First, they want to please others or receive social ap-
proval for following the community’s rules. Later,
they may think from a law-and-order perspective and
value becoming a good citizen. The third stage, post-
conventional or ideal-centered reasoning, occurs
rarely.
These levels of reasoning may overrule the cul-
ture’s standards and the individual’s personal con-
cerns. Initially, laws are important in ideal-centered
analyses of moral dilemmas because they are agreed
upon by the community, as a whole, and are created
to help everyone. Infractions are accepted if the rules
become harmful or if another party breaks the legal
contract. Kohlberg suggested, however, that individu-
als would eventually reason using universal principles
established through individual reflection—not legal
standards or individual values—but there is little evi-
dence to demonstrate that this stage of reasoning ex-
ists.
Evolutionary biologists criticize the validity of
Kohlberg’s last three stages because, unlike the first
three stages, they do not foster the adaptation and co-
operation necessary for species survival. Others assert
that his moral reasoning levels do not reflect various
religious beliefs, cultural values, economic circum-
stances, social situations, or individual interpretations
of moral dilemmas. For example, replies to moral di-
lemmas frequently reflect either a care for others’
perspective or a justice and rights perspective. Moral-
ity of care perspectives consider more responsibility
toward, interest in, and nurturance of others. Morali-
ty of justice perspectives do not consider personal
ideas of right and wrong, but reflect theoretical, vi-
sionary, and complex notions of morality. When as-
sessing replies to moral dilemmas, some researchers
have found that females more than males reflect a
morality of care and that males more than females re-
flect a morality of justice. On the whole, however,
Kohlberg’s stages reflect a range of human possibility
in moral reasoning and have provided a foundation
for future theory and research.
Emotionality
A child’s moral reasoning ability and behavior ex-
pands as emotions, other awareness, and self-
awareness develop. People feeling guilt, the emotion
of remorse over doing wrong, often feel empathy and
are often motivated to confess and compensate. Feel-
ings of guilt, as well as feelings of disgust, sadness,
and empathic anger, also coincide with perceptions
of injustice and immorality. Those with empathic and
sympathetic temperaments or positive moods, in gen-
eral, tend to exhibit more sharing, supporting, volun-
teering, helping, and less aggressive behavior, while
intense negative emotions tend to lead to destructive
or unproductive anger resolution. Feelings of shame
that arise from situations in which the self has been
challenged appear to be related to antisocial behav-
ior. Shame and embarrassment tend to reflect others’
evaluations and play a large role in conformity to so-
cial conventions.
The precursors to many emotions are self- and
other awareness, which may occur as early as twelve
or fifteen months of age. Guilt and other types of
mental discomfort about moral and social transgres-
sions begin to develop between fourteen and forty-six
months. Additionally, empathic responding, repara-
tive behavior, and awareness of right and wrong are
first evident at twenty-four months. Children who
demonstrate these feelings and behaviors also dem-
onstrate fewer moral and social transgressions. Be-
tween ages seven and eleven the brain has adequately
developed so that children can begin to understand
moral issues and relate to their own feelings about
moral behavior. During adolescence not only does
complex moral reasoning increase, but so too does
concern for others. Cognitive processing or thinking
skills, however, tend to break down when people feel
threatened or sad; therefore, it is understandable that
adolescents may concentrate on their own needs and
desires when the costs of helping others are great.Behavior
Some people assert that society should be more
concerned about moral behavior than moral reason-
ing. Children demonstrate prosocial and moral be-
havior when they share, help, cooperate,
communicate sympathy, and otherwise demonstrate
their ability to care about others and the community.
Ideally, these behaviors are performed without the
expectation of reward, as reflected in the later stages
of moral reasoning. Moral behavior, however, often
provides good feelings, kinship, and interconnection
with others. The frequency and type of moral or pro-
social behavior vary with the frequency and type of
moral reasoning, the child’s emotional development,
the child’s gender, and situational factors, including
culture and religion. Human respect, concepts of suc-
cess, and beliefs fostered by family and peers, as well
as negative sanctions, are also related to the frequen-
cy of prosocial and antisocial behavior.
Children’s ability to restrain unacceptable behav-
ior begins to improve in toddlerhood. Children be-
tween the ages of seven and eleven, however, regard
allegiance to peers as more important than cultural
rules, so they often say that they would cheat, lie, or
steal to help a friend in need. It is clear that children
think about and make choices concerning moralityMORAL DEVELOPMENT 277