Moral Reasoning

In this project, three subjects were interviewed using the Heinz story, with some additional questions. The first subject was a 9-year-old boy who is my nephew. He is an elementary school child in the fourth grade. The second subject was the daughter of a friend of mine, aged 15. She was a high school student. Finally, the third interview subject was a friend of mine, age 25, who is a nurse. There responses are presented in the following pages, then compared, and explored.

My nephew, J., was quite clear about what Heinz should do about his wife's problem. He said that Heinz should steal the drug, because it can save his wife. The primary concern for him was saving the life of someone Heinz cared for, because his answer to the second question was that Heinz should not steal the drug, because he didn't love his wife. He should not get in trouble for someone he did not love.

He also did not think that Heinz should save the life of a stranger by stealing the drug, because his wife would misunderstand this action, probably thinking that Heinz was in love with the other woman. In terms of t

. . .
er loved her. The adult did not believe there was any situation which justified Heinz stealing the drug. She said no to his wife, the stranger, and a pet, and clearly stated that legal principles should rule. She indicated that it was always wrong to disobey the law, no matter what the situation. The younger people felt that there was more variation. J. thought that the wife should be saved, but not the unloved wife, stranger, or pet, because they were not as important to the man and it was not worth the risk. J. also thought that the pet might be helped by the veterinarian. On the other hand, the adolescent, L., gave more complex reasoning for her answers and was less clear about them. While clear that Heinz should save his wife, whether loved or not, she was not sure about his relationship with the stranger and the pet and whether these justified his actions in stealing the drug. She concluded that it did not make sense for him to steal the drug in these situations. She also indicated confusion about morality and legality, trying to distinguish between the two. She noted that she wanted the law to be the moral thing, but that it was not always. She also said that maybe there were two kinds of law, with one higher,
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Reasoning Introduction, Conventional Stage, Critique Kohlberg's, III Postconventional, steal drug, heinz steal, heinz steal drug, References Kohlberg, moral development, moral reasoning, Press Kohlberg, stranger pet, stage 4, didn't love, heinz save, love wife, save wife, Harper Row, stages moral development, wife stranger pet, wrong breaks law, stealing drug wife,
Approximate Word count = 1841
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Moral Reasoning