Sociology

Lawrence Kohlbergs six-stage and three-level continuum of moral development is a way of explaining the underlying reasons behind the decisions that people make as they progress from childhood to adulthood (Crain, 1985).

At stages 1 and 2 (Level 1  Preconventional morality), children, being outside the formal membership in society, base morality on what their parents or authorities tell them. At stage 1, children make decisions based on its consequences. At stage 2, judgments are based on which decision would further their self-interest. At stages 3 and 4 (Level 2  Conventional morality), young adolescents view themselves as part of conventional society who must conform to social mores, norms, and expectations.

At stage 3, emphasis is on being a good boy or a good girl while at stage 4, concerns are directed toward obeying laws for the stability of society. At stages 5 and 6 (Postconventional morality), adults focus their concern more on values and principles that make society better.

At stage 5, people emphasize on democratic rights and processes and equality while at stage 6, they are concerned with the concept of justice (Kohlberg, 1981). Kohlberg was a follower of developmental psychologist Jean Piaget and his six-stage theory expounded on Piagets two-stage theory on childrens moral development (Duska  Whelen, 1975).  Kohlbergs stage theory suggests that people cannot comprehend moral reasoning a stage ahead of their own so that a person in Stage 1 may understand Stage 2 reasoning but nothing past that (Crain, 1985). To illustrate, 9-year old Daniel wants badly to be part of his schools baseball team. However, he has been getting bad grades in math and was warned by his parents that if he does not get better grades, he will not be allowed to join the team. On the next math exam, he was tempted to cheat. He thought that if he can get the grades his parents approved of, they would let him be on the team and would be proud of him. If he would be honest, he knew he would fail the exam and be miserable in the process. So, Daniel cheated. Kohlberg and Piaget would say that this judgment is typical or appropriate for children at Daniels age. Kohlberg would place this childs moral reasoning at Stage 1 where his judgment is being dictated on the consequences of his decision. If he does well on the exam, his parents would love him and be proud of him and would let him join the baseball team. If he does not, he will be miserable. Piaget would say that Daniels actions are reflective of the moral reasoning of a child below 10 years old. Daniel is yet incapable of appreciating how serious a concern cheating is. What is right for him is what would satisfy the expectations of those from whom he derives his own morality in this case, his parents. Although Daniel may have some awareness that there is some form of punishment attached to cheating, his moral reasoning only allows him to recognize the consequence of failing the exam and letting his parents down. In this regard, Daniel sees morality as external to himself, as something which his parents say he must do.