Republic of the Philippines

TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

1000 Ayala Boulevard cor. San Marcelino St., Ermita, Manila

GEC8 – M
ETHICS

GROUP REPORT NO. 5

MORAL CHARACTER AND MORAL DEVELOPMENT

BSCE-2B
AGITO, RAFAEL S.
BANAL, MIGUEL JOHN L.
DE LA CRUZ, CHRISTIAN REI E.
DOLUNTAP, ZYRAH E.
ESPINA, RYAN C.
ENCENDENCIA, RAJAH P.
PUYONG, ARIAN MAE R.

PROF. ENRICO S. LUCENA

September 25, 2019
 I. INTRODUCTION
Etymologically, the term "character" comes from the ancient Greek
term charaktêr, which initially referred to the mark impressed upon a coin. The
term charaktêr later came to refer more generally to any distinctive feature by which
one thing is distinguished from others.
Moral character, like most issues in moral psychology, stands at the intersection
of issues in both normative ethics and empirical psychology. This suggests that there
are conceivably two general approaches one could take when elucidating the nature of
moral character. One could approach moral character primarily by focusing on
standards set by normative ethics; whether people can or do live up to these standards is
irrelevant.
Alternatively, one could approach moral character under the guideline that
normative ethics ought to be constrained by psychology. On this second approach, it's
not that the normative/descriptive distinction disappears; instead, it is just that a theory
of moral character ought to be appropriately constrained by what social psychology
tells us moral agents are in fact like.
Moral character is defined as an idea in which one is unique and can be
distinguished by other. Perhaps it can assemble qualities and traits that are different
from various individuals. It implies to how individual acts or how they expressed
themselves. In other words, it is human excellence, or unique thoughts of a character.
A moral person understands right and wrong and wilfully chooses what is right;
a virtues person engages in good behaviour intentionally, predictably, and habitually;
an ethical person figures out what is right or good when this is not obvious.

II. MAIN IDEAS

As explaining what moral characters are we must also know the different method
or ways on developing of moral character. This report will tackle about moral character
and how philosophers developed it, the connection of moral, ethics and virtues, and
also Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, the problem arise in his theory and
method.
III. CONTENT OUTLINE
1. Development of Moral Character
 Definition

When a person is said to have character, it usually implies they have

distinguished moral qualities, moral virtues, and moral reasoning abilities. Less
frequently used terms include morality, virtue and ethics.

Character is associated with the quality of one’s life, especially in terms of

moral and ethical decisions and actions.

According to Lickona (1991), “Good character consists of knowing the

good, desiring the good, and doing the good—habits of the mind, habits of the
heart, and habits of action”.

 Key Ideas / Advocates

Narvaez and Rest (1995) suggest that the skills of moral and character
development should be considered in terms of four psychological components.
Ethical Sensitivity—the perception of moral and social situations, including the
ability to consider possible actions and their repercussions in terms of the people
involved;
Ethical Judgment—the consideration of possible alternative actions and the
rationale for selecting one or more as best;
Ethical Motivation—the selection of moral values most relevant in the situation
and the commitment to act on that selection;
Ethical Action—the ego strength combined with the psychological and social
skills necessary to carry out the selected alternative.

Berkowitz (2002) identified seven psychological components of the

“moral anatomy,” and urged scientists and educators to begin reconstructing the
“complete moral person.”
Moral behavior (prosocial, sharing, donating to charity, telling the truth)
Moral values (believe in moral goods)
 Moral emotion (guilt, empathy, compassion)
Moral reasoning (about right and wrong)
Moral identity (morality as an aspect self-image)
Moral personality (enduring tendency to act with honesty, altruism, responsibility
“Metamoral” characteristics meaning they make morality possible even though
they are not inherently moral.

Stilwell and her team provide another multi-modal view of four domains
of human experience:
Attachment bond with parents—children learn about compliance and respect;
Moral-emotional responsiveness—children learn about the ways in which
emotions regulate moral life, including reparation and healing responses after
wrongdoing;
Moral valuation—children learn about the developmental processes of deriving
and justifying moral rules in behalf of values; and
Moral volition—children learn about the ways in which autonomy and will
become associated with what should be done.

 Explanation
The development of moral character is an intellectual topic that has been
argued for many years. Many philosophers have argued the point of their
existence with the perplexity of this subject. This has allowed the philosophers to
approach this topic in various ways. It explains the many ways and method on
how moral character developed.
In Narvadez and Rest they say that the focus should be on the internal
processes and behavioral skills that are required for moral behavior and propose
that sensitivity, judgment, and motivation emerge from the interaction of
cognitive and affective processes.
In Stilwell and her team focuses on moral motivation and proposes that
children develop it within four domains of human experience:
2. Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development
 Definition
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.
Kohlberg identified three distinct levels of moral reasoning: pre-
conventional, conventional, and post-conventional. Each level has two sub-
stages.

 Key Ideas / Advocates

Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality
At the pre-conventional level (most nine-year-olds and younger, some over
nine), we don’t have a personal code of morality. Instead, our moral code is
shaped by the standards of adults and the consequences of following or breaking
their rules.
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation. The child/individual
is good in order to avoid being punished. If a person is punished, they must have
done wrong.
• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange. At this stage, children recognize
that there is not just one right view that is handed down by the authorities.
Different individuals have different viewpoints.
Level 2 - Conventional morality
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.
 • Stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. The child/individual is
good in order to be seen as being a good person by others. Therefore, answers
relate to the approval of others.
• Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order. The child/individual becomes
aware of the wider rules of society, so judgments concern obeying the rules in
order to uphold the law and to avoid guilt.
Level 3 - Post-conventional morality
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.
• Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual Rights. The
child/individual becomes aware that while rules/laws might exist for the
good of the greatest number, there are times when they will work against
the interest of particular individuals.
The issues are not always clear-cut. For example, in Heinz’s dilemma,
the protection of life is more important than breaking the law against
stealing.
• Stage 6. Universal Principles. People at this stage have
developed their own set of moral guidelines which may or may not fit
the law. The principles apply to everyone.

 Explanation
Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality
Authority is outside the individual and reasoning is based on the physical
consequences of actions.
Level 2 - Conventional morality
Authority is internalized but not questioned, and reasoning is based on the norms
of the group to which the person belongs.
Level 3 - Post-conventional morality
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.

3. Problems with Kohlberg's Methods

 Definition
In Kohlberg’s method, some philosophers didn’t agreed with him,
and claimed that there are problem on his method.
 Key Ideas / Advocates

The dilemmas are artificial (i.e., they lack ecological validity)

Most of the dilemmas are unfamiliar to most people (Rosen, 1980). For example,
it is all very well in the Heinz dilemma asking subjects whether Heinz should
steal the drug to save his wife.

The sample is biased

According to Gilligan (1977), because Kohlberg’s theory was based on an all-

male sample, the stages reflect a male definition of morality (it’s androcentric).
Mens' morality is based on abstract principles of law and justice, while womens'
is based on principles of compassion and care.

The dilemmas are hypothetical (i.e., they are not real)

In a real situation, what course of action a person takes will have real
consequences – and sometimes very unpleasant ones for themselve. Would
subjects reason in the same way if they were placed in a real situation? We just
don’t know.

Poor research design

The way in which Kohlberg carried out his research when constructing this
theory may not have been the best way to test whether all children follow the
same sequence of stage progression. His research was cross-sectional, meaning
 that he interviewed children of different ages to see what level of moral
development they were at.

 Explanation
The dilemmas are artificial (i.e., they lack ecological validity)
Kohlberg’s subjects were aged between 10 and 16. They have never been
married, and never been placed in a situation remotely like the one in the story.
How should they know whether Heinz should steal the drug?

The sample is biased

The gender bias issue raised by Gilligan is a reminded of the significant gender
debate still present in psychology, which when ignored, can have a large impact
on the results obtained through psychological research.

The dilemmas are hypothetical (i.e., they are not real)

The fact that Kohlberg’s theory is heavily dependent on an individual’s response

to an artificial dilemma brings a question to the validity of the results obtained
through this research. People may respond very differently to real life situations
that they find themselves in than they do with an artificial dilemma presented to
them in the comfort of a research environment.

Poor research design

A better way to see if all children follow the same order through the stages would
have been to carry out longitudinal research on the same children. However,
longitudinal research on Kohlberg’s theory has since been carried out by Colby
et al. (1983) who tested 58 male participants of Kohlberg’s original study. She
tested them six times in the span of 27 years and found support for Kohlberg’s
original conclusion, which we all pass through the stages of moral development
in the same order.
4. Problems with Kohlberg's Theory
 Definition
In Kohlberg’s theory there are some problems that arise which challenges
some of the fundamental assumptions of Kohlberg’s theory.

 Key Ideas / Advocates

Are there distinct stages of moral development?

Kohlberg claims that there are, but the evidence does not always support this
conclusion. For example, a person who justified a decision on the basis of
principled reasoning in one situation (post-conventional morality stage 5 or 6)
would frequently fall back on conventional reasoning (stage 3 or 4) with another
story. In practice, it seems that reasoning about right and wrong depends more
upon the situation than upon general rules.

Does moral judgment match moral behavior?

Kohlberg never claimed that there would be a one to one correspondence

between thinking and acting (what we say and what we do) but he does suggest
that the two are linked.

Is justice the most fundamental moral principle?

This is Kohlberg’s view. However, Gilligan (1977) suggests that the principle of
caring for others is equally important. Furthermore, Kohlberg claims that the
moral reasoning of males has been often in advance of that of females.

 Explanation

Are there distinct stages of moral development?

Individuals do not always progress through the stages and Rest (1979) found
that one in fourteen actually slipped backward. The evidence for distinct stages
of moral development looks very weak, and some would argue that behind the
 theory is a culturally biased belief in the superiority of American values over
those of other cultures and societies.

Does moral judgment match moral behavior?

Bee (1994) suggests that we also need to take account of a) habits that people
have developed over time; b) whether people see situations as demanding their
participation; c) the costs and benefits of behaving in a particular way; d)
competing motive such as peer pressure, self-interest and so on.

Overall Bee points out that moral behavior is only partly a question of moral
reasoning. It is also to do with social factors.

Is justice the most fundamental moral principle?

Gilligan is claiming that there is a sex bias in Kohlberg’s theory. He neglects

the feminine voice of compassion, love, and non-violence, which is associated
with the socialization of girls.

IV. RELEVANCE

As a college student, everyday is a battle in academics and in social life. Everyone

has to be capable in facing all these challenges as preparation for facing the real world
afterwards. Through this crucial stage of life, one develops his/her moral character. These
developments in moral character help in dealing with everyday situations so that he/she is
able to handle and give an appropriate action.

V. SUMMARY
The topic that we discussed were all about moral character and moral
development. It was all about how moral character is developed and who are the people
involved in developing such. Moral character is about qualities and traits of various
individuals. It implies to how individuals act or how they express themselves. In other
words, it is human excellence, or unique thoughts of a character. In developing moral
 character, many philosophers argued its existence and approached this topic in various
ways. That’s why there are many methods and ways on how moral character is
developed. Including the four psychoanalysis by Narvaez and Rest, the seven
psychological components of the “moral anatomy by Berkowitz and the four domain of
human experience by Stilwell and her team.
The stages of moral development by Kohlberg that consist of three level and six
stages that tackles about moral development. The first level is the free-conventional
morality that consist of two stages, stage one is the obedience and punishment
orientation and the stage two is the individualism and exchange. The level two which is
the conventional morality that also have two stages, stage three good interpersonal
relationships and the stage four maintaining the social order. And the third level, the
post-conventional morality, that consist of stage five which is the social contract and
individual rights and stage six the universal principles.

VI. CONCLUSION
Life is ever changing, and so are humans. From the eyes of a child to the mature
perspective of an adult, the moral character of any individual evolves to cope up through
generations of changes. It can be considered as a tool that could be used in facing
everyday situations. Becoming stronger and wiser is paramount because at the same
time, it strengthens one’s moral values. It may also serve as a guide in every action,
decision, and judgment one has to come up with in order to do what is morally correct.

VII. RECOMMENDATION

It is important to be mindful of the changes that is occurring upon oneself because

change can lead to two ways, first is for general betterment of an individual, the other is
towards a less fortunate outcome. Moral character development is an important aspect
of one’s life for it is how we learn to deal with every situation. It is a reflection of the
self-image of a person. Therefore, everyone should be aware of their moral character
and how it changes.
VIII. REFERENCES
Websites:

Character Development. (2002). Retrieve from

https://www.encyclopedia.com/education/encyclopedias-almanac-transcripts-nd-
maps/character-development

McLeod S. (2013). Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development. Retrieved from

https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html

Moral and Character Development. Retrieved from www.edpsycinteractive.org

Moral Character. Retrieved from https://www.iep.utm.edu/moral-ch/

The Development of Moral Character. Retrieved from

https://ukessays.com/essays/philosophy/moral-character.php