LAWRENCE KOHLBERG’S SIX

STAGES OF MORAL
DEVELOPMENT

Name : MUHAMMED SAAD

Id No : 9390
Section : C

Page 1 of 40
 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

December 06. 2010

Sir Sahib Khan Channa
Professor
Institute of Business Management
Korangi Creek
Karachi – 75100

Dear Sir Sahib Khan Channa:

Here is the report about the KOHLBERG'S STAGES OF MORAL

DEVELOPMENT. This report as per your instruction has covered
all the authentic areas of concern and contains all the relevant
information.

I would dearly like to thank you for the faith you showed in our
capabilities & the encouragement you gave us when assigning
this report.

I have tried our best to gather as much information as possible.

All rules and regulations for the preparation of the formal report
have been taken into consideration.

Sincerely,

MUHAMMED SAAD (9390)

Page 2 of 40
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ETHICS.........................................................................................................................3
Definition..................................................................................................................4
OTHER DEFINITIONS OF ETHICS.........................................................................4
BUSINESS ETHICS.....................................................................................................6
WHY USE BUSINESS ETHICS IN DECISION MAKING............................................8
MORALITY AND ETHICS............................................................................................9
Ethics......................................................................................................................10
Morality..................................................................................................................10
INDIVIDUAL ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING STYLES.........................................12
HISTORY OF ETHICS IN BUSINESS.......................................................................13
THE IMPORTANCE OF BUSINESS ETHICS...........................................................15
Moral Development and Moral Education: An Overview............................................17
KOHLBERG'S SIX STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT....................................17
INTRODUCTION OF THE SIX STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT..................19
Level 1. Preconventional Morality.......................................................................22
Stage 1 ...............................................................................................................22
Stage 2................................................................................................................23
Level 2. Conventional Morality............................................................................24
Stage 3................................................................................................................24
Stage 4 -..............................................................................................................25
Level 3. Postconventional Morality.....................................................................25
Stage 5 ...............................................................................................................25
Stage 6 -..............................................................................................................26
Moral Education........................................................................................................28
Criticisms of Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development:.....................................31
Carol Gilligan............................................................................................................32
Piaget's Theory.........................................................................................................33
SUMMARY………………………………………………………………………………….37

Page 3 of 40
 ETHICS

Definition
Ethics, also known as moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy that
addresses questions about morality—that is, concepts such as good and evil,
right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice, etc.

Major branches of ethics include:

 Meta-ethics, about the theoretical meaning and reference of moral

propositions and how their truth-values (if any) may be determined;
 Normative ethics, about the practical means of determining a moral
course of action;
 Applied ethics, about how moral outcomes can be achieved in specific
situations;
 Moral psychology, about how moral capacity or moral agency develops
and what its nature is; and
 Descriptive ethics, about what moral values people actually abide by.

OTHER DEFINITIONS OF ETHICS

 A system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.

 The rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular

class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.:
medical ethics; Christian ethics.

Page 4 of 40
  Moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade
betrayal of a confidence.

 That branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to

human conduct, with respect to the rightness and
wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and
badness of the motives and ends of such actions.

INTRODUCTION

The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing,

defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong
behavior. Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into
three general subject areas: metaethics, normative ethics, and
applied ethics. Metaethics investigates where our ethical
principles come from, and what they mean. Are they merely
social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our
individual emotions? Metaethical answers to these questions
focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of
reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms
themselves. Normative ethics takes on a more practical task,
which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and
wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that
we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the
consequences of our behavior on others. Finally, applied ethics
involves examining specific controversial issues, such as
abortion, infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns,
homosexuality, capital punishment, or nuclear war.

By using the conceptual tools of metaethics and normative

ethics, discussions in applied ethics try to resolve these
controversial issues. The lines of distinction between metaethics,
normative ethics, and applied ethics are often blurry. For
example, the issue of abortion is an applied ethical topic since it
Page 5 of 40
involves a specific type of controversial behavior. But it also
depends on more general normative principles, such as the right
of self-rule and the right to life, which are litmus tests for
determining the morality of that procedure. The issue also rests
on metaethical issues such as, “where do rights come from?” and
“what kind of beings have rights?”

BUSINESS ETHICS

Business ethics (also known as corporate ethics) is a form of

applied ethics or professional ethics that examines ethical
principles and moral or ethical problems that arise in a business
environment. It applies to all aspects of business conduct and is
relevant to the conduct of individuals and business organizations
as a whole. Applied ethics is a field of ethics that deals with
ethical questions in many fields such as medical, technical, legal
and business ethics.

Business ethics can be both a normative and a descriptive

discipline. As a corporate practice and a career specialization, the
field is primarily normative. In academia descriptive approaches
are also taken. The range and quantity of business ethical issues
reflects the degree to which business is perceived to be at odds
with non-economic social values. Historically, interest in
business ethics accelerated dramatically during the 1980s and
1990s, both within major corporations and within academia. For
example, today most major corporate websites lay emphasis on
commitment to promoting non-economic social values under a
variety of headings such as ethics codes and social responsibility
charters. In some cases, corporations have redefined their core
values in the light of business ethical considerations, for
example, BP's "beyond petroleum" environmental tilt.

Business ethics is the behavior that a business adheres to in its

daily dealings with the world. The ethics of a particular business
Page 6 of 40
can be diverse. They apply not only to how the business interacts
with the world at large, but also to their one-on-one dealings with
a single customer.

Many businesses have gained a bad reputation just by being in

business. To some people, businesses are interested in making
money, and that is the bottom line. It could be called capitalism
in its purest form. Making money is not wrong in itself. It is the
manner in which some businesses conduct themselves that
brings up the question of ethical behavior.

Good business ethics should be a part of every business. There

are many factors to consider. When a company does business
with another that is considered unethical, does this make the
first company unethical by association? Some people would say
yes, the first business has a responsibility and it is now a link in
the chain of unethical businesses.

Many global businesses, including most of the major brands that

the public use, can be seen not to think too highly of good
business ethics. Many major brands have been fined millions for
breaking ethical business laws. Money is the major deciding
factor.

If a company does not adhere to business ethics and breaks the

laws, they usually end up being fined. Many companies have
broken anti-trust, ethical and environmental laws and received
fines worth millions. The problem is that the amount of money
these companies are making outweighs the fines applied. Billion
dollar profits blind the companies to their lack of business ethics,
and the dollar sign wins.

A business may be a multi-million seller, but does it use good

business ethics and do people care? There are popular soft
drinks and fast food restaurants that have been fined time and
time again for unethical behavior. Business ethics should
eliminate exploitation, from the sweat shop children who are
making sneakers to the coffee serving staff who are being ripped

Page 7 of 40
off in wages. Business ethics can be applied to everything from
the trees cut down to make the paper that a business sells to the
ramifications of importing coffee from certain countries.

WHY USE BUSINESS ETHICS

IN DECISION MAKING

Discussion on ethics in business is necessary because business

can become unethical, and there are plenty of evidences today on
unethical corporate practices. Even Adam Smith opined that
"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for
merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a
conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise
prices." Firms and corporations operate in the social and natural
environment. By virtue of existing in such environments,
business is duty bound to be accountable to the natural and
social environment in which it survives. Irrespective of the
demands and pressures upon it, business by virtue of its
existence is bound to be ethical, for at least two reasons: one,
because whatever the business does affects its stakeholders and
two, because every juncture of action has trajectories of ethical
as well as unethical paths, wherein the existence of the business
is justified by ethical alternatives it responsibly chooses One of
the conditions that brought business ethics to the forefront is the
demise of small scale, high trust and face-to-face enterprises,
and emergence of huge multinational corporate structures
capable of drastically affecting everyday lives of the masses.

There is already something odd about this question. It is like

asking, “Why are bachelors unmarried?” They are unmarried by
definition. If they were married, they would not be bachelors. It is

Page 8 of 40
the same with ethics. To say that one should do something is
another way of saying it is ethical. If it is not ethical, then one
should not do it.

Perhaps when business people ask why they should be ethical,

they have a different question in mind: what is the motivation for
being good? Is there something in it for them?

It is perfectly all right to ask if there is a reward for being good,

but this has nothing to do with whether one should be good. It
makes no sense to try convince people that they should be good
by pointing to the rewards that may follow. One should be good
because “good” is, by definition, that which one should be.
As for motivation, good behavior often brings a reward, but not
every time. Think about it. If it were always in one’s interest to be
good, there would be no need for ethics. We could simply act
selfishly and forget about obligation. People invented ethics
precisely because it does not always coincide with self interest.

MORALITY AND ETHICS

Morality and ethics are terms often used as if they have the same
meaning. At other times, they are used as if they have no
relationship to one another. I think most people realize ethics
and morality have something to do with the concepts of good and
bad.

Generally, the terms morality and ethics and the cognates moral
and ethical and morally and ethically, and so on are
interchangeable. The presence of two words in the English
language with the same meaning is due to the fact that they

Page 9 of 40
derive from different roots: morality from the Latin word moriltas,
and ethics from the Greek ethikos

The word "morality" has been co-opted by groups, such as the

Moral Majority, making us think morality only deals with acts
these religious groups think aren't proper, or are therefore
immoral. If you ask people to define "immoral," generally they will
give an answer that has to do with sex.

The meanings of the terms "ethics" and "morality" can be

differentiated based on their origins in ancient Greek and Latin,
respectively. We know that the foundations of Western
philosophy came from the ancient Greeks. Thus, if one were to
use a single term to describe the Greeks, it would be
"philosophers."

On the other hand, the ancient Romans developed many of the

techniques used in architecture; so much of their work still
stands. Hence, one might describe the
Romans as builders. As a result, words that
come into the English language from the
Greeks often have meanings that are primarily
philosophical study, while the Latin-derived
words imply "doing the thing."

Ethics comes from the Greek word ethikos - moral character or

custom. Ethics, also known as moral philosophy is a branch of
philosophy that addresses questions about morality—that is,
concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice,
justice, etc.

Page 10 of 40
.Morality is used to refer to what we would call moral conduct
or standards. Morality is looking at how good or bad our conduct
is, and our standards about conduct. Ethics is used to refer to the
formal study of those standards or conduct. Sometimes, one refers
to the study of conduct as moral philosophy, but that is less
common than just saying "ethics." Hence, in most chiropractic
colleges, there is an ethics class, rather than one named
"morality." One might say that morality is ethics in action, but in
the end, the two terms can be used interchangeably. The study of
ethics or moral philosophy can be divided into three broad areas:
descriptive, normative and analytical (or metaethics).
Descriptive ethics is simply describing how people behave. For
example, people might say that they think that stealing is bad,
but descriptive ethics might tell us, from observing these people,
that they may have "downloaded" hundreds of media (in such
forms as .mp3 audio or .bmp image) files from file-sharing
programs on the Internet. Descriptive ethics let us see if we "walk
the walk," and if we are just rationalizing our way past our own
moral beliefs.
Sometimes it takes an unbiased observer to point out to us where
we are not meeting our own standards. For some, discovering the
hypocrisy might just get us to change what we say is good or bad,
and adopt and lessen our professed moral code to fit our actions.
Hopefully, descriptive ethics can lead to some moral self-
reflection and an improvement in our own behavior.

Page 11 of 40
INDIVIDUAL ETHICAL DECISION-
MAKING STYLES

Stanley Krolick identifies four individual ethical decision-making

styles. The first is the individualist and this decision maker is
driven by natural reason, personal survival, and preservation.
The self is the only criteria involved in decisions for this style
while ignoring other stakeholders. The second style is altruists
who are primarily concerned for others. This approach is almost
opposite to that of the individualist. Altruists will disregard their
own personal security for the benefit of others. The primary
mission of altruists is to generate the greatest amount of good for
the largest number of people. The third style is pragmatists, who
are concerned with current situations and not with the self or
others. It is facts and the current situation that guide this
decision maker's decision. The fourth and final style is the
idealist who is driven by principles and rules. It is values and
rules of conduct that determine the behaviors exhibited by
idealists. Idealists display high moral standards and tend to be
rigid in their approach to ethical situations.

When communicating with an individualist, one should

emphasize the benefits to the other person's self-interest . When
communicating with an altruist, one should emphasize the
benefits to all stakeholders involved. When communicating with a
pragmatist, one should highlight the facts and possible effects of
actions. When communicating with an idealist, one should focus
on the duties and principles involved.

Page 12 of 40
HISTORY OF ETHICS IN BUSINESS

The term 'business ethics' is used in a lot of different ways, and

the history of business ethics will vary depending on how one
conceives of the object under discussion. The history will also
vary somewhat on the historian—how he or she sees the subject,
what facts he or she seeks to discover or has at hand, and the
relative importance the historian gives to those facts. Business
ethics, being part of the larger social ethics, has always been
affected by the ethics of the epoch.

At different epochs of the world, people, especially the elites of

the world, were blind to ethics and morality which were obviously
unethical to the succeeding epoch. History of business, thus, is
tainted by and through the history of slavery, history of
colonialism, and later by the history of the cold war.

The current discourse of business ethics is the ethical discourse

of the post-colonialism and post-world wars. The need for
business ethics in the current epoch began gaining attention
since the 1970s. Historically, firms started highlighting their
ethical stature since the late 1980s and early 1990s, as the world
witnessed serious economic and natural disasters because of
unethical business practices.

The Bhopal disaster and the fall of Enron are instances of major
disasters triggered by bad corporate ethics. It should be noted
that the idea of business ethics caught the attention of
academics, media and business firms by the end of the overt Cold

Page 13 of 40
War. Cold wars, seen through pages of history, were fought
through and fought for American business firms abroad.
Ideologically, promotion of firms owned by American nationals
were presented as if they represented freedom, and local
resistance against the excess of American firms were labeled as
communist upraising sponsored by the Soviet Block. Further,
even legitimate criticism against unethical practice of firms was
presented as if it were infringement into the "freedom" of the
entrepreneurs by activists backed by communist totalitarians
This scuttled the discourse of business ethics both in media and
academia.

Overt violence by business firms has decreased to a great extent

in the democratic and media affluent world of the day, though it
has not ceased to exist. The war in Iraq is one recent examples of
overt violence by corporations.

In this broad sense ethics in business is simply the application of

everyday moral or ethical norms to business. Perhaps the
example from the Bible that comes to mind most readily is the
Ten Commandments, a guide that is still used by many today. In
particular, the injunctions to truthfulness and honesty or the
prohibition against theft and envy are directly applicable.

Page 14 of 40
THE IMPORTANCE OF BUSINESS
ETHICS
Running a business requires adequate consideration to a number of issues
outside the traditional scope of making money, of which ethics is most certainly
one. As our business grows and becomes more significant, we impact on the
lives and circumstances of people in ways we can only imagine - through
bringing jobs, creating wealth and inspiring others to grow their businesses. An
important part of engaging in this process is understanding your business ethics,
which if not up to scratch can leave you with a bad reputation and can even ruin
your business, not to mention alienating employees, suppliers and the local
community.

Ethics is something of a subjective topic, but it is nevertheless of immense

importance across all areas of business. From the way in which sales and
marketing is handled through to product development and customer service, and
even to some extent finance, ethics has a significant role to play in ensuring
business success and ultimately living up to the corporate social responsibility.
Thus adopting an ethics-specific approach to doing business is critical towards
ensuring a legitimate business model with long term potential.

Business ethics is especially important in dealing with customers. Maintaining

integrity in the customer facing side of your business is crucial to building client
relationships, to assisting the overall branding efforts. Likewise, it's an
important step in minimising returns and protecting business goodwill, which
will have a tangible effect on the success or otherwise of your business.

Ethics wise, it's also important to consider how you deal with customer issues
and customer service. While some businesses are prepared to sacrifice customer
service for pound signs, there is not only a sensible business reason for
providing adequate support but also strong ethics and moral reasons for
providing help and assistance to your customer base.

On the administrative and strategic side of your business, it's also important to
adopt an ethical approach which takes account of your various responsibilities

Page 15 of 40
as a business - to shareholders, employees and the community at large.
Embracing these concepts of ethics as part of the way you do business is vital to
ensuring your run an honest, successful business with the potential to grow and
develop over time, and is one way of ensuring that you develop relationships
across all aspects of your business that are conducive to success and
profitability over the long term.

Ethics is no doubt an important business subject for any entrepreneur to study,

but it also has a wider application throughout organisations. One man's concept
of what is ethical and for the best may be completely different from another
man's concept, and so it's important to establish a collective set of ethics that
represent the entire organisation rather than just adopting a piecemeal approach.
This can be installed through training, through creating business policies and
even through careful selection at the HR stage, although it's important that there
are also enforcement mechanisms within the business concerned, and that ethics
remain a forefront consideration in day-to-day trade to ensure a unified, morally
sound approach to doing business.

Page 16 of 40
 Moral Development and Moral Education:
An Overview

Moral education is becoming an increasingly popular topic in

the fields of psychology and education. Media reports of
increased violent juvenile crime, teen pregnancy, and suicide
have caused many to declare a moral crisis in our nation. While
not all of these social concerns are moral in nature, and most
have complex origins, there is a growing trend towards linking
the solutions to these and related social problems to the teaching
of moral and social values in our public schools. However, considerations of the
role schools can and should play in the moral development of youth are
themselves the subject of controversy.

KOHLBERG'S SIX STAGES OF MORAL

DEVELOPMENT
Stages of Moral Development
Lawrence Kohlberg (1969) modified and elaborated Piaget's work,
and laid the groundwork for the current debate within psychology
on moral development. Consistent with Piaget, he proposed that
children form ways of thinking through their experiences which
include understandings of moral concepts such as justice, rights,
equality and human welfare. Kohlberg followed the development
of moral judgment beyond the ages studied by Piaget, and

Page 17 of 40
determined that the process of attaining moral maturity took
longer and was more gradual than Piaget had proposed.

Moral development is a topic of interest in both psychology and

education. Psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg modified and
expanded upon Jean Piaget's work to form a theory that
explained the development of moral reasoning. Piaget described a
two-stage process of moral development, while Kohlberg theory of
moral development outlined six stages within three different
levels. Kohlberg extended Piaget’s theory, proposing that moral
development is a continual process that occurs throughout the
lifespan.

"The Heinz Dilemma"

Kohlberg based his theory upon research and interviews with

groups of young children. A series of moral dilemmas were
presented to children, who were then interviewed to determine
the reasoning behind their judgments of each scenario. The
following is one example of the dilemmas Kohlberg presented.
Kohlberg relied for his studies on stories such as the Heinz
dilemma, and was interested in how individuals would justify
their actions if placed in similar moral dilemmas. He then
analyzed the form of moral reasoning displayed, rather than its
conclusion, and classified it as belonging to one of six distinct
stages.

"Heinz Steals the Drug

In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of

cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save
her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had
recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the

Page 18 of 40
druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make.
He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose
of the drug.

The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to

borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000
which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife
was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later.
But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to
make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the
man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband
have done that? (Kohlberg, 1963)."

INTRODUCTION OF THE SIX STAGES OF

MORAL DEVELOPMENT
Kohlberg's stages of moral development constitute an adaptation
of a psychological theory originally conceived of by the Swiss
psychologist Jean Piaget. Lawrence Kohlberg began work on this
topic while a psychology postgraduate student at the University
of Chicago, and expanded and developed this theory throughout
the course of his life.

Kohlberg was not interested so much in the answer to the

question of whether Heinz was wrong or right, but in the
reasoning for the participants decision. The responses were then
classified into various stages of reasoning in his theory of moral
development.

On the basis of his research, Kohlberg identified six stages of

moral reasoning grouped into three major levels. Each level
represented a fundamental shift in the social-moral perspective of
the individual.

Page 19 of 40
 At the first level, the pre-conventional level, a person's moral
judgments are characterized by a concrete, individual
perspective. Within this level, a Stage 1 heteronomous orientation
focuses on avoiding breaking rules that are backed by
punishment, obedience for its own sake and avoiding the
physical consequences of an action to persons and property. As
in Piaget's framework, the reasoning of Stage 1 is characterized
by ego-centrism and the inability to consider the perspectives of
others.

At Stage 2 there is the early emergence of moral reciprocity. The

Stage 2 orientation focuses on the instrumental, pragmatic value
of an action. Reciprocity is of the form, "you scratch my back and
I'll scratch yours." The Golden Rule becomes, "If someone hits
you, you hit them back." At Stage 2 one follows the rules only
when it is to someone's immediate interests. What is right is
what's fair in the sense of an equal exchange, a deal, an
agreement. At Stage 2 there is an understanding that everybody
has his(her) own interest to pursue and these conflict, so that
right is relative (in the concrete individualist sense).

Individuals at the conventional level of reasoning, however, have

a basic understanding of conventional morality, and reason with
an understanding that norms and conventions are necessary to
uphold society. They tend to be self-identified with these rules,
and uphold them consistently, viewing morality as acting in
accordance with what society defines as right. Within this level,
individuals at Stage 3 are aware of shared feelings, agreements,
and expectations which take primacy over individual interests.
Persons at Stage 3 define what is right in terms of what is
expected by people close to one's self, and in terms of the
stereotypic roles that define being good - e.g., a good brother,
mother, teacher.

Being good means keeping mutual relationships, such as trust,

loyalty, respect, and gratitude. The perspective is that of the local
community or family. There is not as yet a consideration of the
Page 20 of 40
generalized social system. Stage 4 marks the shift from defining
what is right in terms of local norms and role expectations to
defining right in terms of the laws and norms established by the
larger social system.

This is the "member of society" perspective in which one is moral

by fulfilling the actual duties defining one's social
responsibilities. One must obey the law except in extreme cases
in which the law comes into conflict with other prescribed social
duties. Obeying the law is seen as necessary in order to maintain
the system of laws which protect everyone.

Finally, the post conventional level is characterized by reasoning

based on principles, using a "prior to society" perspective. These
individuals reason based on the principles which underlie rules
and norms, but reject a uniform application of a rule or norm.
While two stages have been presented within the theory, only
one, Stage 5, has received substantial empirical support. Stage 6
remains as a theoretical endpoint which rationally follows from
the preceding 5 stages. In essence this last level of moral
judgment entails reasoning rooted in the ethical fairness
principles from which moral laws would be devised. Laws are
evaluated in terms of their coherence with basic principles of
fairness rather than upheld simply on the basis of their place
within an existing social order.

The theory holds that moral reasoning, the basis for ethical
behavior, has six identifiable developmental stages, each more
adequate at responding to moral dilemmas than its predecessor.
Kohlberg followed the development of moral judgment far beyond
the ages studied earlier by Piaget, who also claimed that logic and
morality develop through constructive stages. Expanding on
Piaget's work, Kohlberg determined that the process of moral
development was principally concerned with justice, and that it
continued throughout the individual's lifetime, a notion that
spawned dialogue on the philosophical implications of such
research.
Page 21 of 40
Thus, there is an understanding that elements of morality such
as regard for life and human welfare transcend particular
cultures and societies and are to be upheld irrespective of other
conventions or normative obligations.

Level 1. Preconventional Morality

Page 22 of 40
 Stage 1 - Obedience and Punishment

The earliest stage of moral development is especially common in

young children, but adults are also capable of expressing this
type of reasoning. At this stage, children see rules as fixed and
absolute. Obeying the rules is important because it is a means to
avoid punishment.

Although the vast majority of children at stage 1 oppose Heinz’s

theft, it is still possible for a child to support the action and still
employ stage 1 reasoning. For example, a child might say, "Heinz
can steal it because he asked first and it's not like he stole
something big; he won't get punished" (see Rest, 1973). Even
though the child agrees with Heinz’s action, the reasoning is still
stage 1; the concern is with what authorities permit and punish.

Stage 2 - Individualism and Exchange

At this stage of moral development, children account for

individual points of view and judge actions based on how they
serve individual needs. In the Heinz dilemma, children argued
that the best course of action was the choice that best-served
Heinz’s needs. Reciprocity is possible, but only if it serves one's
own interests.

At this stage children recognize that there is not just one right
view that is handed down by the authorities. Different individuals
have different viewpoints. "Heinz," they might point out, "might
think it's right to take the drug, the druggist would not." Since
everything is relative, each person is free to pursue his or
her individual interests. One boy said that Heinz might steal the
drug if he wanted his wife to live, but that he doesn't have to if he
wants to marry someone younger and better-looking (Kohlberg,
1963, p. 24). Another boy said Heinz might steal it because

Page 23 of 40
Maybe they had children and he might need someone at home to
look after them. But maybe he shouldn't steal it because they
might put him in prison for more years than he could stand.

You might have noticed that children at both stages 1 and 2 talk
about punishment. However, they perceive it differently. At stage
1 punishment is tied up in the child's mind with wrongness;
punishment "proves" that disobedience is wrong. At stage 2, in
contrast, punishment is simply a risk that one naturally wants to
avoid.

Level 2. Conventional Morality

Stage 3 - Interpersonal Relationships

Often referred to as the "good boy-good girl" orientation, this

stage of moral development is focused on living up to social
expectations and roles. There is an emphasis on conformity,
being "nice," and consideration of how choices influence
relationships.

At this stage children--who are by now usually entering their

teens--see morality as more than simple deals. They believe that
people should live up to the expectations of the family and
community and behave in "good" ways. Good behavior means
having good motives and interpersonal feelings such as love,
empathy, trust, and concern for others. Heinz, they typically
argue, was right to steal the drug because "He was a good man
for wanting to save her," and "His intentions were good, that of
saving the life of someone he loves." Even if Heinz doesn't love his
wife, these subjects often say, he should steal the drug because "I
don't think any husband should sit back and watch his wife die"

Page 24 of 40
As mentioned earlier, there are similarities between Kohlberg's
first three stages and Piaget's two stages. In both sequences there
is a shift from unquestioning obedience to a relativistic outlook
and to a concern for good motives. For Kohlberg, however, these
shifts occur in three stages rather than two.

Stage 4 - Maintaining Social Order

At this stage of moral development, people begin to consider

society as a whole when making judgments. The focus is on
maintaining law and order by following the rules, doing one’s
duty and respecting authority.

At stage 4, in contrast, the respondent becomes more broadly

concerned with society as a whole. Now the emphasis is on
obeying laws, respecting authority, and performing one's duties
so that the social order is maintained. In response to the Heinz
story, many subjects say they understand that Heinz's motives
were good, but they cannot condone the theft.

Because stage 4, subjects make moral decisions from the

perspective of society as a whole, they think from a full-fledged
member-of-society perspective

You will recall that stage 1 children also generally oppose stealing
because it breaks the law. Superficially, stage 1 and stage 4
subjects are giving the same response, so we see here why
Kohlberg insists that we must probe into the reasoning behind
the overt response. Stage 1 children say, "It's wrong to steal" and
"It's against the law," but they cannot elaborate any further,
except to say that stealing can get a person jailed. Stage 4
respondents, in contrast, have a conception of the function of

Page 25 of 40
laws for society as a whole--a conception which far exceeds the
grasp of the younger child.

Level 3. Postconventional Morality

Stage 5 - Social Contract and Individual Rights

At this stage, people begin to account for the differing values,

opinions and beliefs of other people. Rules of law are important
for maintaining a society, but members of the society should
agree upon these standards.

People begin to ask, "What makes for a good society?" They begin
to think about society in a very theoretical way, stepping back
from their own society and considering the rights and values that
a society ought to uphold. They then evaluate existing societies in
terms of these prior considerations. They are said to take a
"prior-to-society" perspective.

Stage 5 respondents basically believe that a good society is best

conceived as a social contract into which people freely enter to
work toward the benefit of all they recognize that different social
groups within a society will have different values, but they believe
that all rational people would agree on two points. First they
would all want certain basic rights,  such as liberty and life, to be
protected Second, they would want some democratic procedures
for changing unfair law and for improving society.

Page 26 of 40
 Stage 6 - Universal Principles

Kolhberg’s final level of moral reasoning is based upon

universal ethical principles and abstract reasoning. At this
stage, people follow these internalized principles of justice,
even if they conflict with laws and rules.

In actual practice, Kohlberg says, we can reach just decisions

by looking at a situation through one another's eyes. In the
Heinz dilemma, this would mean that all parties--the druggist,
Heinz, and his wife--take the roles of the others. To do this in
an impartial manner, people can assume a "veil of ignorance"
(Rawls, 1971), acting as if they do not know which role they
will eventually occupy. If the druggist did this, even he would
recognize that life must take priority over property; for he
wouldn't want to risk finding himself in the wife's shoes with
property valued over life. Thus, they would all agree that the
wife must be saved--this would be the fair solution. Such a
solution, we must note, requires not only impartiality, but the
principle that everyone is given full and equal respect. If the
wife were considered of less value than the others, a just
solution could not be reached.

Until recently, Kohlberg had been scoring some of his subjects

at stage 6, but he has temporarily stopped doing so, For one
thing, he and other researchers had not been finding subjects
who consistently reasoned at this stage. Also, Kohlberg has
concluded that his interview dilemmas are not useful for
distinguishing between stage 5 and stage 6 thinking. He
believes that stage 6 has a clearer and broader conception of
universal principles (which include justice as well as individual
rights), but feels that his interview fails to draw out this
broader understanding. Consequently, he has temporarily
dropped stage 6 from his scoring manual, calling it a
"theoretical stage" and scoring all postconventional responses
as stage 5 (Colby and Kohlberg, 1983, p. 28).

Page 27 of 40
Theoretically, one issue that distinguishes stage 5 from stage 6
is civil disobedience. Stage 5 would be more hesitant to
endorse civil disobedience because of its commitment to the
social contract and to changing laws through democratic
agreements. Only when an individual right is clearly at stake
does violating the law seem justified. At stage 6, in contrast, a
commitment to justice makes the rationale for civil
disobedience stronger and broader. Martin Luther King, for
example, argued that laws are only valid insofar as they are
grounded in justice, and that a commitment to justice carries
with it an obligation to disobey unjust laws. King also
recognized, of course, the general need for laws and democratic
processes (stages 4 and 5), and he was therefore willing to
accept the penalities for his actions. Nevertheless, he believed
that the higher principle of justice required civil disobedience

Moral Education
Kohlberg used these findings to reject traditional character
education practices. These approaches are premised in the idea
that virtues and vices are the basis to moral behavior, or that
moral character is comprised of a "bag of virtues", such as
honesty, kindness, patience, strength, etc. According to the
traditional approach, teachers are to teach these virtues
through example and direct communication of convictions, by
giving students an opportunity to practice these virtues, and by
rewarding their expression. However, critiques of the
traditional approach find flaws inherent in this model. This
approach provides no guiding principle for defining what
virtues are worthy of espousal, and wrongly assumes a
community consensus on what are considered "positive
values". In fact, teachers often end up arbitrarily imposing
certain values depending upon their societal, cultural, and

Page 28 of 40
personal beliefs. In order to address this issue of ethical
relativity, some have adopted the values-clarification approach
to moral education. This teaching practice is based on the
assumption that there are no single, correct answers to ethical
dilemmas, but that there is value in holding clear views and
acting accordingly. In addition, there is a value of toleration of
divergent views. It follows, then, that the teacher's role is one of
discussion moderator, with the goal of teaching merely that
people hold different values; the teacher does attempt to
present her views as the "right" views.

Kohlberg rejected the focus on values and virtues, not only due
to the lack of consensus on what virtues are to be taught, but
also because of the complex nature of practicing such virtues.
For example, people often make different decisions yet hold the
same basic moral values. Kohlberg believed a better approach
to affecting moral behavior should focus on stages of moral
development. These stages are critical, as they consider the
way a person organizes their understanding of virtues, rules,
and norms, and integrates these into a moral choice (Power,
Higgins, & Kohlberg, 1989). In addition, he rejected the
relativist view point in favor of the view that certain principles
of justice and fairness represent the pinnacle of moral
maturity, as he found that these basic moral principles are
found in different cultures and subcultures around the world
(Kohlberg & Turiel, 1971).

The goal of moral education, it then follows, is to encourage

individuals to develop to the next stage of moral reasoning.
Initial educational efforts employing Kohlberg's theory were
grounded in basic Piagetian assumptions of cognitive
development. Development, in this model, is not merely the
result of gaining more knowledge, but rather consists of a
sequence of qualitative changes in the way an individual
thinks. Within any stage of development, thought is organized
according to the constraints of that stage. An individual then
interacts with the environment according to their basic

Page 29 of 40
understandings of the environment. However, the child will at
some point encounter information which does not fit into their
world view, forcing the child to adjust their view to
accommodate this new information. This process is called
equilibration, and it is through equilibration that development
occurs. Early moral development approaches to education,
therefore, sought to force students to ponder contradiction
inherent to their present level of moral reasoning.

The most common tool for doing this was to present a "moral
dilemma" and require students to determine and justify what
course the actor in the dilemma should take. Through
discussion, students should then be forced to face the
contradictions present in any course of action not based on
principles of justice or fairness.

While Kohlberg appreciated the importance and value of such

moral dilemma discussions, he held from very early on that
moral education required more than individual reflection, but
also needed to include experiences for students to operate as
moral agents within a community. In this regard, Kohlberg
reconciled some of the differences in orientation that existed
between the theories of moral growth held by Piaget and
Durkheim. In order to provide students with an optimal
context within which to grow morally, Kohlberg and his
colleagues developed the "just community" schools approach
towards promoting moral development (Power, Higgins, &
Kohlberg, 1989). The basic premise of these schools is to
enhance students' moral development by offering them the
chance to participate in a democratic community. Here,
democracy refers to more than simply casting a vote. It entails
full participation of community members in arriving at
consensual rather than "majority rules" decision-making. One
primary feature of these schools is their relatively small size
(often they are actually schools within schools), aimed at
providing the students with a sense of belonging to a group
which is responsive to individual needs. The central institution

Page 30 of 40
 of these schools is a community meeting in which issues
related to life and discipline in the schools are discussed and
democratically decided, with an equal value placed on the
voices of students and teachers. An underlying goal of these
meetings is to establish collective norms which express
fairness for all members of the community. It is believed that
by placing the responsibility of determining and enforcing rules
on students, they will take prosocial behavior more seriously.
At the same time, this approach stems from the cognitive-
developmentalist view that discussion of moral dilemmas can
stimulate moral development.

Criticisms of Kohlberg's Theory of Moral

Development:

Does moral reasoning necessarily lead to moral behavior?

Kohlberg's theory is concerned with moral thinking, but there is a
big difference between knowing what we ought to do versus our
actual actions.

Is justice the only aspect of moral reasoning we should consider?

Critics have pointed out that Kohlberg's theory of moral
development overemphasizes the concept as justice when making
moral choices. Factors such as compassion, caring and other
interpersonal feelings may play an important part in moral
reasoning.

Does Kohlberg's theory overemphasize Western philosophy?

Individualistic cultures emphasize personal rights while
collectivist cultures stress the importance of society and

Page 31 of 40
community. Eastern cultures may have different moral outlooks
that Kohlberg's theory does not account for.

Carol Gilligan
A second major critique of Kohlberg's work was put
forth by Carol Gilligan, in her popular book, "In a
Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's
Development" (1982). She suggested that Kohlberg's
theories were biased against women, as only males
were used in his studies. By listening to women's
experiences, Gilligan offered that a morality of care
can serve in the place of the morality of justice and
rights espoused by Kohlberg. In her view, the morality of caring
and responsibility is premised in nonviolence, while the morality
of justice and rights is based on equality. Another way to look at
these differences is to view these two moralities as providing two
distinct injunctions - the injunction not to treat others unfairly
(justice) and the injunction not to turn away from someone in
need (care). She presents these moralities as distinct, although
potentially connected.

In her initial work, Gilligan emphasized the gender differences

thought to be associated with these two orientations. The
morality of care emphasizes interconnectedness and presumably

Page 32 of 40
emerges to a greater degree in girls owing to their early
connection in identity formation with their mothers. The morality
of justice, on the other hand, is said to emerge within the context
of coordinating the interactions of autonomous individuals. A
moral orientation based on justice was proposed as more
prevalent among boys because their attachment relations with
the mother, and subsequent masculine identity formation
entailed that boys separate from that relationship and
individuate from the mother. For boys, this separation also
heightens their awareness of the difference in power relations
between themselves and the adult, and hence engenders an
intense set of concerns over inequalities. Girls, however, because
of their continued attachment to their mothers, are not as keenly
aware of such inequalities, and are, hence, less concerned with
fairness as an issue. Further research has suggested, however,
that moral reasoning does not follow the distinct gender lines
which Gilligan originally reported. The preponderance of evidence
is that both males and females reason based on justice and care.
While this gender debate is unsettled, Gilligan's work has
contributed to an increased awareness that care is an integral
component of moral reasoning.

Piaget's Theory

Jean Piaget is among the first psychologists

whose work remains directly relevant to
contemporary theories of moral
development. In his early writing, he focused
specifically on the moral lives of children,
studying the way children play games in

Page 33 of 40
order to learn more about children's beliefs about right and
wrong(1932/65). According to Piaget, all development emerges
from action; that is to say, individuals construct and reconstruct
their knowledge of the world as a result of interactions with the
environment. Based on his observations of children's application
of rules when playing, Piaget determined that morality, too, can
be considered a developmental process. For example, Ben, a ten
year old studied by Piaget, provided the following critique of a
rule made-up by a child playing marbles: "it isn't a rule! It's a
wrong rule because it's outside of the rules. A fair rule is one that
is in the game". Ben believed in the absolute and intrinsic truth
of the rules, characteristic of early moral reasoning. In contrast,
Vua, aged thirteen, illustrates an understanding of the reasoning
behind the application of rules, characteristic of later moral
thinking. When asked to consider the fairness of a made-up rule
compared to a traditional rule, Vua replied "It is just as fair
because the marbles are far apart"(making the game equally
difficult).

In addition to examining children's understanding of rules about

games, Piaget interviewed children regarding acts such as
stealing and lying. When asked what a lie is, younger children
consistently answered that they are "naughty words". When
asked why they should not lie, younger children could rarely
explain beyond the forbidden nature of the act: "because it is a
naughty word". However, older children were able to explain
"because it isn't right", and "it wasn't true". Even older children
indicated an awareness of intention as relevant to the meaning of
an act: "A lie is when you deceive someone else. To make a
mistake is when you make a mistake". From his observations,
Piaget concluded that children begin in a "heteronomous" stage of
moral reasoning, characterized by a strict adherence to rules and
duties, and obedience to authority.

This heteronomy results from two factors. The first factor is the
young child's cognitive structure. According to Piaget, the
thinking of young children is characterized by egocentrism. That

Page 34 of 40
is to say that young children are unable to simultaneously take
into account their own view of things with the perspective of
someone else. This egocentrism leads children to project their
own thoughts and wishes onto others. It is also associated with
the uni-directional view of rules and power associated with
heteronomous moral thought, and various forms of "moral
realism." Moral realism is associated with "objective
responsibility", which is valuing the letter of the law above the
purpose of the law. This is why young children are more
concerned about the outcomes of actions rather than the
intentions of the person doing the act. Moral realism is also
associated with the young child's belief in "immanent justice."
This is the expectation that punishments automatically follow
acts of wrong-doing. One of the most famous cases of such
childhood thinking was that of the young boy who believed that
his hitting a power pole with his baseball bat caused a major
power blackout in the New York city area.

The second major contributor to heteronomous moral thinking in

young children, is their relative social relationship with adults. In
the natural authority relationship between adults and children,
power is handed down from above. The relative powerlessness of
young children, coupled with childhood egocentrism feeds into a
heteronomous moral orientation.

However, through interactions with other children in which the

group seeks a to play together in a way all find fair, children find
this strict heteronomous adherence to rules sometimes
problematic. As children consider these situations, they develop
towards an "autonomous" stage of moral reasoning, characterized
by the ability to consider rules critically, and selectively apply
these rules based on a goal of mutual respect and cooperation.
The ability to act from a sense of reciprocity and mutual respect
is associated with a shift in the child's cognitive structure from
egocentrism to perspective taking. Coordinating one's own
perspective with that of others means that what is right needs to
be based on solutions that meet the requirements of fair

Page 35 of 40
reciprocity. Thus, Piaget viewed moral development as the result
of interpersonal interactions through which individuals work out
resolutions which all deem fair. Paradoxically, this autonomous
view of morality as fairness is more compelling and leads to more
consistent behavior than the heteronomous orientation held by
younger children.

Piaget concluded from this work that schools should emphasize

cooperative decision-making and problem solving, nurturing
moral development by requiring students to work out common
rules based on fairness. This is a direct rejection of sociologists
Emile Durkheim's view of proper moral education (1925/1961).
Durkheim, similar to Piaget, believed that morality resulted from
social interaction or immersion in a group. However, Durkheim
believed moral development was a natural result of attachment to
the group, an attachment which manifests itself in a respect for
the symbols, rules, and authority of that group. Piaget rejected
this belief that children simply learn and internalize the norms
for a group; he believed individuals define morality individually
through their struggles to arrive at fair solutions. Given this view,
Piaget suggested that a classroom teacher perform a difficult
task: the educator must provide students with opportunities for
personal discovery through problem solving, rather than
indoctrinating students with norms.

Page 36 of 40
 SUMMARY

At stage 1 children think of what is right as that which authority

says is right. Doing the right thing is obeying authority and
avoiding punishment. At stage 2, children are no longer so
impressed by any single authority; they see that there are
different sides to any issue. Since everything is relative, one is
free to pursue one's own interests, although it is often useful to
make deals and exchange favors with others.

At stages 3 and 4, young people think as members of the

conventional society with its values, norms, and expectations. At
stage 3, they emphasize being a good person, which basically
means having helpful motives toward people close to one At stage
4, the concern shifts toward obeying laws to maintain society as
a whole.

At stages 5 and 6 people are less concerned with maintaining

society for its own sake, and more concerned with the principles
and values that make for a good society. At stage 5 they
emphasize basic rights and the democratic processes that give
everyone a say, and at stage 6 they define the principles by which
agreement will be most just.

Page 37 of 40
 REFERENCES
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_ethics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/
dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethics
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-business-ethics.htm
http://tigger.uic.edu/~lnucci/MoralEd/overview.html
http://web.tepper.cmu.edu/ethics/whybizethics.pdf

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and
women's development. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.

Kohlberg, L. & Turiel, E. (1971). Moral development and moral

education. In G. Lesser, ed. Psychology and educational practice.
Scott Foresman.

Page 38 of 40
Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment of the child. The Free
Press: New York. Power, F. C., Higgins, A., & Kohlberg, L. (1989).
"Lawrence Kohlberg's Approach to Moral Education." New York:
Columbia University Press.

Page 39 of 40
Page 40 of 40