Kohlberg and Morality by ert554898

VIEWS: 31 PAGES: 18

									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
                                                     Cheating/Good
Athlete Number   Value       Choice       Rule            Self           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

                                                                                                          Final
                                                             Cheating/Good                                Stag
Non Athlete Number       Value       Choice       Rule          Self             Justice       Laws       e




                     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.

								
To top