1. PSYC 206 Lifespan Development
Chapter 13 - Moral Development
Lecture 2

2. Piaget’s Theory of Moral Development
Heteronomous morality
Right and wrong are defined according to objective consequences
Children up to 9 or 10 years old
E.g., number of broken cups
Autonomous morality
Right and wrong are defined according to internal motives and intentions
By age 10
E.g., good or bad intention

3. Piaget’s Theory of Moral Development
Peer context & Playing games
Fantasy role play vs. Rule-based games
6- and -8 year- olds: Rules are fixed and unbreakable.
10-and -12 year-olds: Rules have been decided by themselves and can be changed by agreement.
Game-playing & Understanding social rules

4. Piaget’s Theory of Moral Development
Ali breaks ten cups while helping his mother to dry the dishes.
Can breaks one cup while stealing chocolates in the absence of his mother.
Who is naughtier? Ali or Can?
Ali – 10 cups & good or neutral intent
Can – 1 cup & bad intent

5. Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development
“Morality” is an individual’s sense of right, wrong, and justice
Every individual passes through different levels of moral thinking

7. Kohlberg’s Six Moral Stages
Level I - Preconventional
Stage 1 - Heteronomous morality
Stage 2 - Instrumental morality
Level II - Conventional
Stage 3 - Good-child morality
Stage 4 - Law-and-order morality
Level III - Postconventional (Principled)
Stage 5 - Social-contract reasoning
Stage 6 – Universal ethical principles

8. Level I – Preconventional Morality
Stage 1 - Heteronomous morality
Before age 7
Children obey rules to avoid punishment
Egocentric perspective

9. Level I – Preconventional Morality
Stage 2 - Instrumental morality
At the age of 7 or 8
Children obey rules to gain rewards or satisfy personal objectives
Concrete individualistic perspective

10. Level II – Conventional Morality
Stage 3 - Good-child morality
At age of 10 or 11
Making decisions on the basis of what will please others
Maintaining interpersonal relations
“Golden rule”: treat others as you wish to be treated

11. Level II – Conventional Morality
Stage 4 - Law-and-order morality
By early adolescence
Maintaining the social order
Conforming to the rules of legal authority

12. Level III - Postconventional (Principled) Morality
Stage 5 - Social-contract reasoning
Social contracts and democratic law
Prosocial perspective: Being aware of others’ values and rights

13. Level III - Postconventional (Principled) Morality
Stage 6 – Universal ethical principles
Self-chosen universal principles of ethics and justice (e.g., equality) as abstract moral guidelines

14. Kohlberg Dilemmas
Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wanted to go to camp very much. His father promised him he could go if he saved up the money for it himself. So Joe worked hard at his paper route and saved up the forty dollars it cost to go to camp, and a little more besides. But just before camp was going to start, his father changed his mind. Some of his friends decided to go on a special fishing trip, and Joe's father was short of the money it would cost. So he told Joe to give him the money he had saved from the paper route. Joe didn't want to give up going to camp, so he thinks of refusing to give his father the money.

15. Sample Questions
1. Should Joe refuse to give his father the money? Why or why not?
2. Does the father have the right to tell Joe to give him the money? Why or why not?
3. Does giving the money have anything to do with being a good son? Why or why not?
4. In general, why should a promise kept?

16. Video: “Heinz Dilemma”
Scenario 1
A woman was near death from a unique kind of cancer. There is a drug that might save her. The drug costs $2,000 per dosage. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and tried every legal means, but he could only get together about $1,000. He asked the doctor scientist who discovered the drug for a discount or let him pay later. But the doctor scientist refused.
Should Heinz break into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

17. Scenario 2
Heinz broke into the laboratory and stole the drug. The next day, the newspapers reported the break-in and theft. Brown, a police officer and a friend of Heinz remembered seeing Heinz last evening, behaving suspiciously near the laboratory. Later that night, he saw Heinz running away from the laboratory.
Should Brown report what he saw? Why or why not?

18. Scenario 3
Officer Brown reported what he saw. Heinz was arrested and brought to court. If convicted, he faces up to two years' jail. Heinz was found guilty.
Should the judge sentence Heinz to prison?
Why or why not?
VIDEO!

19. Stage one (obedience):
“Heinz should not steal the medicine
because he will consequently be put in
prison which will mean he is a bad person.” OR
“Heinz should steal the medicine because it
is only worth $200 and not $2000; Heinz
had even offered to pay for it and was not
stealing anything else.”

20. Stage two (self-interest):
“Heinz should not steal the medicine because
prison is an awful place, and he would more
likely languish in a jail cell than over his
wife's death.” OR
“Heinz should steal the medicine because he
will be much happier if he saves his wife,
even if he will have to serve a prison
sentence.”

21. Stage three (conformity):
“Heinz should not steal the drug because
stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he has
tried to do everything he can without breaking
the law, you cannot blame him.” OR
“Heinz should steal the medicine because his
wife expects it; he wants to be a good
husband.”

22. Stage four (law-and-order):
“Heinz should not steal the medicine
because the law prohibits stealing, making it
illegal.” OR
“Heinz should steal the drug for his wife but
also take the prescribed punishment for the
crime as well as paying the druggist what he
is owed. Criminals cannot just run around
without regard for the law; actions have
consequences.”

23. Stage five (human rights):
“Heinz should not steal the medicine because
the scientist has a right to fair compensation.
Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his
actions right.” OR
“Heinz should steal the medicine because
everyone has a right to choose life,
regardless of the law.”

24. Stage six (universal human ethics):
“Heinz should not steal the medicine,
because others may need the medicine just
as badly, and their lives are equally
significant.” OR
“Heinz should steal the medicine, because
saving a human life is a more fundamental
value than the property rights of another
person.”

25. Prosocial Moral Reasoning
Thinking that is involved in deciding whether to share with, help, or take care of other people
Eisenberg: Story dilemmas
E.g., birhday party vs. helping a child who has injured his leg
Immediate self-interest vs. interest of others
With age, children express more empathy
Prosocial reasoning & Prosocial behavior