theprof00 said:
Explain, because all the counter arguments have been your own interpretations of what I've been saying and not what I've been saying. Civil Unions is a higher stage of morality. The counterargument is rooted in reward/punishment. Even if you still think that I believe someone using stage 1 can't be a stage 5, it is still the proposition that christianity still assists in using stage 1 to solve problems. |
Define higher stage of morality.
If you mean a higher stage of morality due to Kohlberg. You are wrong about Kohlberg.
1) Kohlberg's work does not judge ones choices... only the rationale for choosing said choice. Civil Unions vs no Civil Unions are equal in the eyes of Kohlberg when it comes to moral reasoning. Again, look at the druggist dielma. The person is not judged for saying if it was ethical to steal the drugs... ONLY on why they if he should or not.
2) Kohlberg's stages were definite. There is no "using a different stage" versus the stage you are in. The most one could regress in reasoning was one level... and only if they hadn't fully integrated the level above it.
3) Kohlberg often attributed people making that mistake by misunderstanding the 5th stage as one of the earlier stages due to the charactiristics of the 5th stage which largely involve creating your own personal ethical code and elevating that above the "law of the land." Kohlberg would most likely suggest you are misunderstanding the points of those you are talking to. First level moral reasoning just doesn't happen to adults according to him.
4) Western societies (christian ones) were seen as progressive faster then non christian societies. Including ones that weren't based on nonsecular philosphies. (EX. China.)
Sorry I got your point wrong. You were just misusing Kohlberg's research more then i thought you were.
Now if the above all sounds like awful bullshit to you... you now understand why I think Kohlberg's stages of moral development suck. Regardless.... that is what Kohlbergs work says.
