has been broken down into 3 different subheadings and 6 different stages. The first stage is obedience and punishment where children see rules as fixed. Stage 2 Is Self-Interest Orientation or Individualism where children learn that there isn’t just one right view. Stage 3 takes place in the adolescence age, social conformity orientation or good inter-personal relationships are developed. In this stage adolescence perceive a sense of what ‘good boys and girls do. Stage 4 Is Law and Order orientation or initialing social order where Individual’s become more concerned with society as a whole when making Judgment. Stage 5 is where adults develop their social contrast orientation or individual Rights where people realize that there are different opinions to what make a good society. The final stage 6 Is where universal ethics orientation are developed and It Is rare to develop this. However If you do then you realize that the principles of Justice require us to get the claims of all parties.

The sub-headings re pre-conventional morality, conventional morality and post conventional morality. Emotional development Involves the development and changes on how an individual experiences different feelings and how these feelings are expressed. Research conducted by ‘Bowls looks at the emotional development of an infant and how they can create an emotional bond to another person (usually their care giver). With body contact and familiarity, an Infant can become very attached to their care-giver and can start to consider them as a safe haven, according to Bowls.

When seeking inform or safety when scared, infants return to their attachment figure because they see them as a ‘safe haven. ‘ Also in Bellboy’s theory, it is believed that infants perceive their attachment figure as a base of security from which the Infant can then explore its surrounding environment. Insinuators also undertook research into emotional development and came up with the theory of ‘strange situation’ where infants develop a ‘secure base’ with their attachment figure. Insinuators found that most Infants have a secure attachment with their care giver.

They will stay close to their are giver and use them as a ‘safe base’ when exploring environments. Infants will become distressed and won’t explore when a caregiver leaves. They are enthusiastic when a care giver returns and seek physical contact. Although 10% of infants have avoiding attachment where they do not seek closeness with their care giver and treat them Like a stranger. And 12% of Infant’s have resistant attachment where the Infant is anxious when with the care-giver and becomes greatly distressed when the caregiver leaves. This is usually Brought about by caregivers not being attentive to

Moral Development

This essay will demonstrate the explanation and the evaluation of two different theories of moral development. Moral development Is related to behavior, and psychologists mean by moral behavior is that the judgment of person. Jean Pigged is the most renowned psychologist for his work on moral development. However, his theory was limited and not developed as Lawrence Kohlrabi’s theory, but Pigged made a favor for Goldberg by provided him the starting point of the studying.

Starting with Piglet’s theory, which was focused on children and how do they concise right and wrong. It is worth to know that moral development has been divided by Pigged to three age stages, the first stage is pre-moral Judgment which Is from birth to five years old, the second stage Is moral realism, it is also called heterogamous morality, children here are between five to nine years old, the rules In this stage are unchangeable and they are obligatory by others and the punishment Is always harsh.

However the third stage moral relativism which Is also called autonomous morality, children in this stage are older than ten years old, and rules ere can be flexible to accommodate the situation, and the punishment is adjusted to fit the offense. To evaluate Piglet’s theory, it is important to know if his theory has supported evidence or not. Many psychologists’ findings were consistent with Piglet’s theory, like Hoffman (1970) “who confirmed that younger children see rules as moral absolutes”. However,Judith Gamesman (1981, 1985) found that young children about three years old were aware of rules and showed respect.

In addition, an Important question Is that; did Piglet’s theory cover moral development, Pigged did not study hillier beyond eleven years, In opposite of many researchers who found many stages of moral development behind this age. Pigged study who claimed that children at three-year-old cannot take into account. However, Nelson (1980) found that children at this age were able to take into account, also Pigged put this age in pre- moral stage. However, Nelson found that children could make moral Judgments at this age. Moreover, “… – ID-year-olds are capable of questioning parental authority – they believe that parents are justified in making and enforcing rules about moral issues such as stealing, but not in imposing conventional rules” Laps and Turret (1986). Furthermore, Pigged studied few children who were his own or his friends’ children, so this small number of children could not represent all children in the world. Therefore, Pigged study lacked of population validity. It Is also note-worthy that Pigged research was androgenic since he believed that girls’ games were simple. The second theory, which will be illustrated in this essay. s Lawrence Kohlrabi’s Kohlrabies (1967) research, both children and adults were engaged to evaluate their moral reasoning. His aim was to work out how children’s moral Judgment changed while they grew up. In his study, again the participants were males aged ten to thirteen and sixteen year-old in Chicago. Goldberg was focusing on the reasoning not the answers that the boys gave. As a result, he proposed three levels of moral reasoning and each level consist of two stages. Goldberg divided his levels by ages, starting with level one which is pre-conventional morality, this level for children about eight to twelve year-old.

Children’s understanding about how to keep themselves out of trouble is based on their moral thinking. This first stage which is similar to Piglet’s stage of moral realism is about punishment of actions and obedience orientation, so doing anything to avoid punishment, anything wrong, it must be punished. Who has stronger power is obeyed. The second stage is talking about instrumental hedonism orientation, children in this stage start to know that different people have different moral option. This stage is about exchanging of favors. Hedonism is the belief that what is pleasurable is morally good”. The second level is conventional morality and this level is for people around thirteen to sixteen year-old. This level contain stage three and four, starting with stage three which is talking about good boy/girl orientation, so doing what others like and what please them is a good behavior. The fourth stage is about the morality of authority; not the authority of specific people but the authority of norms of the society, so to be a good person you need to obey the law and try to do other’s duty.

The third level is post-conventional morality and this level is for early adulthood onwards, in this level people start to recognize that they can build their own values and norms that they believe it will be better than society norms and ales. This level consist last two stages five and six, stage five illustrated the individual rights and democratically accepted law, so in this stage it is the time for people to know how to deal with laws and manage that when they can ignore it or break it.

The last stage is talking about morality of individual principles of conscience, so individual’s self-chosen ethical principles are the basis of right or wrong definition, now law is not important as much as principles. To evaluate, Goldberg claimed that his stages are universal. Cross-culture studies show the same sequences which evidence and support Kohlrabies theory. However, there are many weaknesses in his study including ethnocentric, he Just studied Western society and leave other societies who have different norms and values.

He also expressed the ideas so it is difficult for participant to put their reasoning in words. Methodologically, Goldberg analyses the answers to his questions, so it is based on his analysis. In addition, Kohlrabies dilemmas were not related to everyday life, and it was difficult for participant to comprehend. Therefore, his theory lacked of ecological validity. Furthermore, Goldberg had a biased sample; he Just had male participants. It is also important to know that does moral development go through six different stages.

Turret (1978-1983) argued that moral development was gradual and continuous not different stages, when people grow up and starting to think and Pigged before him, they did not have and convince evidence that development has stage boundaries. All people’s moral statements will belong to one stage, if moral development passes on through stages. Finally, it is worth to know that both of Pigged and Goldberg broke the four ethical rules; they did not inform the consent, the participants were not able to leave, there were no guarantee to protect the artificial from harms, and they were deceivers.

Leave a Reply