The Criticisms of Kohlbergs Moral Development Stages Essay -- Moral D

The Criticisms of Kohlbergs Moral Development StagesPart OneThe criticisms of Kohlbergs honorable development maps seem to center around three major points, his research methods, the regression of stage four, and finally his goals.The first criticism that I would like to address is that of his research methods. Kohlberg is often criticized for not only his subject selection, but also the methods by which he tries to extricate data from those subjects. His initial study consisted of school boys from a private institution in Chicago. The problem with this is fairly obvious, that this does not represent a world-shattering portion of the population to allow for generalized conclusions. In other words, how can we test some boys from Chicago and ascertain that this is how all people develop planetary?I believe that the answer to this criticism comes from the theory that it relates to. Kohlbergs moral development schema is highly dependent upon the idea that there are fundamental truths that cannot be dismissed. These ideas are in the ether, wound into the very fabric that constructs human nature. Granted, his descriptions of the various stages also seem very dependent upon the surroundings and social institutions that an various(prenominal) would be subjected to. Yet these institutions would be have to be built upon people, all of whom would share these ideological truths. It seems fairly obvious that all people have undisputable needs, survival and some group membership. Kohlbergs stages are merely methods by which one could fulfill these needs. For instance, Spartan societies were adamant about maintaining the purity and strength of the civilization. Citizens saw no wrong in exposing a sick or lame baby to the elements so that it might die. Surely an act of cruelty today, but in that society, a necessary evil The prosperity and wealth of the whole was of greater importance than that of the individual.In addition to these justifications, additional research su bstantiated Kohlbergs claims. Different subjects were tested, from all ages and regions, and the same conclusions were drawn from the data. presume that these conclusions are correct, and the data leads to the same interpretation, is there any other possibility? This argument seems most impressive, especially considering the differences between people that are evident in everyday life. Similarities ... ...o a small compromise to fit their needs. In conclusion, it seems that there is definitely a way to combine the Kohlberg justice group and the Gilligan caring theme of moral development. Mr. Kohlberg provides a method to police a society that does not include 100 percent utopian citizens. Ms. Gilligan gives us the ability to relate to to each one and every person, as a person. She indicates ways that we can identify with their perspectives, understand their needs, and compromise. Although the real world seems infinitely more complex than either of these models, they bear a frigh tening resemblance to real societies and real people. Maybe someday, a perfect model will be constructed, judged by a perfect path of moral development. Until then, I hope that I have found a good combination of these two ideas. One last side note I conjecture I could spend weeks typing a paper on this subject. There are thousands of facets of each system that could fit into the others potential flaws. However, I think Ive been ho-hum enough as it is. I have tried to make my points as succinct and reasonable as possible, but without sacrificing exactly what I wanted to say. give thanks you for your patience.