Kohlberg’s Six Stages of Moral Development
Background on Lawrence Kohlberg
- Professor of Education and Social Psychology at Harvard University.
- Influenced by Jean Piaget’s work on cognitive development.
- Developed his moral development theory based on research at Harvard’s Center for
Moral Education.
Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development
- Based on interviews with young boys responding to ethical dilemmas.
- Found that moral reasoning progresses in stages over time.
- Divided moral development into three levels, each with two stages.
Levels and Stages of Moral Development
1. Preconventional Level (Focused on Consequences & Self-Interest)**
*Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment– People obey rules to avoid punishment.
*Stage 2: Self-Interest– Actions are based on personal gain (“What’s in it for me?”).
2. Conventional Level (Focused on Social Order & Conformity)**
*Stage 3: Peer Approval– Decisions are made to gain social acceptance.
*Stage 4: Law and Order– Emphasis on obeying laws and fulfilling duties to maintain
social stability.
3. Postconventional Level (Focused on Universal Ethics & Justice)**
*Stage 5: Social Contract – Laws are seen as agreements for the common good but
can be changed if they are unfair.
*Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles – Decisions are made based on abstract moral
principles like justice, dignity, and equality, even if they conflict with laws.
Key Takeaways
- Moral development occurs in a *hierarchical and linear* progression.
- Individuals *cannot skip stages* in their development.
- The highest level of moral reasoning is based on “ principles beyond laws and
societal norms”
Example: A Student Finds a Wallet with Money Inside
“A student finds a wallet full of cash on the school ground. What would they do at each
stage? “
[Link] 1 (Obedience and Punishment) – “I will return it because if I don’t, I might
get caught and punished.”
[Link] 2 (Self-Interest)– “If I return it, I might get a reward from the owner.”
[Link] 3 (Peer Approval)– “I should return it because people will think I am honest.”
[Link] 4 (Law and Order)– “It’s the right thing to do because stealing is against the
law.”
[Link] 5 (Social Contract) – “I will return it because keeping lost money is unfair to
the owner.”
6. Stage 6 (Universal Ethical Principles) – “Honesty is a moral principle I live by, so I
will return the wallet regardless of laws or rewards.”
Scott Rae’s 7-Step Moral Reasoning Model
Scott Rae’s model is designed to guide individuals in ethical decision-making by asking
the right questions rather than simply providing a single “ correct” answer.
The model integrates moral virtues, principles, and consequences in evaluating ethical
dilemmas.
The 7 Steps of Moral Reasoning
[Link] the Facts
- Understand the general facts of the moral situation.
- Ensure that all relevant information is collected before making a decision.
- Ask: What do we know? What do we need to know?
[Link] the Ethical Issues
- Identify the **major ethical dilemma** in the case.
- Competing values or interests must be **clearly stated**.
- If no values are at stake, it may not be an ethical dilemma.
[Link] the Relevant Virtues/Principles
- Identify ethical principles that apply (e.g.,philosophical ethics, cultural norms, laws,
or religious beliefs.
- Consider which principles hold more weight in the situation.
4. List the Alternative Actions
- Brainstorm different **possible courses of action.
- Evaluate each action based on feasibility and ethical soundness.
[Link] Alternatives with Virtues/Principles
- Eliminate options that **contradict** core ethical principles.
- Prioritize solutions that best align with moral values.
[Link] the Consequences
- Analyze the **positive and negative** consequences of each alternative.
- Weigh the impact of each outcome carefully.
7. Make a Decision and Justify It
- Select the best ethical course of action.
- Provide **a clear justification** for the choice made.
Situational Example: Workplace Dilemma
Scenario:
A nurse in a hospital discovers that a senior doctor is secretly changing patient records
to cover up a misdiagnosis. If reported, the doctor could lose their job, but if ignored,
patients may be at risk.
Applying Scott Rae’s 7 Steps
[Link] the Facts – Confirm the details of the doctor’s actions. Are there multiple cases?
Is there proof?
[Link] the Ethical Issue– The dilemma is whether to report the doctor (protect
patients) or stay silent (protect the doctor’s career).
3. Determine the Relevant Virtues/Principles– Integrity, patient safety, and professional
responsibility must be prioritized.
[Link] the Alternatives – Options:
(a) Report the doctor to hospital authorities,
(b) Confront the doctor privately,
© Do nothing.
[Link] Alternatives with Virtues/Principles– Reporting aligns with ethical values;
ignoring the issue contradicts integrity.
[Link] the Consequences– Reporting may cause workplace conflict but ensures
patient safety. Silence could lead to harm.
[Link] a Decision– The nurse decides to report the doctor and justifies it based on
Professional ethics and patient welfare.
