8.3 Moral judgment grows in expanding circles.

< back

Growing, also in a mental and moral sense, again and again involves shedding of an old protective skin and acquiring a new one. Growth occurs at the frontier of chaos, in a mixture of fear and fascination. A desire for renewal competes with fear of the unknown when one takes the next step; because of this, the step is carefully prepared. In the LAD the components of the lymphoid system form a network that responds to environmental challenges, similarly in a moral system for adaptation and defence (MOAD) successive notions together form a system of ethics. Such notions have a cohesive structure with which one evaluates and responds to the challenges of the social environment. This environment is different for an infant, a child, an adolescent or an adult. The moral system of adaptation and defence therefore grows in layers. Passing from one stage of life to the next, one has to renew one's moral rigging.

As in the other systems for adaptation and defence, ethics develop in a dialogue between the genome and the environment. The genome supplies two instincts, one for self-preservation and one for preservation of the group (family, tribe). The two instincts often cooperate, but sometimes compete for supremacy. In an insecure person, whose life is guided by fear and worries, self-preservation often dominates and rarely cedes the leading role to group-interest. Therefore group-interest is better served by an individual who feels fundamentally secure and rarely feels the need to let self-preservation dominate. Inevitably there is an interaction between an individual's development and his history of life within a group. Motivation to exert oneself for the benefit of the group will be activated if the child has experienced that the group supports his well being. Every higher step in the moral hierarchy reconciles the opposing tendencies that in the lower level fought for supremacy.

Preparing a new layer of one's MOAD-strategy is accompanied by episodes of anxiety and doubt. Anticipating a period of vulnerable nakedness may make a person hesitant whether or not to take the next step towards a new pattern of adaptation / defence based on a new and broader view of the world. The uneasiness of being inadequately equipped for an ever widening environment and the accompanying inner conflicts, force a person to relinquish an old skin. The passage is made easier when a close relative, a teacher or a friend helps the process along by showing the benefits of a new equilibrium and by giving the reassurance that, even though it is difficult, the next step can be and should be taken.

We can retrace the notion of a stepwise development to J.Piaget (1965), author on child development. He found that moral conceptions develop in a child in more or less discrete stages. L.Kohlberg (1969) has confirmed that there are levels of moral development. Different people are guided by moral values at different levels, and one person may switch back and forth between levels, depending on circumstances (regression). Too little is known about the social, educational and spiritual ambience that fosters the development of values. Social scientists from the political left have denounced the whole concept of a hierarchy of values. In their view it is a deceitful instrument that is used by the establishment to deflate revolutionary ideals. In spite of that accusation I hope that a layered model of moral values will be recognised and accepted as the fabric that strengthens the structure of a just and mutually supportive society. As we will see the hierarchy is not only from top to bottom, it is also from the bottom upwards.

Stage 1 of Level 1 is heteronomous (literal meaning: the laws are outside oneself) and child-like in nature; the person follows a trusted parent or leader, or a revered and feared person or divine being. Obedience is motivated by wanting to avoid punishment. Stage 2 of this level is self-centeredness, everything revolves around satisfying one's own needs, and feeling that one has the right to do so.

Level 2 is called the conventional level. Stage 3: There is attention for "what others think of me": conformity and avoidance of social disapproval is the ethic. Stage 4: Meeting the expectations of society, performing one's social duties.

Level 3, which is attained by a minority of the population, again has two stages. Stage 5, in which a person makes choices on the basis of what is good for society, while being also truly aware of the inviolable rights of other individuals. At stage 6 full autonomy (literal meaning: the law is inside oneself) has been reached. Moral principles, embodied in one's conscience, are in accordance with the universal principles that underlie social commitments. They are applied consistently and are upheld in spite of allurements and temptations. Map 8.3.1: for a short summary of the stages of moral development and subsequent quotes I rely on Map 38 by Hampden-Turner (1981):

Kohlberg's model of moral development in six stages has been extensively tested in large populations and found to be valid. It has also been criticised: the description of levels of moral judgment is hard to accept by people who find it discriminating. These critics however confound factfinding with passing judgment. It is a statistical fact, not a judgment on anybody, that the majority of Americans and Europeans (75%) never develop beyond the stages 3 and 4 on Kohlberg's scale. Nor does the scale of moral development run parallel with social status. It may be easier for somebody in a high and responsible social position to clearly see the consequences of human behaviour, including his own, which will influence his moral decisions. However there are sinners and saints to be found at all levels of society. Much depends on the individual having passed safe and sound through all the stages of emotional, social and mental development (6.2). Moral behaviour is very much a matter of willpower, and willpower is courage combined with creative phantasy.

C. Morris brought a refinement to the value system: the discrimination between operant and conceptual values. This reconciles the double standard paradox which is so typical for human behaviour. A drug addict knows full well that his habit has damaging effects, yet he lets the operative value of immediate gratification prevail over the conceived value that it is better not to become addicted.

It has been shown that the level of moral insight can be elevated e.g in classroom discussions, and this raises the hope that defects in moral reasoning can be repaired. This is especially important in multicultural classrooms, where the clash of religious backgrounds has to be reconciled by dialogue.

Since moral consciousness appears to be arranged in a concentrical way similar to what we have seen in many previous maps, we are not surprised to find the customary two-way hierarchy. Top-down:

• the highest moral judgment (level 6) is exemplified by humanist and general religious teachings that transcend any institutional interest. A limited number of exemplary teachers have a direct influence on the adjacent less elevated levels. In order to shape others, who cannot look higher than one level above their own habitual stage,

• an institution (e.g. a religion), school or movement is created (level 5)

• it teaches social justice (level 4)

• and uses the media to broadcast an image of honest and respectful people (level 3)

• it promises rewards for just behaviour (level 2)

• and threatens with penalties in case of improper behaviour (level 1).

The hierarchy in the other direction, bottom-up, has already been mentioned: every next stage enables a person to participate in a social order that is more coherent and thriving than the previous one. The concentric structure of the moral adaptation and defence system (MOAD) is the result of individual development, in interaction with one's cultural and educational environment.

Again the map shows the pattern of a two-way hierarchy. It summarizes the information-flow between successive layers of adaptation and defence, that can be characterised in short form as [1] dependency, [2] dominance, [3] detachment. They are the essence of the Varieties of Human Value, discovered by C.Morris (1956). The fact that they are influenced to a large degree by culture and education take away the sharp edges of biological determinism that biological variety seems to (but does not) imply. Human society profits by the cooperation of seemingly conflicting tendencies. As the scale of moral values expands every grade on the MOAD scale has its assignments in a particular field of action.

Values change with the stages of life. For a baby the primary values are nourishment and loving care. Detachment at this stage would be fatal. When, on the contrary, an adult has reached the stage of maturity and wisdom, his serene attitude of detachment may be a source of inspiration to the younger generation. However without Promethean fire nothing can be forged out of abstract idea's. Although the values of Dependance, Dominance and Detachment are intrinsically different, they complement each other and are equally valuable.

9. HUMAN INTERACTIONS; THE EMERGENCE OF LANGUAGE