Blog Post 10

I can directly relate to this chapters observation on moral development because of my role as an older sister. I have watched my younger brother who is 4 years younger than myself, progress through almost all of Piaget’s moral development stages. It is extremely interesting to read through these as an accepted norm and I’m sure growing up it would’ve been helpful to know (or at least would’ve prevented some pretty silly sibling fights). I think the biggest takeaway from Piaget’s stages was the third stage of development, that of understanding the reasoning behind rules and therefore feeling better in justifying breaking them. This is a question that I think defines ethics for me. The quiz at the beginning of the semester placed me as a hard realist, so I am in large support of fully accepting this stage of development. A universal moral code seems absurd to me, it is the reasoning that one acquires at this stage of development that I think defines one as ethical vs. unethical.

This ties in a bit with Kohlberg’s theories as well. His sixth stage of so-called ‘universal ethical principles’ seems impossible, but perhaps that’s because I probably operate on a more conventional moral basis. I fully support his concept of social systems as a moral incentive. When I think of this I think of my mother. She is a moral person by most standards but she would constantly stress certain things to my brother and I because they were “the right thing to do”. The right thing to do though was never what immediately struck my brother and I to do naturally. It was something we were supposed to do based off of widely accepted social systems and norms. I think this level of ethical behavior is questionable but understandable. Without anyone being able to be truly, purely ethical (save for the few handfuls of people Kohlberg brought up) it makes sense that ethics should be measured on a scale that defines what modern day ethical behavior is motivated by.

I was a much bigger fan of Gilligan’s notions of moral development. The idea of fusing two different moral languages fits the way in which I approach ethical decision making a lot better. While I may not always behave or act morally, I would consider myself as completing moral development in Gilligan’s model.

After completing the chapter I was left with one final thought: I definitely don’t think I would make a good journalist. I would like to think that I am generally ethical but I certainly don’t hold myself to the moral standards it appears the average journalist does. I think I’ll leave that to the professionals!