Upon reviewing Kohlberg's three levels of reasoning process, I have decided that I do agree with his findings. However, I do believe that morality is based, at least for many people, on religious teachings and practices. In Kohlberg's levels, it is not until the last one, Postconventional Morality that any hint of religious morality comes up, as with the 10 Commandments. The cultural bias criticism seems to be the one that could refute the argument of religious morality, especially because only Christianity and Judaism follow the 10 Commandments, the example that was used in the textbook. Even though other religions do not have a strict "10 Commandments," they have a moral code that could reflect in many ways the 10 Commandments, therefore refuting the cultural bias. I think cultural bias has some truth to it, but I am not sure it is the most compelling of criticisms against Kohlberg.
Kohlberg's Morality
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/184724
Kohlberg, of course, was just looking at how people reason about moral dilemmas, and the criticism of cultural bias comes in because there was this PC desire to respect all cultures equally, and what is considered "moral" differs from culture to culture, at least somewhat. Certainly religious traditions influence what is considered moral, but even there, the details count. For example, all cultures are against murder, and the Ten Commandments are quite clear that "thou shalt not kill," yet capital punishment is not defined as murder in the still mostly Christian US. However, Secular Europeans, for whom capital punishment is murder, are shocked that some American states still use legal executions.
If you are interested in this, I encourage you to check out the work of Jonathan Haidt. He argues that there are six "moral foundations", only one of which (fairness v cheating) really maps onto Kohlberg's model.
I agree that the cultural bias criticism isn't the most compelling criticism against him. Kohlberg was mostly interested in moral reasoning as a special case of cognitive development. So in the pre-conventional stage is essentially egocentric (Can I get away with this? Is it good for me?); the conventional stage is consistent with the Piaget's operational stage (what are the rules here, what do people like me think is right?) and the post-conventional stage is consistent with the formal operations stage, where people can reason abstractly about broad moral principles (Is this just?) I think those stages of cognitive reasoning should transcend specific culture, don't you?
May I ask, I have seen that logo many places and I have always wondered what does it mean. I am very curious to learn more behind the logo you publised with your blog. Thank you so much for sharing.
I don't know if I agree with this because following the rules of morality doesn't necessarily mean that one is participating in rationalizing things at a postconventional stage. One could just be following the rules because they are told to or because they don't want to be punished.
That being said, the rules of morality are more than just black and white and more than just a set list made by whatever religion one belongs to.
Morality is found among all sorts of people from all sorts of cultures throughout the ages. Morality, I believe, has its root in people, not in religion.