Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development Presents Three

Kohlberg's theory of moral development presents three levels with two stages each of moral reasoning. The reason or motive for the behavior of an individual is what defines each stage (Crain, 1985). In order to come up with this developmental theory Kohlberg carried out studies using various dilemmas and finding out how the subjects responded. His main interest in the process is not a "yes" or "no" said by the subject but rather the reasoning behind the answer.

This way he was able to demonstrate that people's moral reasoning progressed through a series of stages as discussed hereunder: The first level is referred to as the "pre-conventional moral reasoning" and is typically related to children of about the age of 10 years. At this stage the individual does not internalize morals and the reasoning is externally influenced (Jeremy et al., 2000).

The individual categorizes an act as good or bad depending on the consequences and in relation to the set rules, actually children at this level do not understand the rules that have been set down by others thus the name "pre-conventional," the first and second stage fall under this level. Stage one is where punishment and obedience influence actions, at this stage moral decisions made by individuals are based on the fear of punishment.

Individuals evaluate their actions not in terms of goodness or badness but rather in terms of possible punishment, and the emphasis is on obeying power (McDevitt and Ormrod, 2007). Individuals tend to behave in a way that evades punishment and whether an action is right or wrong depends on whether it is punished or not. Children within this age bracket will obey instructions because they have been told by adults and because if they don't they will be punished by the adults.

For instance, a six-year-old boy will refrain from cheating in exams because he feels he will get caught and be punished by the teacher, therefore, the reasoning is that cheating in exams is bad because it is punishable. Stage two is characterized by individual self-interest and exchange of favors. At this stage the individual determines what is right or wrong by the reward that is attached to it.

McDevitt and Ormrod (2007) explain that whenever an action feels good to the individual and is also rewarding then it is categorized as good, the individual will get concerned about others' needs if they have something to gain from that and not out of loyalty, justice or gratitude.

At this stage a nine-year-old boy will feel it is right to cheat in exams because he will get a better score and he is interested in getting a better score, thus, the reasoning is that cheating is rewarding and meets his self-interest, so it is good. The second level is the "conventional moral reasoning" and this is commonly found in the society hence the name "conventional," it is typically associated with individuals between the age of ten and adolescence.

With a decline in egocentrism, the individual now tends to consider others in moral reasoning. Instead of viewing morals with respect to personal consequences, the individual now considers other's ethics in making moral decisions such as others' approval, loyalty to the family, obeying the set laws, and conforming to the social order (Power et al., 1989). The individuals have achieved intermediate internalization of morals or what may be referred to as the "conventions" of the society, this level includes the third and fourth stages of Kohlberg's theory.

The first stage at this level is stage three and individuals at this stage are characteristic of seeking approval or evading disapproval. In order to determine what is right and wrong then the approval of people who are close, such as friends and family, must be considered (Power et al., 1989). Whatever pleases others is considered good while anything that others disapprove of is bad. The moral judgment of such an individual is based on the trust, care and loyalty to others.

At this stage individuals tend to adopt the moral standards of those who are close to them. In this case, a fourteen-year-old boy will not cheat in an exam because he feels his parents will be ashamed of him when they get to know of it, since the parents disapprove of the act of cheating in exams them it is bad. The second stage at this level is stage four and morals are based on law and order.

Individual's moral decisions are influenced by the guidelines set by the society regarding what is right or wrong, the whole society is considered as opposed to stage three where it is only those who are close to the individual. The individual is aware of the existence of rules in the society and believe that they have an obligation to obey these rules.

However, their perception of rules is that they are rigid and can never change without realizing that there are certain needs that may necessitate change of rules (Power et al., 1989). Therefore, any action that is against the set rules is wrong, full stop! In this case a seventeen-year-old boy will not cheat in exams because he wants to uphold the exam rules and regulations which state that cheating is not allowed.

This means that if the rule that one should not cheat in exams did not exist then the boy would not view cheating in exams as wrong, and since this rule already exists no situation will be able to convince him that cheating may be acceptable. Moral decisions are therefore influenced by the extent to which the individual is aware of and understands the existing laws and social order.

The third and last level is the "post-conventional moral reasoning" which comes with full internalization of morals by an individual (Power et al., 1989). It is commonly seen adults though generally rare to be seen both in the younger ages and adults. In the previous level it is clear that individuals take rules as they are, however, at this level they start focusing on the basic principles of these rules and it is a level that is reached by few people.

The last two stages of Kohlberg's theory fall under this level. Stage five is characterized by the interpretation of the law and the rules of the society are used to determine what is wrong and right. However, at this stage the rules are not viewed as absolute but rather as frail. In this case the individual understands that relativity can be applied to rules and a variation of standards exists from one individual to another.

The importance of rules to the society is recognized but having in mind that laws are changeable. The individual believes that the law can be less important that some values such as freedom. Rational analysis and mutual agreement is the basis for.