Moral Judgment: Understanding Ethical Decision-Making
Moral Judgment
Interest in ethical behavior and moral development is increasing in various areas of society. The moral character of education and the need for educational institutions to effectively promote moral education and values training in students of all levels are frequently highlighted. In general, there’s a growing focus on moral development and values formation within educational activities.
Conscience and Moral Judgment
Conscience, the judge of our actions, can only function when human acts are voluntary and performed freely. A trial of conscience cannot occur when actions are forced by authority or external agents. Consider the actions of a soldier during wartime occupation, where decisions are sometimes made out of obligation or adherence to predetermined schemes, leaving little room for individual choice. In such cases, moral conscience may be suppressed.
As a result of value judgments made by the individual’s moral conscience regarding their own actions, the following may occur:
- Guilt
- Remorse
- Repentance
These can lead to punishment, self-punishment, or internal reflection.
Bridges of Morality
This field involves elements referred to as “bridges of morality,” which represent the agreement or disagreement with right reason that guides human action.
We continually make judgments about the behavior and actions of others, often becoming judges of their honesty or dishonesty. We also try to justify our own actions to those around us.
Exercise: Identifying Moral Judgments
In each block below, identify which statements are moral judgments:
Block 1:
- Lorena lied to her parents.
- Lying to parents is wrong.
- You are correct.
- Each person does what they can.
Block 2:
- The terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in New York killed thousands of people.
- It was a right action.
- The terrorist act is extremely negative and repulsive.
- Revenge through terrorism is politically motivated.
In each block, the statements preceded by letters b, c, and d are moral judgments. The statements preceded by the letter ‘a’ are not moral judgments but rather statements of fact or empirical observations.
For example, stating that Lorena lied to her parents is simply expressing a potential fact. It’s an empirical judgment if we have evidence to support it. It could even be false. Similarly, stating that the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers killed thousands of people is a factual statement based on evidence and documentation.
Moral judgments (b, c, and d) do not focus on the events themselves but on our evaluation of those events.
The Moral Sense
Moral judgments are made possible by the moral sense. This is the set of schemes, rules, and norms acquired through education, family, and environment that we utilize when making moral decisions. Throughout our lives, we are taught a set of moral rules and standards of conduct primarily by our families, educational institutions, and society.
We are constantly told what is considered good or bad. We can have three attitudes towards these learned rules and standards:
- Rejection
- Indifference
- Acceptance
Rejection occurs when, after reflection and criticism, we decide to discard a rule because we are not convinced by it. Rejection can also happen due to exhaustion or saturation, or when we replace a rule with another.
Indifference occurs when a rule doesn’t resonate with us, and we remain neutral towards its content. It’s a passive denial rather than a conscious acceptance.
Acceptance occurs when the rule becomes part of our moral framework. These accepted rules constitute our moral principles, guiding our actions and decisions.
Stages of Moral Judgment
The following table outlines the stages of moral judgment according to Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory:
| Levels and Stages | What is Right | Reasons for Good | Social Perspective of the Stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Level I: Preconventional Stage 1: Heteronomous Morality | Submitting to rules enforced by punishment; obedience; avoiding physical harm to persons and property. | Avoiding punishment; deference to higher authorities. | Egocentric point of view. Does not consider the interests of others or recognize that they differ from their own. Does not relate two points of view. Actions are considered physically rather than in terms of the psychological interests of others. Confusion of authority’s perspective with their own. |
| Stage 2: Individualism, Instrumental Purpose, and Exchange | Following rules only when it is in immediate self-interest; acting to meet one’s own interests and needs and letting others do the same. The good is what is fair and involves an equal exchange, agreement, or deal. | Serving one’s own interests in a world where others also have interests. | Concrete individual perspective. Aware that everyone has interests to pursue and that these may conflict. The good is relative in an individualistic sense. |
| Levels and Stages | What is Right | Reasons for Good | Social Perspective of the Stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Level II: Conventional Stage 3: Mutual Interpersonal Expectations, Relationships, and Conformity | Living up to the expectations of those close to you (e.g., being a good son, brother, friend). “Being good” is important and means having good motives, showing concern for others, and maintaining mutual relationships based on trust, loyalty, respect, and gratitude. | The need to be a good person in one’s own eyes and in the eyes of others; caring for others; believing in the Golden Rule; the desire to maintain rules and authority that support good behavior. | Perspective of the individual in relation to other individuals. Awareness of shared feelings, agreements, and expectations that take precedence over individual interests. Relates points of view through the Golden Rule, putting oneself in another’s place. Still does not consider a generalized system perspective. |
| Stage 4: Social System and Conscience | Performing duties to which one has committed; upholding laws except in extreme cases where they conflict with other fixed social rules. The good also involves contributing to society, group, or institution. Awareness that people have a variety of values and opinions, and that most values and rules are relative to one’s group. | Maintaining the institution and avoiding a breakdown in the system (“if everyone did it…”). The imperative of conscience to fulfill one’s defined obligations. (Easily confused with Stage 3’s belief in rules and authority.) | Differentiated societal perspective. Takes the point of view of the system that defines roles and rules. Considers interpersonal relationships in terms of their place in the system. |
Moral Judgment in Practice
Moral judgment is the mental act of affirming or denying the moral value of a situation or behavior. It involves a search for truth and the identification (or absence) of ethical value.
The development of moral judgment benefits from explicit educational support. However, our environment from birth significantly influences our moral judgments. We adopt attitudes based on our understanding of right and wrong, analyzing our environment and circumstances, leading to three types of attitudes: rejection, indifference, and acceptance.
Once we adopt an attitude, our conscience evaluates our actions based on these attitudes, resulting in feelings of guilt, remorse, or repentance. These feelings can lead to punishment, self-punishment, or internal reflection as a means of rectifying the situation.