STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT The emphasis in the foregoing discussions, again, is that there are values that are higher than others and that there are values that are more or less universal than others. What follows are two of the known theories that discuss about how conception of right and wrong develops and “matures” as the individual advances in age, rationality and valuation. Kierkegaard’s Existential Stages Danish philosopher Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813- 1855, in photo) outline, in three progressing stages, man’s existential journey. Although he did not name it “stages of moral development’, in fact he considered the last one as beyond ethics, his existential stages is given inclusion here since they reflect in some way the processes of choosing (orpreferring) one course of action over another, as well as the reasons behind them. The three stages are as follows (McDonald 2017): 1. The Aesthetic Stage. In this stage, the agent's choices are characterized by “immersion in sensuous experience; valorization of possibility over actuality; egotism; fragmentation of the subject of experience; nihilistic wielding of irony and scepticism; and flight from boredom.” Simply put, the agent's conception of right and wrong depends on the gratification of senses (lower value pleasure or dislike). At this stage, an individual's choices are generally self-serving, By valorizing possibility over actuality, the individual at this stage is seen generally as avoiding responsibility and commitment. tzps://en wikipedia.orgThe Ethical Stage. In this stage, the agent's choices are characterized by being determined or influenced by the prevailing social norms, that is, whether or not they follow such norms. Under this stage, the agent's conception of right and wrong is based on its agreement or disagreement with the norms of the society. Although the individual does not lose his or her “individuality”, his or her choices must now transcend the aesthetic (sensory value: like — dislike; pleasure - pain) and into what brings about the good of the society (spiritual value). In this stage, even the sacrifice of life (vital value) is morally good for as long as it is done for the sake of the society. Hence, Agamemnon’ sacrifice of his daughter Iphigenia at the command of Artemis is seen as also an act of sacrifice on his part (displeasure) for the sake of bringing the fleet across the Aegean safely to Troy (higher good). The Religious Stage. In this stage, the agent's choices are characterized by being determined by faith and not by the social norms, by what Kierkegaard calls the “teleological suspension of the ethical’. Although at this stage, the aesthetic (sensual value) and the ethical (vital and/or spiritual values) are not really erased, the individual’s conception of right and wrong transcends them and comes into the realm of the holy. Comparing Agamemnon and Abraham, both of whom were required to sacrifice their respective children, Kierkegaard looks at the sacrifice of the latter “higher”. While the sacrifice of Iphigenia (vital value: life) was done for the sake of the Achaeans (higher value: integrity of the society), the would- be sacrifice of Isaac (vital value: life) would have been done for the sake of God's command (highest value: holy).Kohlberg’s Moral Development Stages ‘The American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987) outlined his view on how moral reasoning develops, ie., how an individual’s concept of right and wrong develops, in what is now popularly known as Stages of Moral Development. The six stages are arranged in progressing manner in three levels, with each level comprised of two stages. The stages are the following (Matthews 2015; Psychology Notes HQ): 1. Level A: Promoral. At this level, the individual (asually a child) is so self-engrossed. Hisorherconception of whatisright and wrong depends onthe direct consequences of his or her actions, whether it brings about benefit or punishment. a. Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Orientation. In this stage, the individual’s conception of right and wrong is no different from avoiding punishment, ie. the right thing to do is right because it saves one from punishment and the ‘wrong thing to do is wrong because it brings about punishment. b. Stage 2: Naive Instrumental Hedonism. In this stage, the individual's conception of what is right and wrong transcends from avoiding punishmentinto seeking benefits or rewards. This means that an action is considered good if it gives reward. Although there is now a concept of human relations, the question of the individual in such relations is always “What in it is for me?” 2. Level B: Morality of Conventional Role Conformity. Mt this level, the individual (typically an adolescent or an adult) has now finally graduated from being self- engrossed and becomes ready to assume conventional roles. His or her conception of what is right and wrong depends on what society views as right and wrong, ie. right are the actions that adhere to what the society views as right and wrong are the actions that does not adhere to them. a. Stage 3: Good-hoy Morality of Maintaining Good Relations. In this stage, the individual's conception of right and wrong is dependent on approval and belongingness. In other words, for an individual good is the act that meets the approval of his or her peers and merits for him or her acceptance and belongingness. On the contrary, wrong are the acts that does not meet the approval of his or her peers and, thus, merits exclusion. b. Stage 4: Authority-maintaining Morality. In this stage, the determining factor for approval or disapproval is no longer the peers but the authority or the law. And right or wrong is no longer dependent on acceptance and belongingness but on social order or integrity of the society. In other words, what theindividual considers as good acts are those actions that help the society to function properly, that promotes the integrity (peace, order and the very existence) of society. 3, Level C: Morality of Accepted Moral Principles. At this level, an individual slowly distances from the laws and norms of the society and goes back to the self, only now it is already a “principled self”. In other words, his or her conception of what is right and wrong is no longer dependent upon the views of the society. Rather, right and wrong now depends on principles that are valid and can be applied whether there is authority or not. a. Stage 5: Morality of Contract, of Individual Rights and Democratically Accepted Law. In this stage, an individual's conception of what is right and wrong is. determined by social contracts among individuals who democratically and caitically examine standards. The standards that are accepted “good” are those that serve the general welfare. In here, consensus is very important. b. Stage 6: Morality of Individual Principles of Conscience. In this stage, an individual's conception of what is right and wrong is now based on a principle’s universalizability. This means that for an action to be considered right, it must be based on principles that transcend even mutual benefit. Universalizability means the property of being applicable to all. Thus, it goes beyond the consensus of consenting parties. It involves everybody. An example of this universalizable principle is the principle of justice. Moral Responsibility and the Need for Moral Reasoning As a summary, an individual, no matter the influences to his or her behaviour, is morally responsible for his or her deliberate, free and voluntary acts. This is the truth revealed by the nature of human act, in an agent's choosing or preferring of one value instead of another (positive instead of negative, higher instead of lower, universal instead of relative), and even in the stages of moral and existential development. However, this very voluntariness, this act of choosing or preferring can very well be mistaken. The logic of the heart can very well be wrong especially if the agent's ordo amoris is impaired. How then can one be guided as to what to do exactly? One way is through moral reasoning.