Comparing Erikson's Moral Development
Listening to the responses from the developmental panel, showed distinct differences between stages in life. The children who were under ten years of age showed little development when it came to topics that required general knowledge. The teens showed adequate levels of understanding of topics and Emilee showed to be furthest in development. Emilee is a twenty one year old female who had a very rough time growing up. when asked how Emilee describes herself, she believes herself to be reserved and quiet. Emile had to mature quicker mentally, than she did physically. She also had very intriguing answers to many of the questions asked on the panel. Emilees responses will be compared to three different stages of development. Emilee will be compared
…show more content…
to Erikson stages of the psychosocial crisis. Her responses to the developmental panel questions will also be compared to Piaget's developmental stages along with moral development. Using the stages, it is hoped to provide a clear understanding as to where Emilee is in her development.
When developing from a child into an adult, a person changes in a variety of ways. Their physical appearances changes, their general and world knowledge changes and the way they think and form ideas change as well. One of the most significant changes that has been studied by therapist overtime is the moral development. Adults who lives that are ideal, have an understanding as to what they believe is right and wrong. Their beliefs are apart of who they are. When studying moral development, Sigmund Freud had an emotion based focus. His method was based off of a psychoanalytic theory. He believed that morals derived from one's Id, ego and superego. The Id serving self purposes for sustenance, the ego and the superego he believes is the source of moral emotion. These emotions included good, bad, based off of shame and guilt. However, cognitive theorist have a different belief. Piaget believed that the changes of an individual's logical thinking, was the source of their moral development. He focused on an individual's view of rules and conduct. However, Piaget focus mainly on children's moral development. He did so by asking children a series of normative question that applied to their day to day life. Kohlberg did further research from late childhood into the early adult years. Kohlberg's theory gives an indepth look into the changes within young adults and children. Kohlberg did this by asking questions that were outside the norm. This forced the person to think philosophically and face issues that were out of the ordinary. Based off the responses, Kholberg found that there were three levels of moral developments. These levels included preconventional, conventional and postconventional. At the preconventional level, people base what is right according to whether or not they will be punished. At the conventional stage, the person determines what is right based off other people's approval. At the postconventional level, the person determines what is right based off justice and principle and not a particular rule.
According to Kohlberg's moral development stages, it can be said that Emilee is at Stage 4 of the conventional level.
Stage 4 is the member of society perspective. The book states that “social order is most important now. Behaviors that contribute to functioning of social systems are most valued, e.g., obeying laws,hard work.” p.261. During the developmental panel, a question that could be classified as a Kohlberg Moral Development question was asked. The question …show more content…
stated:
“John’s family is starving, so he goes to Publix and steals a loaf of bread to feed them. Is this morally right or wrong? Why do you believe so?” Emilee responded with stating that a man stealing bread to feed his family is not morally wrong. She went on to quote a line from her mother that said “You can’t trust a thief because he’s also a liar.” When asking a moral development question, Kohlberg is not looking for whether the person judged the situation as morally right or wrong, but he focused on the reason for their judgement. It can be said that yes, Emilee did not believe that the man stealing the bread was morally wrong however she judged him by calling him a liar in the same statement. Emilees statement can be compared to the components of stage 4 of Kholbergs stages. Though she thought he was not morally wrong, she is judging his actions at the same time by calling him a liar.Stealing may not be considered a contribution to social functioning because it breaks the laws. Emilee was then asked the jack and jill question from the book, The Righteous Mind. Essentially the question asked if a brother and sister went away on a trip, engaged in intercourse that was safe with preventative pregnancy measures taken, and no bad feelings were expressed nor was there discussion about the situation, is this morally wrong. Emilee stated that it is not morally wrong because there is an incest taboo. She went on to say how she would not engage in that type of activity herself but she would question their back related to sexual abuse. Emilee did not find this situation to be a huge problem, though she did mention the potential sexual abuse. This situation is not breaking social order. In addition, the mention of taboo and essentially accepting the shows that she is a member of society and follows the norms. Emilee is an active member of her society and she seems to fall in line with maintaining social order. The incest situation is not altering social order and it is also not disobeying any laws which may be why Emilee did not have any major concerns with the situation. Overall, in relation to Kohlberg’s Moral development, it can be said that Emilee is at the stage equivalent for her age range.
Jean Piaget was a psychologist whose focus was cognitive development. Piaget found interest in the reasons children gave wrong answers to the questions that required logical thinking. He believed these differences in logical thinking developed over time. In Piaget’s cognitive development theory, there were three components. There are schemas, which he believed was a way that individual organize knowledge, as well as the adaption process. In addition there are four stages that children fall under.These stages include sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational. According to Piaget, Emilee would fall under the formal operational stage. This stage takes place from twelve years of age into adulthood. During this stage Piaget believes that young adolescents can think logically about hypothetical situations. He believes that at this stage, a person can now absorb abstract material.
During the developmental panel, Emilee was asked questions according to Piaget’s theory. One of the questions were to consider if you had ten one-pound feathers in a bag and you also have a ten pound watermelon. If you were to drop them both at the same time, which one would hit the ground first? Emilee was able to think hypothetically about the situation and essentially answering the question right. She answered that both would hit the ground equally, which is accurate because the are of equal weight. Emilee did not heavily factor in the feather versus the watermelon, but instead, noted that the bags were of equal weight. When she was asked what to do next if she overslept the morning of her final exam and missed the test, what would she do? Emilee responded by saying she would be honest and email the teacher and let them know what happened. Emilee is capable of thinking logically and can be abstract about situations due to her stage of development in Piaget’s stages.
Erik Erikson did not believe much of what Freud believed when it came to development. Though he did work along side him and his daughter, he developed his own theory. Erikson formed what is known as the Eight Stages of Man. These stages are used to explain aspects of behavior in a psychosocial aspect. They define the feelings and attitudes towards oneself and towards others throughout our stages of development. These eight stages include trust vs. mistrust, autonomy vs shame and doubt, industry vs guilt, identity vs role confusion, intimacy vs isolation, generativity vs stagnation and lastly ego integrity vs despair. These stages travel from infancy into our late adulthood and have outcomes that are both negative and positive. Being that Emilee is a young adult, according to Erikson, she would be in the intimacy vs isolation stage. During this stage, adults are ready to commit themselves fully to another person as well as share their identity with others. The positive outcome to the stage is love. It is the virtue developed at this stage. In addition, the fear of intimacy and distancing are negatives outcomes that play a factor during this stage.
During the developmental panel, Emilee was asked a question that fell under the category of Erikson's stages of development.
The question asked was, at what age do you think it is appropriate to move out of your parents place and why? Emilee replied by saying that it is appropriate to leave home when you are ready. Emilee went on to say that she did not leave home until she was about twenty, but also stated that she could have done it sooner if she wanted to. It is interesting that Erikson believes that before the age of twenty, adolescents have an inability to establish a sense of self. perhaps that is the reason that Emilee stayed home until the age of twenty which is when Erikson believes that individuals are able to establish a sense of self and is able to share themselves with others. Emilee was asked another question relevant to Erikson's developmental stages. The question asked what is one important value you hold and where do you think it came from? Emilee responded by stating to never leave the house angry, but to instead leave the house saying i love you, which is something she learned from her mother. With this response Emilee is showing the virtue of love that Erikson developed. She also is showing that she wants to keep those important to her close avoiding distancing. This supports Erikson's theory that distance and love play a factor in the development during young
adulthood.
When looking at Emilee’s development, it seems as if she falls inline with where the theories believe she should be. Emilee shows logical thinking when asked questions are considered abstract. She is able to consider a hypothetical situation and respond based off the information given, giving the correct response to the situation. In addition, she is an active member of society, and seems to fall in line within the Kohlberg’s moral development stages. She seems to base what is morally right or wrong based off social order and whether or not laws are being obeyed. In relation to Erikson’s psychosocial stages, she has established a sense of self and is able to share her identity with others. She is at the stage where distancing is a factor in her life, and love is being developed. Emilee showed great maturity, understanding and intellect during the panel. It was a pleasure getting to know her through the developmental panel questions and understanding where she falls within the different developmental stages.
to Erikson stages of the psychosocial crisis. Her responses to the developmental panel questions will also be compared to Piaget's developmental stages along with moral development. Using the stages, it is hoped to provide a clear understanding as to where Emilee is in her development.
When developing from a child into an adult, a person changes in a variety of ways. Their physical appearances changes, their general and world knowledge changes and the way they think and form ideas change as well. One of the most significant changes that has been studied by therapist overtime is the moral development. Adults who lives that are ideal, have an understanding as to what they believe is right and wrong. Their beliefs are apart of who they are. When studying moral development, Sigmund Freud had an emotion based focus. His method was based off of a psychoanalytic theory. He believed that morals derived from one's Id, ego and superego. The Id serving self purposes for sustenance, the ego and the superego he believes is the source of moral emotion. These emotions included good, bad, based off of shame and guilt. However, cognitive theorist have a different belief. Piaget believed that the changes of an individual's logical thinking, was the source of their moral development. He focused on an individual's view of rules and conduct. However, Piaget focus mainly on children's moral development. He did so by asking children a series of normative question that applied to their day to day life. Kohlberg did further research from late childhood into the early adult years. Kohlberg's theory gives an indepth look into the changes within young adults and children. Kohlberg did this by asking questions that were outside the norm. This forced the person to think philosophically and face issues that were out of the ordinary. Based off the responses, Kholberg found that there were three levels of moral developments. These levels included preconventional, conventional and postconventional. At the preconventional level, people base what is right according to whether or not they will be punished. At the conventional stage, the person determines what is right based off other people's approval. At the postconventional level, the person determines what is right based off justice and principle and not a particular rule.
According to Kohlberg's moral development stages, it can be said that Emilee is at Stage 4 of the conventional level.
Stage 4 is the member of society perspective. The book states that “social order is most important now. Behaviors that contribute to functioning of social systems are most valued, e.g., obeying laws,hard work.” p.261. During the developmental panel, a question that could be classified as a Kohlberg Moral Development question was asked. The question …show more content…
stated:
“John’s family is starving, so he goes to Publix and steals a loaf of bread to feed them. Is this morally right or wrong? Why do you believe so?” Emilee responded with stating that a man stealing bread to feed his family is not morally wrong. She went on to quote a line from her mother that said “You can’t trust a thief because he’s also a liar.” When asking a moral development question, Kohlberg is not looking for whether the person judged the situation as morally right or wrong, but he focused on the reason for their judgement. It can be said that yes, Emilee did not believe that the man stealing the bread was morally wrong however she judged him by calling him a liar in the same statement. Emilees statement can be compared to the components of stage 4 of Kholbergs stages. Though she thought he was not morally wrong, she is judging his actions at the same time by calling him a liar.Stealing may not be considered a contribution to social functioning because it breaks the laws. Emilee was then asked the jack and jill question from the book, The Righteous Mind. Essentially the question asked if a brother and sister went away on a trip, engaged in intercourse that was safe with preventative pregnancy measures taken, and no bad feelings were expressed nor was there discussion about the situation, is this morally wrong. Emilee stated that it is not morally wrong because there is an incest taboo. She went on to say how she would not engage in that type of activity herself but she would question their back related to sexual abuse. Emilee did not find this situation to be a huge problem, though she did mention the potential sexual abuse. This situation is not breaking social order. In addition, the mention of taboo and essentially accepting the shows that she is a member of society and follows the norms. Emilee is an active member of her society and she seems to fall in line with maintaining social order. The incest situation is not altering social order and it is also not disobeying any laws which may be why Emilee did not have any major concerns with the situation. Overall, in relation to Kohlberg’s Moral development, it can be said that Emilee is at the stage equivalent for her age range.
Jean Piaget was a psychologist whose focus was cognitive development. Piaget found interest in the reasons children gave wrong answers to the questions that required logical thinking. He believed these differences in logical thinking developed over time. In Piaget’s cognitive development theory, there were three components. There are schemas, which he believed was a way that individual organize knowledge, as well as the adaption process. In addition there are four stages that children fall under.These stages include sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational. According to Piaget, Emilee would fall under the formal operational stage. This stage takes place from twelve years of age into adulthood. During this stage Piaget believes that young adolescents can think logically about hypothetical situations. He believes that at this stage, a person can now absorb abstract material.
During the developmental panel, Emilee was asked questions according to Piaget’s theory. One of the questions were to consider if you had ten one-pound feathers in a bag and you also have a ten pound watermelon. If you were to drop them both at the same time, which one would hit the ground first? Emilee was able to think hypothetically about the situation and essentially answering the question right. She answered that both would hit the ground equally, which is accurate because the are of equal weight. Emilee did not heavily factor in the feather versus the watermelon, but instead, noted that the bags were of equal weight. When she was asked what to do next if she overslept the morning of her final exam and missed the test, what would she do? Emilee responded by saying she would be honest and email the teacher and let them know what happened. Emilee is capable of thinking logically and can be abstract about situations due to her stage of development in Piaget’s stages.
Erik Erikson did not believe much of what Freud believed when it came to development. Though he did work along side him and his daughter, he developed his own theory. Erikson formed what is known as the Eight Stages of Man. These stages are used to explain aspects of behavior in a psychosocial aspect. They define the feelings and attitudes towards oneself and towards others throughout our stages of development. These eight stages include trust vs. mistrust, autonomy vs shame and doubt, industry vs guilt, identity vs role confusion, intimacy vs isolation, generativity vs stagnation and lastly ego integrity vs despair. These stages travel from infancy into our late adulthood and have outcomes that are both negative and positive. Being that Emilee is a young adult, according to Erikson, she would be in the intimacy vs isolation stage. During this stage, adults are ready to commit themselves fully to another person as well as share their identity with others. The positive outcome to the stage is love. It is the virtue developed at this stage. In addition, the fear of intimacy and distancing are negatives outcomes that play a factor during this stage.
During the developmental panel, Emilee was asked a question that fell under the category of Erikson's stages of development.
The question asked was, at what age do you think it is appropriate to move out of your parents place and why? Emilee replied by saying that it is appropriate to leave home when you are ready. Emilee went on to say that she did not leave home until she was about twenty, but also stated that she could have done it sooner if she wanted to. It is interesting that Erikson believes that before the age of twenty, adolescents have an inability to establish a sense of self. perhaps that is the reason that Emilee stayed home until the age of twenty which is when Erikson believes that individuals are able to establish a sense of self and is able to share themselves with others. Emilee was asked another question relevant to Erikson's developmental stages. The question asked what is one important value you hold and where do you think it came from? Emilee responded by stating to never leave the house angry, but to instead leave the house saying i love you, which is something she learned from her mother. With this response Emilee is showing the virtue of love that Erikson developed. She also is showing that she wants to keep those important to her close avoiding distancing. This supports Erikson's theory that distance and love play a factor in the development during young
adulthood.
When looking at Emilee’s development, it seems as if she falls inline with where the theories believe she should be. Emilee shows logical thinking when asked questions are considered abstract. She is able to consider a hypothetical situation and respond based off the information given, giving the correct response to the situation. In addition, she is an active member of society, and seems to fall in line within the Kohlberg’s moral development stages. She seems to base what is morally right or wrong based off social order and whether or not laws are being obeyed. In relation to Erikson’s psychosocial stages, she has established a sense of self and is able to share her identity with others. She is at the stage where distancing is a factor in her life, and love is being developed. Emilee showed great maturity, understanding and intellect during the panel. It was a pleasure getting to know her through the developmental panel questions and understanding where she falls within the different developmental stages.