Moral Argument & Reasoning PDF

Moral Argument & Reasoning - A **moral argument** is *a reasoning* in which the conclusion is *a moral statement.* A **moral statement** is a *statement/premise asserting that an action is right or wrong (moral or immoral) or that a person or motive is good or bad.* In a moral argument, we cann...

Moral Argument & Reasoning - A **moral argument** is *a reasoning* in which the conclusion is *a moral statement.* A **moral statement** is a *statement/premise asserting that an action is right or wrong (moral or immoral) or that a person or motive is good or bad.* In a moral argument, we cannot establish the conclusion without *a moral premise*. *A standard moral argument* has (a) at least one premise that asserts a general moral principle, (b) at least one premise that is a nonmoral claim, and (c) a conclusion that is a moral statement. Examples of a Moral Argument Valid Moral Argument: 1\) A human fetus has a brain wave after 25 weeks of gestation. (fact or premise) 2\) A human with a brain wave is a person. (connecting fact-value premise) 3\) Killing a person is morally wrong. (evaluative premise) Therefore, killing a fetus with a brain wave is morally wrong. (evaluative) - **Kohlberg identified three distinct levels of moral reasoning: (a) *preconventional*, (b) *conventional*, and (c) *postconventional*.** **Kohlberg\'s theory proposes that there are three levels of moral development, with each level split into two stages. Kohlberg suggested that people move through these stages in a fixed order, and that moral understanding is lb. The three levels of moral reasoning include preconventional, conventional, and postconventional.** **By using children\'s responses to a series of moral dilemmas, Kohlberg established that the reasoning behind the decision was a greater indication of moral development than the actual answer.** **Lawrence Kohlberg (1958) agreed with Piaget\'s (1932) theory of moral development in principle but wanted to develop his ideas further.** **He used Piaget's storytelling technique to tell people stories involving moral dilemmas. In each case, he presented a choice to be considered, for example, between the rights of some authority and the needs of some deserving individual who is being unfairly treated.** **One of the best known of Kohlberg's (1958) stories concerns a man called Heinz who lived somewhere in Europe.** **Kohlberg asked a series of questions such as:** **1. Should Heinz have stolen the drug?** **2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife?** **3. What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any difference?** **4. Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman died?** **By studying the answers from children of different ages to these questions, Kohlberg hoped to discover how moral reasoning changed as people grew older. The sample comprised 72 Chicago boys aged 10 --16 years, 58 of whom were followed up at three-yearly intervals for 20 years (Kohlberg, 1984).** **Each boy was given a 2-hour interview based on the ten dilemmas. What Kohlberg was mainly interested in was not whether the boys judged the action right or wrong, but the reasons given for the decision. He found that these reasons tended to change as the children got older.** **Kohlberg identified three distinct levels of moral reasoning: preconventional, conventional, and postconventional. Each level has two sub-stages.** **People can only pass through these levels in the order listed. Each new stage replaces the reasoning typical of the earlier stage. Not everyone achieves all the stages. The 3 levels of moral reasoning include** ***Level 1 - Preconventional morality*** **Preconventional morality is the first stage of moral development and lasts until approximately age 9. At the preconventional level children don't have a personal code of morality, and instead moral decisions are shaped by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking their rules.** **For example, if an action leads to punishment is must be bad, and if it leads to a reward must be good.** **Authority is outside the individual and children often make moral decisions based on the physical consequences of actions.** ***Level 2 - Conventional morality*** **Conventional morality is the second stage of moral development and is characterized by an acceptance of social rules concerning right and wrong. At the conventional level (most adolescents and adults), we begin to internalize the moral standards of valued adult role models.** **Authority is internalized but not questioned, and reasoning is based on the norms of the group to which the person belongs.** **A social system that stresses the responsibilities of relationships as well as social order is seen as desirable and must, therefore, influence our view of what is right and wrong.** ***Level 3 - Postconventional morality*** **Postconventional morality is the third stage of moral development and is characterized by an individuals' understanding of universal ethical principles. These are abstract and ill-defined but might include:the preservation of life at all costs, and the importance of human dignity.** **Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles, and moral reasoning is based on individual rights and justice. According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is as far as most people get.** **Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of abstract thinking necessary for stage 5 or 6 (post-conventional morality). That is to say, most people take their moral views from those around them and only a minority think through ethical principles for themselves.** **E.g., human rights, justice, and equality. The person will be prepared to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest of society in the process and having to pay the consequences of disapproval and or imprisonment. Kohlberg doubted few people reached this stage.** ***Problems with Kohlberg\'s Methods*** - A critique of Kohlberg\'s theory is that it emphasizes justice to the exclusion of other values and so may not adequately address the arguments of those who value other moral aspects of actions. Carol Gilligan, in her book In a Different Voice, has argued that Kohlberg\'s theory is excessively androcentric. The point of contention is that Kohlberg\'s model directs to inferior morality of women as compared to men, which Carol Gilligan noticed and opposed. Gilligan researched and constitutes her own model, which later, Kohlberg did not challenge. - Two glaring weakness in Kohlberg\'s theory have largely discredited it. (1) The fact that boys and girls develop at different stages mentally and morally is problematic to his theory. (2) Also, Kohlberg does not take into account that children of different cultures develop at different rates. - Kohlberg is biased against women. This challenge is due to the fact that Kohlberg doesn\'t take into account the differences between men and women. For example, women are more likely to base their explanations for moral dilemmas on concepts such as caring and personal relationships.