The Development of Morality, Term Paper Example

In the most basic sense the term “morality” refers to the guidelines and expectations about how human beings should treat one another. Issues such as fairness, equality, justice, human rights, and “right” and “wrong” are all concepts that fit into the larger are of consideration known as morality. The issue of morality and moral authority has been of significant interest and concern throughout human history, though it has only been within the last century that serious scientific consideration has been given to the issue of moral development.  Several notable researchers and theorists from Piaget to Kohlberg and beyond have proposed theories of moral development, though these and other theories that propose to be universally applicable have been the subject of criticism. Among the specific criticisms of Piaget, for example, is that morality must be understood in a cultural context, and as such is not universal. While Piaget, Kohlberg, and other theorists have established a basic framework for the consideration and understanding or moral development, further exploration of the subject has given rise to other theories and conceptual frameworks. This paper will provide an overview of some of the primary historical and contemporary theories of moral development.

Background

The issue of morality has been central to the human experience throughout the history of the species. Humans are a naturally gregarious and communal species, and have formed groups ranging from families to tribes to towns, cities, and nations. No matter the size, these groups require that members cooperate to some degree, and questions and determinations about how such cooperation will be defined and enforced are framed in moral terms (Korthals, 1992). For much of human history the moral expectations of any given group of people were defined in religious terms and enforced by religious authorities; in Western civilization, the Catholic Church served as the primary and moral and political authority for centuries (Korthals, 1992). While history shows how moral authority has been exercised by religious and secular groups and individuals, it is only recently that researchers have begun to consider how human undergo moral development on an individual basis. A vast number of researchers and theorists have explored the issue of moral development, and proper consideration to all of them would be impossible in the scope of this paper. With that consideration in mind, the discussion or moral development herein will be limited to several of the most notable and recognized theorists in the field of moral development.

The Birth of Contemporary Psychology

Beginning in the 20^th century a number of prominent theorists in the field of psychology began to propose ideas about the process of moral development, often in the context of larger sets of theories about human psychology and behavior. Sigmund Freud, who is known as the father of modern psychology, believed that moral development was predicated on the dichotomy between the needs of the individual and the needs of the group (Gibbs, 2003). In this conceptual framework, infants only have the capacity to understand their own needs, while the larger social group into which they are born has its own needs. According to Freud, moral development involves the process by which infants learn to understand and meet the needs of the social group as they grow into children and adults (Gibbs, 2003). While this is an oversimplification of Freud’s theories on moral development, it does serve to establish the basic framework of his approach, and subsequent theoretical forms built on and expanded upon this Freudian view.

Freud’s theories on moral development were fairly practical, and based on the idea that the process of socialization was what guided moral development. Noted psychologist and behaviorist B.F. Skinner took a similarly practical view, believing that moral development was rooted in the process of socialization. Skinner’s theories centered on the concept of reinforcement; the rewards and punishments children receive as they develop serve as positive and negative reinforcements of behavior (Gibbs, 23003). Skinner does not focus on the duality between internal and external forces in the same manner as Freud, but instead focuses primarily on the external forces exerted by families and other social groups in the shaping of moral development. Like Freud, Skinner’s work received much attention and consideration, though subsequent theorists greatly expanded the scope of theoretical frameworks related to the concept of moral development.

Piaget and the Theory of Cognitive Development

Among the most significant contributors to the field of moral development theory is Jean Piaget. Piaget was known for his work in the larger field of cognitive development, which is concerned both with the physiological and psychological processes involved in child development. It was Piaget who was largely responsible for establishing the concept of cognitive development; his theory on the subject continues to serve as a fundamental framework for understanding childhood intellectual, psychological, and emotional development. Piaget’s theory of cognitive development involves a range of different considerations, from the nature of knowledge itself to the practical ways in which humans utilize that knowledge as they progress through various stages of development (Korthals, 1992). As considered in the framework of Piaget’s theory, the process of moral development is not necessarily a separate or discrete psychological process, but is instead embedded in a series of larger stages of development that begin with the limited perceptions and abilities of infancy and progress towards greater levels of perception and capacity (Korthals, 1992).

According to Piaget, cognitive development occurs in several stages and substages (Korthal, 1992). The first of these is the sensorimotor stage in infancy, when individuals have not developed the capacity for higher levels of logical thinking, and are limited primarily with the development of basic motor skills and the satisfaction of basic needs. The years after infancy are described by Piaget as the preoperational stage, during which children being to develop more advanced capabilities but continue to see the world through a limited and selfish perspective.  The years between late childhood and early adolescence are the concrete operational stage, and it is in this stage that children begin to develop the capacity to see the world through the perspectives of others, and develop the capacity to reason.

Viewed from the perspective of Piaget’s theory, the process of moral development is one that takes place within the various stages. Young children conceive of morality primarily through the manifestation of external authority; the concepts of “right” and “wrong” are defined solely by authority figures such as parents and family members (Gibbs, 2003).  At this early stage, children have no inner sense of what is right or wrong. As children grow they begin to develop the capacity to view and understand the world apart from their selfish, egocentric perspective. This makes it possible for children to both understand how their actions affect other people and to conceptualize the idea of an external, independent moral system. In some ways Piaget’s theory of cognitive development allows the process of moral development to be viewed in the context of socialization (reflecting the theories of Freud and Skinner). At the same time, Piaget builds on those theories by incorporating ideas about physiological development and theorizing that physiological and psychological processes combine to support the process of moral development.

Lawrence Kohlberg and the Stages of Moral Development

Kohlberg was a psychologist who built on the framework of developmental stages established by Piaget and others.  Kohlberg did not dismiss Piaget’s work, but focused more closely on the specifics of moral development rather than the larger processes of overall development (Gibbs & Schell, 1985). Like Piaget, Kohlberg theorized that development takes place in stages, and his Theory of Stages of Moral Development is divided into six distinct stages (Gibbs, 2003). Kohlberg agreed with Piaget in the sense that moral development involves the growth of an individual to see the world in increasingly boarder and less selfish terms, though he provided more detailed stages, each of which are further divided into levels.

In the two stages of level one, infants and very young children are primarily motivated by self-interest and the desire to avoid punishment. In level two children begin to learn and adapt to outward expectations and to conform to social expectations and standards such as gender roles. External authority remains a primary means by which morality is imposed, but in the level two stages children begin to develop the capacity to understand morality as distinct from their own self interests. As children pass through adolescence into adulthood they develop the capacity to consider morality in the context of logic and reason. It is in these stages individuals develop the capacity to understand entirely external moral considerations such as universal justice, human rights, and the consensual moral principles of society (Gibbs, 2003). In Kohlberg’s theoretical framework not everyone will progress to these stages; conversely, he later theorized further stages in which some people might exhibit moral regression (Gibbs & Schnell, 1985).  Although Kohlberg expanded on the work of Piaget, both men grounded their theories in the idea that developmental processes involved a number of internal and external forces. For Kohlberg, the upper stages of moral development were firmly rooted in the development of the capacity to think logically and apply reason to moral and ethical considerations.

Beyond Piaget and Kohlberg

The theories of both Piaget and Kohlberg include concepts related to the social construction of reality. In essence, social construction means that the individual understanding of the world is based on a process that involves internal and external (social) forces. Gibbs (2003) notes that Piaget’s and Kohlberg’s theories of moral development include both non-social and social stages as an individual progresses towards the ability to conceptualize morality beyond the framework of simple punishment. Ideas about social construction both support and challenge the theories of Piaget and Kohlberg (and Freud, Skinner, and others) as they raise debate about how much of individual development is determined by biological and physiological imperatives and how much it is shaped by external forces (Lind et al, 1985; Cam et al, 2012). In all of the various theories proposed by these well-known figures, however, at least some aspect of social construction can be seen. From Freud to Kohlberg, each theorist proposes ideas about how the external forces of social groups and larger societies shape development; to some extent, the only debate is about the degree to which these external forces affect developmental processes.

Critics of Piaget and Kohlberg have both built on and disputed the theories of development proposed by the two. Some critics have, for example, asserted that their theories are limited by social and cultural biases (Arnold, 2000; Cam et al, 2012)). Others have responded to Piaget and Kohlberg by noting their limitations and attempting to build on them. Haste and Abrahams (2008) discuss the topic of moral reasoning within the framework of cultural theory, an approach that seeks to explain or remedy the shortcomings of earlier theories by acknowledging the ways that specific cultures shape moral development. To some degree, Piaget and Kohlberg proposed theories that were intended to be universally applicable; critics and supporters alike have noted that these theories are limited by their failure to account for the act that societies do not all function according to the same universal moral standards.

The theories that have been proposed since the early theories of Piaget and Kohlberg demonstrate how complex the issue of moral development is, and how it can be examined and considered from so many divergent perspectives. The complexity of moral development theory is especially notable when considering from the perspective of moral reasoning, i.e. the moral understanding and behavior of adults. Theories of moral development that focus on the childhood years are based on the idea that the complex and sophisticated moral codes of society have a growing impact on individuals as they progress to adulthood; at the same time, these theories do not necessarily account for the nature of that external social morality (Haste & Abrahams, 2008). Even those who accept that moral development in childhood follows certain stages contend that as children develop into adults, the moral constructs that replace their earlier, internal moral systems are not the same in every culture or society.

While Freud, Piaget, Kohlberg, and others provide a theoretical foundation for consideration of how individuals develop the most basic aspects of morality, the ideas they proposed have also opened the doors to vast areas of inquiry that extend beyond the limitations of cognitive development theory or moral development theory. As theories of moral development progress from their infancy in the 20^th century, they are becoming subject to scrutiny and challenge that brings a wide variety of other perspectives to bear. These theories may have been limited by the social and cultural biases of those who developed them, but they remain significant for providing a staring point for current and future theorists.

Works cited

Arnold, M.A. ‘Stage, Sequence, And Sequels: Changing Conceptions Of Morality, Post-Kohlberg’.Educational Psychology Review 12.4 (2000): 365-383. Print.

Cam, Zekeriya et al. ‘Classical And Contemporary Approaches For Moral Development.’. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 12.2 (2012): 1222–1225. Print.

Gibbs, John C. Moral Development And Reality. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE, 2003. Print.

Gibbs, John C, and Steven V Schnell. ‘Moral Development” Versus” Socialization: A Critique.’. American Psychologist 40.10 (1985): 1071. Print.

Haste, Helen, and Salie Abrahams. ‘Morality, Culture And The Dialogic Self: Taking Cultural Pluralism Seriously’. Journal of Moral Education 37.3 (2008): 377–394. Print.

Koenig, Bernie. Natural Law, Science, And The Social Construction Of Reality. 1st ed. Dallas: University Press of America, 2004. Print.

Korthals, Michiel. ‘Morality And Cooperation’. Journal of Moral Education 21.1 (1992): 17–27. Print.

Lind, Georg, Hans A Hartmann, and Roland Wakenhut. Moral Development And The Social Environment. 1st ed. Chicago, Ill.: Precedent Pub., 1985. Print.