'Kohlberg`s Three Levels and Six Stages of Moral Reasoning\r'

'Lawrence Kohlberg, a professor of psychology in the University of Chicago, has created his own hypothesis of deterrent example development. The mathematicalness is based on children’s reasoning, when facing moralistic dilemmas, however, Kohlberg went remote beyond that and created a common theory for all(a) ages. Under his theory moral thinking passes through six scatter puts, which argon broken into three takes. This root aims to provide a review of stages and takes proposed by Kohlberg. The first level is PRE-CONVENTIONAL. This level is more than char deporteristic for children, although it is sometimes passed by adults too. At this level an individual considers exclusively like a shot consequences of an challenge for himself. Reasoning at this level is purely egoistic and consists of two stages: percentage point 1 An individual concentrates only on direct consequences for himself and the main moral intimidation is idolatry of punishment. moralistic fut ility of an moveion is estimated by punishment. The more severe is the punishment, the worse an accomplish is[1]. story 2 is characterized by limited following to the needs of others. However, this interest is of egocentric. A individual is interested in getting something for himself for his/her moral behavior[2]. The second level is CONVENTIONAL. This stage is veritable(prenominal) for most adults. At this level individuals canvass the morality of their actions to social norms and expectations. This level includes the third gear and fourth stage of moral reasoning.Stage 3 is related to social roles. People act so, as their relatives, friends and members of their group act to assimilate their praise. Actions be evaluated in price of personalised relationships and social stereotypes. The main deterrence is fear of authority and fear of social condemnation[3].Stage 4 is similar to stage 3, however it is lengthened as actions ar evaluated in terms of laws and social conv entions. Individual needs ar overcome at this stage and laws are attri merelyed own value. A distinction amidst right and wrong in this stage is created by culpability of an action. The third level is POST-CONVENTIONAL is also called â€Å"principled level”. Actions are evaluated by an individual before they are evaluated by society. A person becomes chastely â€Å"autonomous”[4]. The level includes stages 5 and 6.Stage 5 At this stage an individual comes to understanding, that race hold different views and opinions. Laws are understood not only as rules, but as useful social contracts. Those, who act against common good are considered to be morally bad and those have to be changed. The aim of morals is understood as â€Å"as much good for as domainy people as possible”, which is achieved by decision of the majority.Stage 6 is characterized by abstract reasoning and universality of honest principles. An individual comes to understanding that any laws w hitethorn be justified only to the expiration they correspond those universal principles[5]. The social consensus is reached afterwardwards â€Å"seeing the situation from another man’s eyes”. It is firstly requirement to get full understanding of all moral positions on the matter and after that a consensus between those positions should be reached. This action is validated by consent of both person, not only the majority.References1. Shaffer, David R. (2004). favorable and nature tuition, 5th Ed, Wadsworth Publishing2. Kohlberg, Lawrence; T. Lickona, ed. (1976). â€Å" moralistic stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental cost”, moral Development and Behavior: possibleness, query and Social Issues. Rinehart and Winston3. Rawls, john (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belkap hug of Harvard University Press4. Kohlberg, Lawrence (1973). â€Å"The advance to Moral Adequacy of a Highest Stage of Moral Judgment”. Journal of ph ilosophy 70[1] Shaffer, David R. (2004). Social and Personality Development, 5th Ed, Wadsworth Publishing, p.- 43                 [2] Kohlberg, Lawrence (1973). â€Å"The Claim to Moral Adequacy of a Highest Stage of Moral Judgment”. Journal of Philosophy 70: 630-646 [3] Supra note                                                                                                                                                               [4] Kohlberg, Lawrence; T. Lickona, ed. (1976). â€Å"Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach”, Moral Development and Behavior: Theory, Research and Social Issues. Rinehart and Winston p.-188   [5] Rawls, John (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belkap Press of Harvard University Press, p.-201\r\n'