Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Moral Education 9 (2):103-109 (1980)
|Abstract||Abstract Kohlberg's developmental theory of moral reasoning postulates a supremely adequate form of moral thinking to which all other stages are tending, labelled Stage Six. Kohlberg identifies this with a principle of justice, though without adequately justifying the elimination of other autonomous universal principles. The claim that this principle provides consistent, reversible and universalizable moral judgements is criticized: by itself a purely formal principle of justice can provide no particular moral judgements at all; for that we need independent values, such as the value of life which Kohlberg appeals to, but does not justify, in his discussions of the Heinz dilemma. More generally there is no reason to expect that any form of moral reasoning will be supremely adequate in Kohlberg's sense, providing a solution to all moral problems and dilemmas. The principle of justice is merely one among the many specifically moral principles which Kohlberg locats at Stage Five, albeit the one which he personally happens to favour. Perhaps the most striking feature of Lawrence Kohlberg's many accounts of his cognitive?developmental theory of moral reasoning is the crucial importance which he attaches to the form of reasoning labelled Stage Six, when it is a stage of development that only a tiny minority of individuals actually attain. Indeed it appears that even that number has had to be revised downward in the light of changes to the theory and scoring system, until it begins to seem that only a handful of saints and heroes, such as Socrates or Martin Luther King, remain. In fact so slender is the empirical evidence for a separate form of Stage Six reasoning that the official scoring manual (Kohlberg et al., 1977) prefers to ignore it altogether. Clearly, then, the case for Stage Six must be almost wholly theoretical, not to say philosophical, as the supremely adequate form of moral thinking to which all other stages are tending. And by the same token it may seem that criticisms of Kohlberg's claims for Stage Six will leave the rest of the theory untouched. But that, I think, is to underestimate the significance of Stage Six. It is the apogee of his system, providing both a focus and a rationale for the stage?development that allegedly leads to it; it is as crucial to the theory as Kohlberg's own writings make it. Without Stage Six the cognitive?developmental account stands in need of radical re?thinking, to put it no higher|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Don Locke (1979). Cognitive Stages or Developmental Phases? A Critique of Kohlberg's Stage‐Structural Theory of Moral Reasoning. Journal of Moral Education 8 (3):168-181.
Elizabeth A. Morelli (1978). The Sixth Stage of Moral Development. Journal of Moral Education 7 (2):97-108.
John A. Codd (1977). Some Conceptual Problems in the Cognitive‐Developmental Approach to Morality. Journal of Moral Education 6 (3):147-157.
Richard Peters (1978). The Place of Kohlberg's Theory in Moral Education∗. Journal of Moral Education 7 (3):147-157.
Iordanis Kavathatzopoulos (1991). Kohlberg and Piaget: Differences and Similarities. Journal of Moral Education 20 (1):47-54.
Hye-Jeong Baek (2002). A Comparative Study of Moral Development of Korean and British Children. Journal of Moral Education 31 (4):373-391.
Martin Bunzl (1977). The Moral Development of Moral Philosophers. Journal of Moral Education 7 (1):3-8.
Marion E. Smith (1978). Moral Reasoning: Its Relation to Logical Thinking and Role‐Taking. Journal of Moral Education 8 (1):41-49.
Daniel J. Bolt & Edmund V. Sullivan (1977). Kohl Berg's Cognitive‐Developmental Theory in Educational Settings: Some Possible Abuses. Journal of Moral Education 6 (3):198-205.
Klaus Beck, Karin Heinrichs, Gerhard Minnameier & Kirsten Parche-Kawik (1999). Homogeneity of Moral Judgement?-Apprentices Solving Business Conflicts. Journal of Moral Education 28 (4):429-443.
Ernest Wallwork (1985). Sentiment and Structure: A Durkheimian Critique of Kohlberg's Moral Theory. Journal of Moral Education 14 (2):87-101.
Helen Weinreich (1975). Kohlberg and Piaget: Aspects of Their Relationship in the Field of Moral Development. Journal of Moral Education 4 (3):201-213.
Lawrence J. Walker & Thomas J. Moran (1991). Moral Reasoning in a Communist Chinese Society. Journal of Moral Education 20 (2):139-155.
James Weber (1991). Adapting Kohlberg to Enhance the Assessment of Manager's Moral Reasoning. Business Ethics Quarterly 1 (3):293-318.
Jan Boom (1989). Different Conceptions of Stage in Theories of Cognitive and Moral Development. Journal of Moral Education 18 (3):208-217.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads4 ( #189,165 of 739,325 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,325 )
How can I increase my downloads?