Lawrence (Lorenz) Kohlberg is a global figure, and not a single serious textbook on child psychology is complete without mentioning his theory moral development. Morality, to one degree or another, is inherent in any person, otherwise he is not a person at all. But to what extent? And what is this morality? How does an asocial infant become familiar with human morality? In his theory of moral development, L. Kohlberg precisely expressed the answers to these and other related questions. And his hypothetical dilemmas are designed to diagnose the level of development of a person’s moral consciousness, equally of an adult, a teenager, and a child.

According to Kohlberg, moral development has three successive levels, each of which includes two clearly defined stages. During these six stages, there is a progressive change in the basis of moral reasoning. On early stages the judgment is made based on certain external forces - the expected reward or punishment. At the very last, highest stages, judgment is already based on a personal, internal moral code and is practically not influenced by other people or social expectations. This moral code stands above any law and social agreement and can sometimes, due to exceptional circumstances, come into conflict with them.

Thus, Lawrence Kohlberg, following J. Piaget, came to the conclusion that rules, norms, laws are created by people on the basis of mutual agreement and that, if necessary, they can be changed. Therefore, an adult, having gone through all the stages of moral development, comes to the realization that there is nothing absolutely right or wrong in the world and that the morality of an act depends not so much on its consequences, but on the intentions of the person committing it.

Instructions.

Read (listen) carefully to the following nine hypothetical dilemmas and answer the questions provided. No dilemma contains an absolutely correct, perfect solution - every option has its pros and cons. Pay close attention to the rationale behind your preferred answer.

Test material.

DilemmaI. In Europe, a woman was dying from a special form of cancer. There was only one medicine that doctors thought could save her. It was a form of radium recently discovered by a pharmacist in the same city. Making the medicine was expensive. But the pharmacist set a price 10 times higher. He paid $400 for the radium and set a price of $4,000 for a small dose of radium. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow money and used every legal means, but could only raise about $2,000. He told the pharmacist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or accept payment later. But the pharmacist said: “No, I discovered a medicine and I’m going to make good money on it, using everything real funds". And Heinz decided to break into the pharmacy and steal the medicine.

Should Heinz steal the medicine? Why yes or no?
(The question is posed in order to identify the subject’s moral type and should be considered optional). Is it good or bad for him to steal the medicine?
(The question is posed in order to identify the subject’s moral type and should be considered optional.) Why is this right or wrong?
Does Heinz have a duty or obligation to steal the medicine? Why yes or no?
If Heinz didn't love his wife, should he have stolen the medicine for her? ( If the subject does not approve of stealing, ask: will there be a difference in his action if he loves or does not love his wife?) Why yes or no?
Suppose that it is not his wife who dies, but a stranger. Should Heinz steal someone else's medicine? Why yes or no?
(If the subject approves of stealing medicine for someone else.) Let's say it's a pet that he loves. Should Heinz steal to save his beloved animal? Why yes or no?
Is it important for people to do whatever they can to save the life of another? Why yes or no?
Stealing is against the law. Is this morally bad? Why yes or no?
In general, should people try to do everything they can to obey the law? Why yes or no?
(This question is included to elicit the subject's orientation and should not be considered mandatory.) Thinking about the dilemma again, what would you say is the most important thing Heinz needs to do in this situation? Why?

(Questions 1 and 2 of Dilemma I are optional. If you do not want to use them, read Dilemma II and its continuation and start with question 3.)

Dilemma II. Heinz went into the pharmacy. He stole the medicine and gave it to his wife. The next day, a report of the robbery appeared in the newspapers. Police officer Mr. Brown, who knew Heinz, read the message. He remembered seeing Heinz running from the pharmacy and realized that Heinz had done it. The policeman hesitated whether he should report this.

Should Officer Brown report that Heinz committed the theft? Why yes or no?
Let's say Officer Brown is a close friend of Heinz. Should he then file a report on him? Why yes or no?

Continuation: Officer Brown reported Heinz. Heinz was arrested and brought to trial. The jury was selected. The jury's job is to determine whether a person is guilty or not of a crime. The jury finds Heinz guilty. The judge's job is to pronounce a sentence.

Should the judge give Heinz a specific sentence or release him? Why is this the best?
From a societal perspective, should people who break the law be punished? Why yes or no? How does this apply to what the judge has to decide?
Heinz did what his conscience told him to do when he stole the medicine. Should a lawbreaker be punished if he acted dishonestly? Why yes or no?
(This question is posed in order to reveal the orientation of the subject and can be considered optional.) Think through the dilemma: What do you think is the most important thing a judge should do? Why?

Dilemma III. Joe is a 14-year-old boy who really wanted to go to camp. His father promised him that he could go if he earned money for it himself. Joe worked hard and saved the $40 he needed to go to camp and a little more. But just before the trip, my father changed his mind. Some of his friends decided to go fishing, but his father did not have enough money. He told Joe to give him the money he had saved up. Joe didn't want to give up the trip to the camp and was going to refuse his father.

(Questions 1-6 are included to identify the subject's ethical beliefs and should not be considered mandatory.)

Does the father have the right to persuade Joe to give him money? Why yes or no?
Does giving money mean that the son is good? Why?
Is it important in this situation that Joe made the money himself? Why?
Joe's father promised him that he could go to camp if he earned the money himself. Is the father's promise the most important thing in this situation? Why?
In general, why should a promise be kept?
Is it important to keep a promise to someone you don't know well and probably won't see again? Why?
What is the most important thing a father should care about in his relationship with his son? Why is this the most important?
In general, what should be the authority of a father in relation to his son? Why?
What is the most important thing a son should care about in his relationship with his father? Why is this the most important thing?
(The following question is aimed at identifying the subject's orientation and should be considered optional.) What do you think is the most important thing Joe should do in this situation? Why?

Dilemma IV. One woman had a very severe form of cancer for which there was no cure. Dr. Jefferson knew she had 6 months to live. She was in terrible pain, but was so weak that a sufficient dose of morphine would have allowed her to die sooner. She even became delirious, but during calm periods she asked the doctor to give her enough morphine to kill her. Although Dr. Jefferson knows that mercy killing is against the law, he considers complying with her request.

Should Dr. Jefferson give her a drug that would kill her? Why?
(This question is aimed at identifying the moral type of the subject and is not mandatory). Is it right or wrong for him to give a woman a medicine that would allow her to die? Why is this right or wrong?
Should a woman have the right to make the final decision? Why yes or no?
The woman is married. Should her husband interfere in the decision? Why?
What should I do good husband in this situation? Why?
Does a person have a duty or obligation to live when he does not want to, but wants to, commit suicide?
(The next question is optional). Does Dr. Jefferson have a duty or obligation to make the drug available to the woman? Why?
When a pet is seriously injured and dies, it is killed to relieve the pain. Does the same thing apply here? Why?
It is illegal for a doctor to give a woman medicine. Is it also morally wrong? Why?
In general, should people do everything they can to obey the law? Why? How does this apply to what Dr. Jefferson should have done?
(The next question is about moral orientation, it is optional). As you consider the dilemma, what would you say is the most important thing Dr. Jefferson would do? Why?

Dilemma V. Dr. Jefferson committed merciful murder. At this time, Dr. Rogers passed by. He knew the situation and tried to stop Dr. Jefferson, but the cure had already been given. Dr. Rogers hesitated whether he should report Dr. Jefferson.

(This question is optional) Should Dr. Rogers have reported Dr. Jefferson? Why?

Continuation: Dr. Rogers reported on Dr. Jefferson. Dr. Jefferson is put on trial. The jury has been selected. The jury's job is to determine whether a person is guilty or innocent of a crime. The jury finds Dr. Jefferson guilty. The judge must pronounce a sentence.

Should the judge punish Dr. Jefferson or release him? Why do you think this is the best answer?
Think in terms of society, should people who break the law be punished? Why yes or no? How does this apply to the judge's decision?
The jury finds Dr. Jefferson legally guilty of murder. Is it fair or not for the judge to sentence him to death? (possible punishment by law)? Why?
Is it always right to impose the death penalty? Why yes or no? Under what conditions do you think the death sentence should be imposed? Why are these conditions important?
Dr. Jefferson did what his conscience told him to do when he gave the woman the medicine. Should a lawbreaker be punished if he does not act according to his conscience? Why yes or no?
(The next question may be optional). Thinking about the dilemma again, what would you identify as the most important thing for a judge to do? Why?

(Questions 8-13 reveal the subject’s system of ethical views and are not mandatory.)

What does the word conscience mean to you? If you were Dr. Jefferson, what would your conscience tell you when making a decision?
Dr. Jefferson must make a moral decision. Should it be based on feeling or only on reasoning about what is right and wrong? In general, what makes an issue moral or what does the word “morality” mean to you?
If Dr. Jefferson is pondering what is truly right, there must be some right answer. Is there really any right solution to moral problems like those of Dr. Jefferson, or where everyone's opinion is equally right? Why?
How can you know when you have reached a just moral decision? Is there a way of thinking or a method by which a good or adequate solution can be reached?
Most people believe that thinking and reasoning in science can lead to the correct answer. Is the same true for moral decisions or is there a difference?

Dilemma VI. Judy is a 12 year old girl. Her mother promised her that she could go to a special rock concert in their city if she saved up money for a ticket by working as a babysitter and saving a little on breakfast. She saved up $15 for the ticket, plus an extra $5. But her mother changed her mind and told Judy that she should spend the money on new clothes for school. Judy was disappointed and decided to go to the concert any way she could. She bought a ticket and told her mother that she only earned $5. On Wednesday she went to the show and told her mother that she had spent the day with a friend. A week later, Judy told her older sister, Louise, that she had gone to the play and lied to her mother. Louise was wondering whether to tell her mother about what Judy had done.

Should Louise tell her mother that Judy lied about the money, or should she remain silent? Why?
Hesitating whether to tell or not, Louise thinks that Judy is her sister. Should this influence Judy's decision? Why yes or no?
(This question, related to the definition of a moral type, is optional.) Does such a story have any connection with the position of a good daughter? Why?
Is it important in this situation that Judy made her own money? Why?
Judy's mother promised her that she could go to the concert if she earned money herself. Is the mother's promise the most important in this situation? Why yes or no?
Why should a promise be kept at all?
Is it important to keep a promise to someone you don't know well and probably won't see again? Why?
What is the most important thing a mother should care about in her relationship with her daughter? Why is this the most important thing?
In general, what should a mother's authority be like for her daughter? Why?
What is the most important thing you think a daughter should care about in relation to her mother? Why is this thing important?

Thinking through the dilemma again, what would you say is the most important thing for Louise to do in this situation? Why?

Dilemma VII. In Korea, a crew of sailors retreated when faced with superior enemy forces. The crew crossed the bridge over the river, but the enemy was still mostly on the other side. If someone went to the bridge and blew it up, the rest of the team, with the advantage of time, could probably escape. But the person who stayed behind to blow up the bridge would not be able to escape alive. The captain himself is the person who best knows how to conduct a retreat. He called for volunteers, but there were none. If he goes on his own, the people will probably not return safely; he is the only one who knows how to conduct a retreat.

Should the captain have ordered the man to go on the mission or should he have gone himself? Why?
Should a captain send a man (or even use a lottery) when it means sending him to his death? Why?
Should the captain have gone himself when it meant the men would probably not make it back safely? Why?
Does a captain have the right to order a man if he thinks it is the best move? Why?
Does the person who receives the order have a duty or obligation to go? Why?
What creates the need to save or protect human life? Why is this important? How does this apply to what a captain should do?
(The next question is optional.) Thinking through the dilemma again, what would you say is the most responsible thing for a captain? Why?

Dilemma VIII. In one country in Europe, a poor man named Valjean could not find work; neither his sister nor brother could. Having no money, he stole bread and the medicine they needed. He was captured and sentenced to 6 years in prison. Two years later he ran away and began to live in a new place under a different name. He saved his money and gradually built a large factory, paid his workers the highest wages and donated most of his profits to a hospital for people who could not get good medical care. Twenty years passed, and one sailor recognized the factory owner Valjean as an escaped convict whom the police were looking for in his hometown.

Should the sailor have reported Valjean to the police? Why?
Does a citizen have a duty or obligation to report a fugitive to the authorities? Why?
Suppose Valjean were a close friend of the sailor? Should he then report Valjean?
If Valjean was reported and brought to trial, should the judge send him back to hard labor or release him? Why?
Think about it, from a society's point of view, should people who break the law be punished? Why? How does this apply to what a judge should do?
Valjean did what his conscience told him to do when he stole the bread and medicine. Should a lawbreaker be punished if he does not act according to his conscience? Why?
(This question is optional.) Revisiting the dilemma, what would you say is the most important thing a sailor needs to do? Why?

(Questions 8-12 concern the subject's ethical belief system; they are not necessary to determine the moral stage.)

What does the word conscience mean to you? If you were Valjean, how would your conscience be involved in the decision?
Valjean must make a moral decision. Should a moral decision be based on a feeling or inference about right and wrong?
Is Valjean's problem a moral problem? Why? In general, what makes a problem moral and what does the word moral mean to you?
If Valjean is going to decide what needs to be done by thinking about what is actually just, there must be some answer, a right decision. Is there really some right solution to moral problems like Valjean's dilemma, or when people disagree, is everyone's opinion equally valid? Why?
How do you know when you have reached a good moral decision? Is there a way of thinking or a method by which a person can arrive at a good or adequate solution?
Most people believe that inference or reasoning in science can lead to the correct answer. Is this true for moral decisions or are they different?

Dilemma IX. Two young men, brothers, found themselves in a difficult situation. They secretly left the city and needed money. Carl, the eldest, broke into the store and stole a thousand dollars. Bob, the youngest, went to see an old retired man who was known to help people in the city. He told this man that he was very sick and needed a thousand dollars to pay for the operation. Bob asked the man to give him money and promised that he would give it back when he got better. In reality, Bob was not sick at all and had no intention of returning the money. Although the old man did not know Bob well, he gave him money. So Bob and Carl skipped town, each with a thousand dollars.

What's worse: stealing like Carl or cheating like Bob? Why is this worse?
What do you think is the worst thing about deceiving an old person? Why is this the worst?
In general, why should a promise be kept?
Is it important to keep a promise? given to a person someone you don't know well or will never see again? Why yes or no?
Why shouldn't you steal from a store?
What is the value or importance of property rights?
Should people do everything they can to obey the law? Why yes or no?
(The following question is intended to elicit the subject's orientation and should not be considered mandatory.) Was there old man irresponsible by lending Bob money? Why yes or no?

Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development. Interpretation of Kohlberg test results based on the stage of development of moral judgment.

Lawrence Kohlberg identifies three main levels of development of moral judgments: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional.

Pre-conventional level is characterized by egocentric moral judgments. Actions are assessed mainly on the basis of benefit and their physical consequences. What is good is what gives pleasure (for example, approval); something that causes displeasure (for example, punishment) is bad.

Conventional the level of development of moral judgments is achieved when the child accepts the assessments of his reference group: family, class, religious community... The moral norms of this group are assimilated and observed uncritically, as the ultimate truth. By acting in accordance with the rules accepted by the group, you become “good.” These rules can also be universal, such as the biblical commandments. But they are not developed by the person himself as a result of his free choice, but are accepted as external restrictions or as the norm of the community with which the person identifies himself.

Post-conventional the level of development of moral judgments is rare even in adults. As already mentioned, its achievement is possible from the moment of the appearance of hypothetico-deductive thinking (the highest stage of development of intelligence, according to J. Piaget). This is the level of development of personal moral principles, which may differ from the norms of the reference group, but at the same time have universal breadth and universality. At this stage we're talking about about the search for universal foundations of morality.

In each of these levels of development, L. Kohlberg identified several stages. Achieving each of them is possible, according to the author, only in a given sequence. But L. Kohlberg does not strictly link the stages to age.

Stages of development of moral judgments according to L. Kohlberg:

Stage	Age	Grounds for moral choice	Attitude to the idea of the intrinsic value of human existence
Pre-conventional level
0	0-2	I do what pleases me	-
1	2-3	Focus on possible punishment. I obey the rules to avoid punishment	Value human life mixed with the value of the items that person owns
2	4-7	Naive consumer hedonism. I do what I am praised for; I do good deeds according to the principle: “you - for me, I - for you”	The value of a human life is measured by the pleasure that person gives to a child
Conventional level
3	7-10	Good boy morals. I act in such a way as to avoid the disapproval and hostility of my neighbors, I strive to be (reputed) " good boy", "good girl"	The value of a human life is measured by how much that person sympathizes with the child
4	10-12	Authority-oriented. I act this way to avoid disapproval from authorities and feelings of guilt; I do my duty, I obey the rules	Life is assessed as sacred, inviolable in the categories of moral (legal) or religious norms and obligations
Post-conventional level
5	After 13	Morality based on the recognition of human rights and democratic adopted law. I act according to my own principles, respect the principles of other people, try to avoid self-condemnation	Life is valued both from the point of view of its benefit to humanity and from the point of view of the right of every person to life
6	After 18	Individual principles developed independently. I act in accordance with universal human moral principles	Life is viewed as sacred from a position of respect for the unique capabilities of each person

Mature moral reasoning occurs when children freely express their opinions on moral issues, put forward by elders, and elders, in turn, demonstrate to children a higher level of moral reasoning.

Moreover, high levels of moral reasoning are likely to motivate moral behavior. Although this point seems quite controversial. According to many of Kohlberg's critics, there is a big difference between moral judgment and moral behavior. No matter how high our moral principles are, we are not always at their height when the time comes to act in accordance with them.

And the criticism of Kohlberg does not end there. He himself was aware that the positions he put forward were not flawless, and tried to make possible adjustments to his theory.

5 Rating 5.00 (1 Vote)

I. Pre-conventional level.

At this level, the child already reacts to cultural rules and the scale of “good” and “bad”, “fair” and “unfair”; but he understands these scales in the sense of the physical or sensory consequences of actions (punishment, reward, exchange of advantages) or in the sense of the physical power of individuals who give meaning to these rules and scales (parents, teachers, etc.).

1st stage: Focus on punishment and obedience.

The physical consequences of an action determine its good and evil qualities without regard to the human meaning or value of those consequences. Avoidance of punishment and uncomplaining compliance with authority are seen as an end in itself, and not in the sense of respect for the moral order, which is supported by punishment and authority.

2nd stage: Instrumental-relativistic orientation.

Right activity consists of action that satisfies one's own needs and sometimes the needs of others as a means (instrumentally). Human relations understood in the sense of market exchange relations. The elements of fairness, reciprocity and equality of exchange are present here, but they are understood in a physical-pragmatic way. Reciprocity is an analogy to the case of “scratch my back, then I'll scratch yours,” but not in the sense of loyalty, gratitude and fairness.

II. Conventional level.

At this level, the goal in itself is to fulfill the expectations of one's own family, group or nation, without regard to immediate or obvious consequences. This attitude is determined not only by conformism, adaptation to personal expectations and public order, but also through loyalty, active maintenance and justification of order and identification with individuals or groups who act as bearers of order.

3rd stage: interpersonal adjustment or “good boy – nice girl” orientation.

Good behavior is that which pleases, helps, and is approved by others. There is complete conformity with stereotypical ideas about “natural” behavior or the behavior of the majority. In addition, judgment is often made on the basis of discovered intention - the formula “he meant well” for the first time acquires important. The favor of others is won by being nice.

4th stage: Orientation towards "law and order".

At this stage, an orientation towards authority, fixed rules and the maintenance of social order dominates. Correct behavior is to do duty, show respect to authority and maintain existing social order for his own sake .

III. Post-conventional level.

At this level, there is an apparent effort to define moral values and principles that have meaning and apply independently of the authority of the groups and individuals who represent those principles and regardless of the individual's identification with those groups.

5th stage: Legalistic orientation towards the social contract.

Right behavior is defined in terms of universal individual rights and in terms of dimensions that are critically tested and accepted by the entire society. There is a clear awareness of the relativity of personal assessments and opinions, and accordingly, the need for rules for procedures for achieving consensus. To the extent that what is right does not rest on constitutional and democratic consensus, it is a matter of personal “values” and “views.” From this follows the emphasis on the “legal point of view”, which takes into account the possibility of changing the law in the sense of a reasonable weighing of public benefit (in any case, to a greater extent than freezing in the sense of the “law and order” formula). steps). Regardless of the legal field, free agreement and contract are a binding element of consciousness. This is the “official” morality of the American government and the US Constitution.

6th stage: Focus on a universal ethical principle.

What is right is determined on the basis of a decision of conscience in consonance with independently chosen ethical principles, which must be logically interconnected, universal and logically consistent. These principles are abstract (such as Kant's categorical imperative); We are not talking about specific moral standards, such as the Ten Commandments. At its core, we are talking about the universal principles of justice, reciprocity and equality of human rights, the principles of respect for the dignity of people as individuals.”

All others psychological states turn into steps of assertoric approach to this ideal of “pure” morality, so that Kohlberg’s theory becomes a practical application to Apel’s philosophical calculations. Kohlberg's concept has proven to be a convenient tool for sociologists to transfer its results to the social and sociocultural dimension. The same desire underlies the attempts of Apel and Habermas to “complete” Kohlberg’s concept, which was expressed in the debate about the seventh stage.

At the sixth stage we are talking about Kant’s categorical imperative, about a decision “according to conscience.” At the same time, each individual has to independently (monologically) recheck the norms for their universal significance. Accordingly, it is logical to assume the existence of a higher (7th) stage, at which the task of interpreting norms becomes the subject of joint practical discourse. The interpretation of norms in a situation of possible normative conflict at this stage no longer occurs according to the scale adopted from culture, but for the first time takes place directly in society in the discourse of all its participants according to the procedures for resolving individual claims. The condition for an individual's moral decision becomes the participation of the whole society, and the condition for the ethical discourse of the whole society becomes the moral competence of each individual. Thus, the post-conventional level expands to the level of universal communicative ethics, which reflects not so much the level of the individual as the ethical state of the entire society. Of course, these constructions already went beyond the scope of psychology and individual moral development, and therefore did not meet with the sympathy of Kohlberg himself.

Of particular importance for sociological extrapolation was the stage 4 ½ identified by Kohlberg - the “adolescent crisis” during the transition from the conventional to the post-conventional level. Here's how Kohlberg characterizes it:

“This level is post-conventional, but it is not yet equipped with principles. The decision here is personal and subjective. It is based on feelings. Conscience is seen as arbitrary and relative, just like ideas of “duty” or “morally right.” The point of view that an individual accepts at this level is the point of view of an observer external to society who accepts customized solutions without obligations or contract with the company. Obligations can be extracted or chosen, but there are no principles for such selection. (Sartre’s existentialism might be a good illustration of this crisis level).”

4 ½ stage is highest stage conventional morality, at the same time it carries its own specific dangers, fraught with a descent into immorality. This period is characterized by criticism and overthrow of authorities, traditions and values. Instead of stabilizing conventional norms, purely subjective, revolutionizing abstract pseudo-norms can act as a guide to action. Overcoming negative consequences the state of the teenage crisis requires ongoing active socialization and integration of the individual into social life. This presupposes that social consciousness must already contain universal norms of the post-conventional stage. Thus, the theory of the logic of the stages of individual moral development, according to Apel, fully admits and even presupposes a corresponding social theory that could complement it.

In accordance with the ideas of universal pragmatics of J. Habermas and transcendental pragmatics of K.-O. Apel, personality development occurs in the interconnection of language, thinking and interaction, in their cognitive unity and interactive development. Accordingly, the development of an individual can be represented as the development of linguistic, interactive and manipulative competencies in the form of universal, formally reconstructed and rule-subject patterns of behavior. The formation of personality, the identity of the human Self is the construction of a system of restrictions in relation to the objectivity of nature, the normativity of society, the intersubjectivity of language and one’s own subjectivity. Moreover, language is a medium that establishes an individual’s relationship to various regions of reality. Thus, the self-awareness of an individual in Apel’s philosophy is not something initially given, but a communicatively produced phenomenon.

Already Kohlberg's theory itself was reproached for its “strong” statements and was seriously criticized from different sides. He himself noted that, according to his observations, no more than 5% of American adults meet the requirements of the 6th stage, while no one adheres to them consistently. The scientific community has agreed that this is a reconstruction of the age-related formation of ideas about justice, which can serve for everyday orientation, but without the necessary consequences for individual behavior. Obviously, extrapolation of the theory into the dimension of society further strengthens the theses of the theory. After all, the development of a child is caused by the processes of his physical maturation, the maturation of the psycho-somatic functions of his body, the formation of abilities for full-fledged activity, and only secondarily the increase in experience of interaction with the environment. It is impossible to find analogues to these processes in culture. Cultures do not “grow up” in this sense, and their sources of experience are different. As a result of this extrapolation, an idea suddenly arises of the historical logic of development, which is inherent in some eschatalogical and teleological aspiration. In the form of the seventh stage, the social ideal of the “highest moral state of society” is constructed, which cannot be free from reproaches of utopianism. Whereas in Kohlberg's concept the natural end of development is the ability to act according to principles, but no judgment is made that all or most are capable of this, then in the Apel/Habermas picture it is assumed that a certain critical mass of the population reaches this stage. Finally, an evaluative hierarchy of states is constructed, from the position of which it is possible to divide societies into morally developed and undeveloped, and the perspective of which clearly coincides with the Eurocentric assessment, even if it has claims to universality. Thus, among the morally backward are all cultures with the dominance of traditional morality, regardless of what degree of internal “moral world” is inherent in them. On the contrary, European-American culture, characterized by a high internal crisis level and tension, appears to be a higher example of cultural development. At the same time, the situation of a global crisis of humanity, in which macroethics has become in demand, is directly caused by the development of European-American, and not at all traditional, cultures.

L. Kohlberg criticized Zhe. Piaget for exaggerated attention to the intellect, as a result of which all other aspects of development (emotional-volitional sphere, personality) remain unattended. L. Kohlberg discovered a number of interesting facts in child development, which allowed him to build a theory of the moral development of the child.

As criteria for dividing development into stages, L. Kohlberg took 3 types of orientation, forming a hierarchy:

2) orientation to customs,

3) orientation to principles.

Developing the idea of Zhe. Piaget and L. S. Vygotsky that the development of moral consciousness baby is coming In parallel with his mental development, L. Kohlberg identifies several phases in him, each of which corresponds to a certain level of moral consciousness.

The “pre-moral (pre-conventional) level” corresponds to stage 1 - the child obeys in order to avoid punishment, and stage 2 - the child is guided by selfish considerations of mutual benefit - obedience in exchange for some specific benefits and rewards.

"Conventional morality" corresponds to stage 3 - model " good child", which is guided by the desire for approval from others and shame before their condemnation, and 4 - an attitude towards maintaining the established order of social justice and fixed rules.

“Autonomous morality” brings the moral decision within the individual. It opens with stage 5A - a person realizes the relativity and conditionality of moral rules and demands their logical justification, seeing in them ideas of usefulness. Then comes stage 5B - relativism is replaced by recognition of the existence of some higher law that corresponds to the interests of the majority.

Only after this - stage 6 - are stable moral principles formed, the observance of which is ensured by one’s own conscience, regardless of external circumstances and considerations.

In recent works, L. Kohlberg raises the question of the existence of another 7th, highest stage, when moral values are a consequence of more general philosophical postulates; however, only a few people reach this stage.

L. Kohlberg does not distinguish the levels of development of adults. He believes that the development of morality in both children and adults is spontaneous, and therefore no measurements are possible here.

Cultural-historical concept of L.S. Vygotsky

In developmental psychology, the direction of socialization arose as an attempt to define relationships in the subject-environment system through the category of the social context in which the child develops.

L.S. Vygotsky believed that a person’s mental development should be considered in the cultural and historical context of his life. The word “historical” carried the idea of introducing the principle of development into psychology, and the word “cultural” implied the child’s involvement in social environment, which is the bearer of culture as the experience accumulated by humanity.

One of the fundamental ideas of L.S. Vygotsky, according to which two intertwined lines should be distinguished in the development of a child’s behavior. One is natural "maturation". The other is cultural improvement, mastery of cultural ways of behavior and thinking.

Cultural development consists in mastering such aids behaviors that humanity has created in the process of its historical development and what are language, writing, counting systems, etc.; cultural development is associated with the assimilation of behavioral techniques that are based on the use of signs as a means for carrying out one or another psychological operation. Culture modifies nature according to human goals: the method of action, the structure of the technique, the entire structure of psychological operations changes, just as the inclusion of a tool rearranges the entire structure of the labor operation. The child’s external activities can turn into internal activities, the external reception supposedly grows and becomes internal (interiorized).

L.S. Vygotsky owns two important concepts, defining each stage age development- the concept of the social situation of development and the concept of neoplasm.

Under the social situation of development of L.S. Vygotsky understood the unique, age-specific, exclusive, unique and unrepeatable relationship between a person and the surrounding reality, primarily social, which lies at the beginning of each new stage. The social situation of development is the starting point for all changes possible in a given period, and determines the path by which a person acquires high-quality developmental education.

Neoplasms L.S. Vygotsky defined it as qualitative new type personality and human interaction with reality, absent as a whole at the previous stages of its development.

A leap in development (a change in the social situation of development) and the emergence of new formations are caused by fundamental developmental contradictions that develop towards the end of each segment of life and “push” development forward (between maximum openness to communication and the absence of a means of communication - speech in an infant; between the growth of subject skills and the inability to implement them in “adult” activities in preschool age, etc.).

According to L.S. Vygotsky, age denotes an objective category to designate three points:

1) the chronological framework of a particular stage of development,

2) a specific social development situation emerging at a specific stage of development,

3) qualitative new formations arising under its influence. In his periodization of development, he suggests alternating stable and critical age periods. In stable periods (infant period, early childhood, up to school age, primary school age, adolescence, etc.) there is a slow and steady accumulation of the smallest quantitative changes in development, and in critical periods (newborn crisis, crisis of the first year of life, crisis of three years, crisis of seven years, pubertal crisis, crisis of 17- age), these changes are detected in the form of abruptly occurring irreversible neoplasms.

At each stage of development there is always a central new formation that leads the entire development process and characterizes the restructuring of the child’s entire personality as a whole on a new basis. Around the main (central) neoplasm of a given age, all other partial neoplasms related to individual aspects of the child’s personality and developmental processes associated with neoplasms of previous periods are located and grouped.

Those developmental processes that are more or less directly related to the main neoplasm, L.S. Vygotsky calls the central lines of development at a given age; he calls all other partial processes, changes that take place at a given age, side lines of development. Processes that are the central lines of development at a given age become side lines in the next, and vice versa - the side lines of the previous age come to the fore and become central lines in the new one, as their meaning and specific weight in the new age change. general structure development, their relationship relative to the central neoplasm changes. Therefore, when moving from one stage to another, the entire age structure is rebuilt. Each age has a specific, unique and unrepeatable structure.

Understanding development as a continuous process of self-movement, continuous emergence and formation of something new, he believed that new formations of “critical” periods are not subsequently preserved in the form in which they arise during the critical period, and are not included as a necessary component in the integral structure of the future personality. They die off, are absorbed by new growths of the next (stable) age, are included in their composition, dissolve and transform into them.

L.S. Vygotsky constructed the concept of the connection between learning and development, one of the fundamental concepts of which is the zone of proximal development.

We determine by tests or other means the level of mental development of the child. But at the same time, it is completely insufficient to take into account only what the child can and does today and now; it is important what he can and will be able to do tomorrow, what processes, even if not completed today, are already “ripening.” Sometimes a child needs a guiding question to solve a problem, help in choosing a solution, and the like. Then imitation arises, as everything that the child cannot do on his own, but which he can learn or which he can perform under the guidance or in collaboration with another, more adult or more knowledgeable person. But what a child can do today in cooperation and under guidance, tomorrow he becomes able to do independently. By exploring what a child is able to accomplish in cooperation, we determine the development of tomorrow - the zone of proximal development.

L.S. Vygotsky criticizes the position of researchers who believed that a child must reach a certain level of development, his functions must mature, before learning can begin. It turns out that learning “lags behind” development, and development always goes ahead of learning, learning is simply built on top of development, without changing anything essentially.

L.S. Vygotsky proposed a completely opposite position: only that learning is good which is ahead of development, creating a zone of proximal development. Education is not development, but an internally necessary and universal moment in the process of development in a child of unnatural, but culturally-historical characteristics of a person. In training, the prerequisites for future new formations are created, and in order to create a zone of proximal development, i.e., give rise to a number of processes internal development, we need properly constructed learning processes.

Humanistic psychology emerged in the mid-20th century. as a more optimistic third force in personality research (Maslow, 1968 p.). It turned out to be a reaction against the external determinism, which was defended by the theory of learning, and the internal determinism of sexual and aggressive instinctual drives, proposed by Freud's theory. Humanistic psychology offers a holistic theory of personality and is closely related to the philosophy of existentialism. Existentialism is a direction modern philosophy, which focuses on man's desire to find the meaning of his own existence and live freely and responsibly, according to ethical principles. Therefore, humanistic psychologists deny the determinism of drives, instincts or core programming. They believe that people themselves choose how they want to live, and they place human potential above all else.

As a species, humans differ from other animals in their more developed ability to use symbols and think abstractly. For this reason, humanistic psychologists believe that numerous animal experiments provide little information about humans.

Representatives of the humanistic movement attach equal importance to the conscious and unconscious, considering them to be the main processes of a person’s mental life. People view themselves and others as beings who act according to their own vision and strive to creatively achieve their goals (May, 1986 p.). The optimism of humanistic psychologists markedly distinguishes it from most other theoretical approaches.

An influential psychologist of the humanistic school is Abraham Maslow(1908-1970 pp.). His theory of the self, proposed in 1954, emphasizes every person's innate need for self-actualization—the development of one's full potential. According to Maslow's theories, self-actualization needs can only be expressed or satisfied after “lower” needs such as the needs for safety, love, food and shelter have been satisfied. For example, a hungry child will not be able to concentrate on reading or drawing at school until she is fed.

A. Maslow presented human needs in the form of a pyramid.

At the base of the pyramid are the main physiological needs survival; people need food, warmth and rest to survive. At a higher level is the need for security; people need to avoid danger and feel protected in everyday life. They can't reach high levels, if they live in constant fear and anxiety. Once the rational needs for safety and survival are satisfied, the next need becomes the need to belong. People need to love and feel loved, to be in physical contact with each other, to communicate with other people, to be part of groups or organizations. After the needs of this level are satisfied, the need for self-respect is updated; people need positive reactions from others, ranging from simple confirmation of their basic abilities to applause and fame. All this gives a person a feeling of well-being and self-satisfaction.

When people are fed, clothed, housed, belong to any group, and are reasonably confident in their abilities, they are ready to try to develop their full potential, that is, they are ready for self-actualization. A. Maslow believed that the need for self-actualization for a person plays no less important role than the listed basic needs. In a certain sense, the need for self-actualization can never be fully satisfied.

Another humanistic psychologist, Carl Rogers (1902-1987), had a significant influence on pedagogy in psychotherapy. K. Rogers believed that the core of a person’s character is made up of positive, healthy, constructive impulses that begin to operate from birth. Like A. Maslow, K. Rogers was primarily interested in how to help people realize their inner potential. Unlike A. Maslow, K. Rogers did not first develop a theory of staged personality development in order to then apply it in practice. He was more interested in the ideas that arose during his clinical practice. He observed that the greatest personal growth in his patients occurred when he truly and completely empathized with them and when they knew that he accepted them as they were. He called this attitude positive. K. Rogers believed that a positive attitude of a psychotherapist contributes to greater self-acceptance of the client and his greater tolerance towards other people.

Humanistic psychology has been effective in several ways. Emphasis on taking into account the wealth of opportunities real life acts as a stimulus for other developmental psychology approaches. In addition, it had a significant influence on adult counseling and the emergence of self-help programs, and also contributed to the spread of child-rearing methods based on respect for the uniqueness of each child and pedagogical methods aimed at humanizing intra-school interpersonal relationships.

LITERATURE

1. Abramova G. S. Developmental psychology/ Ch. S. Abramova. - M.: Academ, project, 2001. - 704 p.

2. Bauer T. Mental development of the baby: trans. from English / T. Bauer. - 2nd ed. - M.: Progress, 1985. - 320 p.

3. Vallon A. Mental development of the child / A. Vallon. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001.-208 p.

4. Age and educational psychology / O. V. Skripchenko, L. V. K-linska, 3. V. Ogorodniychuk and others. 2nd ed., additional. - K.: Karavella, 2009. - 400 p.

5. Developmental psychology / ed. G. S. Kostyuk. - K.: Radyanskaya school, 1976.-269 p.

6. Developmental and educational psychology / ed. M.V. Ga-meso. - M.; Education, 2004. - 256 p.

7. Davydov V.V. Problems of developmental training: Experience of theoretical and experimental psychological research/ V.V. Davydov - M.: Pedagogy, 1986. - 240 p.

8. Zabrotsky MM. Developmental psychology / N. M. Zabrotsky. - K.: MAUP, 1998.-89 p.

9. Leontiev A. N. Selected psychological works: In 2 volumes - T. 1 / A. N. Leontiev. - M.: Pedagogy, 1983. - 392 p.

10. Kulagina I.Yu. Developmental psychology / Y. Yu. Kulagina. -M.:URAO, 1999.-1 million 76 sec.

11. Mukhina V. S. Developmental psychology. Phenomenology of development / V. S. Mukhina. - M., 2007. - 640 p.

12. Obukhova L. F. Age psychology / L. F. Obukhova. - M., 2001.-442 p.

13. Piaget J. Speech and thinking of a child: trans. from French and English / J. Piaget. - M.: Pedagogy-Press, 1994. - 528 p.

14. Polishchuk V. M. Age and educational psychology / V. M. Polishchuk. - Sumy, 2007. - 330 p.

15. Savchin M.V. Age psychology / N.V. Savchin, L.P. Vasilenko. - K.: Academvidav, 2006. - 360 p.

16. Shapovalenko Y. V. Developmental psychology (Developmental psychology and developmental psychology) / Y. V. Shapovalenko. - M.: Gardariki, 2005. - 349 p.

17. Shvalb Yu. M. Developmental psychology: textbook. aid for students universities / Yu. M. Shvalb, Y. F. Mukhanova; Kyiv. national University named after T. G. Shevchenko; Makeev, economics-humanitarian, int. -Donetsk: Nord-press, 2005. - 304 p.

Kohlberg was a student of Piaget. He studied moral development using Piaget's theory. Kohlberg believed that morality depends on intelligence. He created his own periodization of morality and morality, which is based on an orientation towards authorities, then towards customs and principles.

I. Pre-conventional stage– children obey external rules or pressure.

Stage 0 (0 – 2)– the basis of moral choice - what I do is good. I do what pleases me. There are no values at this stage.

Stage 1 (2-3)- the basis of moral choice - I obey the rules in order to avoid punishment or receive a reward. The value of a person's life is confused with the value of the objects he owns.

Stage 2(4-7) – naive instrumental relativism. The child is guided by selfish considerations of mutual benefit, “you give me - I give you.” Value is the pleasure of the child that this person gives.

II. Conventional stage– moral judgment is based on generally accepted principles. The child not only learns moral standards, but is also consciously guided by them.

Stage 3 (7-10)– interpersonal perspective. The child acts in order to earn approval from people significant to him, to be good child, avoid shame. Value is measured by how much this person sympathizes with the child.

Stage 4 (10-12) – public perspective. The child acts in this way to avoid the disapproval of authority. Life is assessed as sacred, inviolable in religious or legal categories.

III. Post-conventional stage– a person acts in one way or another out of feelings of responsibility or guilt. The child strives to gain the approval of the whole society.

5A (after 13)– social contract. There is an awareness of relativity or convention, and one’s own principles and rules appear. There is respect for the rules of others.

5B (after 15)– a person understands that there is a certain higher law that corresponds to the interests of the majority. Focus on your own conscience.

Life is valued from the point of view. its benefits for humanity and with t.z. every person for life.

Stage 6 (after 18)- a universal ethical principle. Stable moral principles are formed that control the conscience. Life is viewed as sacred, with respect for the unique abilities of each person.

Cultural-historical theory

The book “The History of the Development of Higher Mental Functions” (1931, published 1960) provides a detailed presentation of the cultural-historical theory of mental development: according to Vygotsky, it is necessary to distinguish between lower and higher mental functions, and, accordingly, two plans of behavior - natural, natural (the result of biological evolution animal world) and cultural, socio-historical (the result of the historical development of society), merged in the development of the psyche.

The hypothesis put forward by Vygotsky offered a new solution to the problem of the relationship between lower (elementary) and higher mental functions. The main difference between them is the level of arbitrariness, that is, natural mental processes cannot be regulated by humans, but people can consciously control higher mental functions. Vygotsky came to the conclusion that conscious regulation is associated with the indirect nature of higher mental functions. An additional connection arises between the influencing stimulus and the human reaction (both behavioral and mental) through a mediating link - a stimulus-means, or sign.

The difference between signs and guns, which also mediate higher mental functions, cultural behavior, is that tools are directed “outward”, to transform reality, and signs are “inward”, first to transform other people, then to control one’s own behavior. The word is a means of voluntary direction of attention, abstraction of properties and their synthesis into meaning (formation of concepts), voluntary control of one’s own mental operations.

The most convincing model of indirect activity, characterizing the manifestation and implementation of higher mental functions, is the “situation of Buridan’s donkey.” This classic situation of uncertainty, or problematic situation (a choice between two equal opportunities), interests Vygotsky primarily from the point of view of the means that make it possible to transform (solve) the situation that has arisen. By casting lots, a person “artificially introduces into the situation, changing it, new auxiliary stimuli that are not connected with it in any way.” Thus, the cast of lots becomes, according to Vygotsky, a means of transforming and resolving the situation.

21 Higher mental functions (HMF)- specifically human mental processes. They arise on the basis of natural mental functions, due to their mediation by psychological tools. A sign acts as a psychological tool. HMF include: perception, memory, thinking, speech. They are social in origin, mediated in structure and arbitrary in the nature of regulation. The concept of higher mental functions was introduced by L. S. Vygotsky and subsequently developed by A. R. Luria, A. N. Leontyev, A. V. Zaporozhets, D. B. Elkonin and P. Ya. Galperin. Four main features of HMF were identified: sociality (interiorization), mediocrity, arbitrariness in the method of self-regulation and systematicity.

Such a definition does not apply to either idealistic or “positive” biological theories and allows us to better understand how memory, thinking, speech and perception are located in human brain. It also made it possible to determine the location of local lesions with high accuracy nerve tissue and even recreate them in some way. [ clarify ][ style! ]

As mentioned above, the formation of higher mental functions is a fundamentally different process than natural, organic development. The main difference is that raising the psyche to a higher level lies precisely in its functional development, (that is, the development of the technique itself), and not in organic development.

Development is influenced by 2 factors:

Biological. For the development of the human psyche, a human brain with the greatest plasticity is necessary. Biological development is only a condition for cultural development, because the structure of this process is given from the outside.

Social. The development of the human psyche is impossible without the presence of a cultural environment in which the child learns specific mental techniques.

Higher mental functions are a theoretical concept introduced by L.S. Vygotsky, denoting complex mental processes, social in their formation, which are mediated and therefore arbitrary. According to his ideas, mental phenomena can be “natural,” determined primarily by a genetic factor, and “cultural,” built on top of the first, actually higher mental functions, which are entirely formed under the influence of social influences. The main feature of higher mental functions is their mediation by certain “psychological tools,” signs that arose as a result of the long socio-historical development of mankind, which primarily includes speech. Initially highest mental function is realized as a form of interaction between people, between an adult and a child, as an interpsychological process, and only then - as an internal, intrapsychological one. At the same time, external means mediating this interaction turn into internal ones, i.e. their internalization occurs. If at the first stages of the formation of a higher mental function it represents a detailed form of objective activity, based on relatively simple sensory and motor processes, then in further action collapse, becoming automated mental actions. The psychophysiological correlate of the formation of higher mental functions is complex functional systems, having a vertical (cortical-subcortical) and horizontal (cortical-cortical) organization. But each higher mental function is not strictly tied to any one brain center, but is the result of systemic activity of the brain, in which various brain structures make a more or less specific contribution to the construction of a given function.

23. Periodization according to Vygotsky. L.S. Vygotsky considered mental neoplasms characteristic of each stage of development as a criterion for age periodization. He identified “stable” and “unstable” (critical) periods of development. He attached decisive importance to the period of crisis - the time when a qualitative restructuring of the functions and relationships of the child occurs. During these periods, significant changes are observed in the development of the child’s personality. According to L.S. Vygotsky, the transition from one age to another occurs in a revolutionary way.

Periodization of the psyche (L.S. Vygotsky): 1) neonatal crisis; 2) infancy(2 months – 1 year); 3) crisis of one year; 4) early childhood (1 – 3 years); 5) crisis of three years; 6) preschool age (3 – 7 years); 7) crisis of seven years; 8) school age (8 – 12 years); 9) crisis of thirteen years; 10) pubertal age (14 – 17 years); 11) crisis of seventeen years.

Topic 7: Cognitive direction in developmental psychology

1. Prerequisites for the development of cognitive direction.

2. L. Kohlberg's theory of moral development.

3. K. Fischer’s theory of skill development.

4. Development as problem solving (R. Keyes).

5. The theory of systematic and step-by-step formation of mental actions P.Ya. Galperin.

6. Theory educational activities D.B. Elkonina, V.V. Davydova

Prerequisites for the development of cognitive direction

Cognitive theories of development originate from the philosophical theory of knowledge. Intersecting with biology, the theory of knowledge is associated with solving the problem of adapting an individual to the surrounding social and subject environment. The main goal of this direction is to find out in what sequence the cognitive structures that ensure adaptation are deployed.

German scientist E. Meiman proposed a periodization of mental development, the criterion of which is the stages of intellectual development:

1. Stage of fantastic synthesis (from birth to 7 years). Children generalize individual sensations without system and logic, so the concepts they receive are far from reality.

2. Analysis stage (7 – 12 years). It is not integration that is leading, but differentiation, i.e. decomposition general concepts, knowledge that the child tries to comprehend by dividing the concept into parts and forming an adequate idea of these parts. At this stage, it is possible to begin systematic education of children.

3. Stage of rational synthesis (12 – 16 years). Operational thinking is formed, it becomes possible to integrate individual concepts that were learned at the previous stage and obtain scientific ideas about these parts.

E. Claparède identified the following stages in mental development:

1. From birth to 2 years – children’s interest in the external side of things predominates, and therefore intellectual development is associated mainly with the development of perception.

2. From 2 to 3 years - children develop speech, so their cognitive interests are concentrated on words and their meanings.

3. From 3 to 7 years – intellectual development itself begins, i.e. development of thinking, with children having common mental interests predominating.

4. From 7 to 12 years - they begin to appear individual characteristics and the inclinations of children, because their intellectual development is associated with the formation of special interests.

L. Kohlberg's theory of moral development

L. Kohlberg criticized J. Piaget for exaggerated attention to intelligence, as a result of which all other aspects of development (emotional-volitional sphere, personality) remain, as it were, on the sidelines. He posed the question - what cognitive schemes, structures, rules describe such phenomena as lying (which appears in children at a certain age and has its own stages of development), fear (also an age-related phenomenon), theft (inherent in everyone in childhood). Trying to answer these questions, L. Kohlberg discovered a number of interesting facts in child development, which allowed him to build a theory of the child’s moral development.

As criteria for dividing development into stages, L. Kohlberg takes 3 types of orientation, forming a hierarchy: 1) orientation towards authorities 2) orientation towards customs, and 3) principle-oriented.

Developing the idea put forward by J. Piaget and supported by L. S. Vygotsky that the development of a child’s moral consciousness goes parallel to his mental development, L. Kohlberg identifies several phases in it, each of which corresponds to a certain level of moral consciousness (Table 7-2).

1. Pre-moral(pre-conventional) level correspond to: stage 1- the child obeys to avoid punishment, and stage 2- the child is guided by selfish considerations of mutual benefit - obedience in exchange for some specific benefits and rewards.

2. Conventional morality corresponds to: stage 3- the model of the “good child”, driven by a desire for approval from significant others and shame at their condemnation, and stage 4- an attitude towards maintaining the established order of social justice and fixed rules (what is good is what corresponds to the rules).

3. Autonomous morality transfers the moral decision inside the individual. It opens stage 5A- a person realizes the relativity and conditionality of moral rules and demands their logical justification, seeing it in the idea of utility. Then comes stage 5B- relativism is replaced by recognition of the existence of some higher law corresponding to the interests of the majority. Only after this - stage 6- stable moral principles are formed, the observance of which is ensured by one’s own conscience, regardless of external circumstances and rational considerations.

In recent works, L. Kohlberg raises the question of the existence of 7th, highest stage when moral values are derived from more general philosophical postulates; however, according to him, only a few reach this stage.

Table 7-3. Stages of moral development according to L. Kohlberg