CONVENTIONAL MORALITY AND ETHICAL RELATIVISMReported by: Hazel C. Gascon

CONVENTIONAL MORALITY

EXERCISE:

In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging 10 times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug.

The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he

could get together only about $1,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “NO, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife.KOHLBERG, 1964, pp. 18 – 19

QUESTION: WAS HEINZ MORALLY RIGHT TO STEAL THE DRUG?

KOHLBERG'S THEORY OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Level 1: Pre-conventional Morality Stage 1: Punishment and Obedience Stage 2: Instrumental Exchange

Level 2: Conventional Morality Stage 3: Interpersonal Conformity Stage 4: Law and Order

Level 3: Post-Conventional Morality Stage 5: Prior Rights and Social Contract Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles

A. PRE-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL: 

FOCUS: Self (self-centered) AGES: Birth to adolescence Behavior motivated by anticipation of

pleasure or pain.

    

 STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE:

Decisions are motivated by the individual’s concern for himself or herself.

Child conforms to rule made by authority figures so he/ she can avoid punishment.

HEINZ’S DILEMMA: Heinz should not

steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person.

Might Makes Right Heinz should steal

the medicine because it is only worth $200 and not how much the druggist wanted for it; Heinz had even offered to pay for it and was not stealing anything else.

STAGE 2: INSTRUMENTAL EXCHANGE: Moral reasoning reflects some concerns for

others, but it is ultimately motivated by the hope of benefit in return.

If it’s good for me, it’s right. If it’s bad for me, it isn’t. If you’re nice to me, I should be nice to you. If you’re mean to me, I can be mean to you.

HEINZ’S DILEMMA: Heinz should steal

the medicine because he will be much happier if he saves his wife, even if he will have to serve a prison sentence.

The Egoist Heinz should not

steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would more likely languish in a jail cell than over his wife's death.

B. CONVENTIONAL MORALITY LEVEL:

FOCUS: Significant Others, "Tyranny of the They" (They say….)

 AGES: Adolescence and young adulthood Acceptance of the rules and standards of

one's group.

STAGE 3: INTERPERSONAL CONFORMITY: 

Decisions are motivated by the individual’s obligations to law, peers, or authority.

HEINZ’S DILEMMA: Heinz should steal

the medicine because his wife expects it; he wants to be a good husband.

Good Boy/ Good Girl Heinz should not

steal the drug because stealing is bad and he is not a criminal; he has tried to do everything he can without breaking the law, you cannot blame him.

STAGE 4: LAW AND ORDER: “ Right” actions conform to the behavioral

expectations of the law, the authority, peers, and society.

If the law says it’s right, then it’s right. If the law says it’s wrong, then it’s wrong.

Rules and laws are valued because they maintain a social order that is worth preserving.

HEINZ’S DILEMMA: Heinz should not

steal the medicine because the law prohibits stealing, making it illegal.

The Good Citizen Heinz should steal the

drug for his wife but also take the prescribed punishment for the crime as well as paying the druggist what he is owed. Criminals cannot just run around without regard for the law; actions have consequences.

C. POST-CONVENTIONAL:

FOCUS: Justice, Dignity for all life, Common Good

AGES: Young adulthood to adulthood

STAGE 5: PRIOR RIGHTS AND SOCIAL CONTRACT:

Decisions are motivated by the individual’s concern for moral principles.

They believe laws should be derived from a democratic consensus so that they express the will of the majority or maximize social welfare.

HEINZ’S DILEMMA: Heinz should steal

the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law.

The Philosopher/ King Heinz should not

steal the medicine because the scientist has a right to fair compensation. Even if his wife is sick, it does not make his actions right.

STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES: 

Right actions are justified if they fight for and/or protect those greater principles.

Belief that while rules are needed to maintain social order, they should not be blindly obeyed but should be set up (even changed) based on protecting the greater good or greater principles.

HEINZ’S DILLEMA: Heinz should steal

the medicine, because saving a human life is a more fundamental value than the property rights of another person.

The Prophet/ Messiah Heinz should not

steal the medicine, because others may need the medicine just as badly, and their lives are equally significant.

ETHICAL RELATIVISM

ETHICAL RELATIVISM

Nothing is objectively right or wrong and that the definition of right or wrong depends on the prevailing view of a particular individual, culture or historical period.

“What is morally right or wrong (as opposed to what is merely thought to be right or wrong) may vary fundamentally from person to person or culture to culture.”

Two Forms of Ethical Relativism: cultural (social) relativism—What is right or

wrong may vary fundamentally from one society/culture to another but is the same for people of the same society/culture

extreme (individual) relativism—What is right or wrong may vary fundamentally from one person to another even within the same society/culture.

Subjective A claim or judgment is subjective if its truth

depends on whether or not it conforms to the tastes, attitudes, and beliefs of the claimer (the person making the claim).

Inter-Subjective A claim or judgment is inter-subjective if its

truth depends on whether or not it conforms to the beliefs, attitudes, and conventions of the group to which the claimer belongs.

Objective A claim or judgment is objective if its truth

does NOT depend on whether it conforms to the beliefs or attitudes of any group or individual.

EXAMPLES: State whether the following are subjective, inter-subjective, or objective:

“It’s not normal to feel good after murdering innocent people.” (inter-subjective)

“Sailing in the open ocean is a pleasant experience.”(subjective)

“The boiling point of water is 100°C.” (objective)

“The time it takes to travel from earth to another planet, 20 light-years away, at 50% of the speed of light is 10 years.”(objective)

“The Mona Lisa is the most beautiful painting put to canvas.” (subjective)

The concept of cultural relativism contains the following claims:

Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture.

There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another.

Different cultures have different moral codes, and the moral code of a society determines what is right within that society.

It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the conduct of other peoples. We should, therefore, adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.

Look around you and you'll see the evidence of this everywhere. Our diverse society shares a surprising amount of common moral beliefs. No matter whom you voted for president, what religion you are, or your position in life, your basic moral standards of right and wrong are much the same. These are not "social norms" but moral absolutes. Stealing is wrong. Lying is wrong. Honesty, patience, dependability, fairness, and responsibility are right. You can take these moral absolutes to the bank. If you grab on to them and wrap yourself in them, you will be following a model of success that has stood the test of time. When you focus like a laser beam on what is good and right and take out all the emotion and distraction, what remains are pure moral absolutes that are universal to all humanity.

THANK YOU