Moral Development and World HistoryAn application of Kohlberg's theories to God's dealings with planet EarthThis is a thinking paper -- it is an attempt to clarify some of my thoughts by putting them down on "paper" (actually, by writing them on a computer in preparation for publishing them on the internet). First of all I present a very brief, incomplete, and likely misleading summary of the moral development theory of Lawrence Kohlberg. He decided that the means humans used to reach ethical decisions developed in much the same way as cognitive theorists had suggested the human brain developed. He eventually proposed a scale of six levels of moral development which he then put in three broader categories. The first two he labeled "Pre-Conventional." He saw these as juvenile stages that most humans grew past as they entered adulthood and became members of the society and culture around them. Then there were two "Conventional" stages so named because they characterized the bulk of society. The last two he considered "Post-Conventional" because few actually reached these stages. It is important to note that Kohlberg did not pay much attention to the choices that were made, focusing instead on the process an individual went through to reach that choice. So an individual might choose to do something generally considered "immoral" on the basis of higher moral development than someone else whose choice led to generally accepted "moral" behavior. Religionists whose focus is on human behavior would immediately condemn this approach. The higher morality, they would claim, is the one that leads to the "right" choices. Let's look briefly at Kohlberg's stages and look at some of the ways this conflict might arise. The first stage is characterized as "Obedience and Punishment." In this stage individuals are focused on obedience to authority and avoidance of punishment. Encouraging these individuals to make the "right" choices requires simply arranging rewards and punishments so that the individual benefits from doing "right" and suffers from doing "wrong." You'll probably recognize that most child-rearing strategies and even most school "discipline" procedures operate at this level. The next level is titled "Individualism, Instrumentalism, and Exchange." Examining each of these terms can help us understand this stage. The individual becomes more self-aware and begins to assert his or her own rights, individualism and choices. It should not suprise any educator that many individuals begin operating at this stage during the "middle school" years. Instrumentalism means that these individuals begin to see other people as "instruments" for accomplishing their personal goals. Teens will often "manipulate" unwary parents to get what they want. Exchange encompases the idea "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." These individuals will often ask, even if not out loud, "What's in it for me?" For this person, attaining a reward is more important than avoiding punishment. Again, schools often use the reward approach to encourage "appropriate" behavior from students. Now we reach the first "Conventional" stage, "Good Boy, Good Girl." While the first stage focused on an authority figure (usually a parent), there was a great deal of attention to avoiding punishment. Here, the authority figure becomes the primary determinant of morality. Since this is the first conventional stage and many adults are operating at it, it becomes important for society to maintain the legitimacy of authority figures. This is, no doubt, one of the reasons conservatives felt it so important to destroy the authority of W. J. Clinton. This man held the highest authority position in the United States, but his behavior crossed into socially unacceptable territory, threatening the legitimacy of all authority, including their own! Duty is an important determinant of appropriate behavior for these people. Military societies like our own depend on this sense of duty to get people to sacrifice life, limb, and sanity in physical battle. Listen to the outrage of someone who suffered pain and indignity in Vietnam when confronting a peace activist or a conscientious objector who avoided military service. We even attach the label "coward" to those who avoided the draft to encourage people to make what would otherwise be an insane choice. The second "Conventional" stage is one Kohlberg theorized very few adults ever surpassed. He called it "Law and Order." These individuals recognize that authority figures are human and tend to err. For them established law becomes the primary determinant of right and wrong. If these people sense that an action is inherently wrong their reaction is to demand that a sanction against it be codified. "There ought'a be a law!" For these people it is imperative that lawbreakers be punished. What a terrible society it would become if people were allowed to break the law without sanction! Peace and harmony depend on the strict enforcement of the laws. Religion becomes, for these people, a tool for social control. Ever hear someone suggest that the Ten Commandments be posted on courthouse walls? They are the ultimate Law; enforced by a God who has the power to condemn you to eternal and unimaginable torment if you break even one. So, if most people's morality never gets beyond this stage, how did Kohlberg arrive at two more levels? Actually, his sixth stage was one he was never able to clearly demonstrate clinically. He did name a few potential candidates, but with so few people ever reaching stage six, how could you measure the transition from five to six? The first post-conventional stage he called "Social Contract." This approach might best be described in the thinking of Thomas Paine, a British philosopher whose writings inspired many American revolutionaries. He suggested that government should only take over those rights that the governed willingly gave up in order to protect themselves from the threats of certain behaviors: murder, theft, rape, and so on. Read the first sentences of the preamble to the United States Constitution. The person at the "Social Contract" stage of moral development sees morality as an agreement between the individuals of a society reached to achieve mutual safety and happiness. This is clearly less selfish than the other stages, but it probably won't be viewed as positive by those operating at the conventional stages. These people are likely to criticize and possibly even scoff at laws they percieve as detrimental to the ultimate good of society. Clearly threatening to a "law and order" person! Which brings us to Kohlberg's final stage: "Universal Principle." These people, rare as they are, eschew even social conventions as the determinants of right and wrong. Instead, they answer to some universal principle of right and wrong that transcends laws (including the Ten Commandments) and social agreements. Since Kohlberg theorized that only a handful of humans ever reach this stage, it's hard to describe it further. Kohlberg theorized that people passed through these stages progressively -- that there was no "skipping steps." I don't know if he suggested that there were no occasional relapses, but I'm convinced there are. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., one of those Kohlberg suggested represented the final stage of moral development, did have a problem keeping his pants zipped. It is true that Kohlberg's theory considered the reasons for the choices made, not the actual choices. But I, limited as I probably am to conventional morality, have difficulty imagining a "universal principle" of right and wrong which could justify taking advantage of young women through one's personal prestige. Could it be that not all of Dr. King's choices were made at stage six? There are interesting spiritual implications for this on an individual basis. Suppose God is not looking for adherence to a particular behavioral code, but wants humans to progress to this last, rarest stage of moral development? Motivation becomes more important than behavior, an idea that seems to be supported in the New Testament. But in this paper I'd like to explore the idea that God's dealings with humanity have progressed through at least some of these stages. Where we are in history would then depend on where, on this chain of moral development, you decided humanity, as a whole, stood. I'd like to suggest that human history depicted in the Old Testament is primarily pre-conventional. The worshipers of the Creator God seemed stuck at the first stage of obedience and punishment. Other religions of the time, with their focus on appeasing gods in order to prevent disaster and to obtain desired blessings, could easily be seen at the second, instrumental stage. God dealt with his people on this basis, promising rewards if they obeyed his laws, and threatening dire punishment when they went astray. God presented himself to his chosen people in this time as the ultimate source of revenge, the only form of "justice" they could understand. "Vengeance is mine, I will repay." This was solace to the oppressed, and a warning to the oppressor. Hence God's wrath is frequently pointed out, and his followers are called on to "fear" him; much as a child fears the punishments its parents have promised for misbehavior. Also in accordance with this, God called his people forward to the next stages of moral development. There was a constant call to obey his commands, decrees, and judgements. When Jesus came to earth he called on his followers to "be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect." Jesus' appearance on earth seems to mark the transition from pre-conventional stages to conventional stages. Thus the New Testament seems to be filled with encouragements to move to the post-conventional stages. "Bear ye one another's burdens." "Seek ye first the kingdom of God." As you might imagine, the "Christian" era has been largely characterized by "conventional" morality, with the possibility of a relapse into "pre-conventional" morality during the dark ages. The focus on duty, and on law and order finds fulfillment in Methodism, but the followers of Mohammed are likely even more attuned to behavioral measures of morality than any Christian. And the collusion between evangelical Christianity today and the "law and order" forces of politics seems to confirm that God's people are firmly lodged in Kohlberg's "conventional" stages. (Didn't he call them conventional because that's what one mostly finds in today's world?) Many prophetical interpreters have found ways to suggest that we have passed through all the stages prophecied for humanity and that the final confrontation between good and evil is the next major event which must certainly happen soon. This type of thinking has, however, been the norm since before the coming of the Messiah. The moral development theory is different, for it suggests that God still has the post-conventional stages to lead his people through before he is ready for that final confrontation. The question arises then, what event might God bring to this earth to push us from conventionality into post-conventionality? And just where will God's people work out these final two stages? How long will it take? These questions, of course, lead to speculation about the future, and very few people have ever ventured far into such prognostication without eventually looking like an absolute fool! So, if you don't mind, I'll stop while I'm ahead. Papers index Back home |