Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Piaget theory of moral development. Essay
Nature nurture controversy
Piaget theory of moral development. Essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Piaget theory of moral development. Essay
Morals: Nature vs. Nurture
In psychology the story of Heinz has been widely known. A European man whose wife was sick with cancer, Heinz needed to purchase a drug that would help his wife. however, the drug cost $2000. Determined to help his wife, Heinz did all he could to raise as much money as possible but could only come up with half. With no other options left, Heinz broke into the druggist’s office to steal the medicine for his wife. This story leads perfectly into the debate on nature versus nurture as it pertains to morality. Was Heinz justified in what he did because of the situation he was in, or were bad morals instilled within him from the very beginning? In other words, is there more of a contribution from social expectations to moral development than genetic expectations? From young childhood through young adulthood, individuals are molded by parents, siblings, teachers, peers, society, media, and our environments. These socialization or nurturing related factors far outweigh genetics or nature related factors when it comes to morality. Theories and studies created by famous psychologists Kohlberg and Piaget, whose theories are still used in textbooks today, genetic studies done by biologists, as well as studies done in other cultures, their societies, and what is morally acceptable to them help to prove this.
Piaget, a Swiss developmental psychologist from the early 1900s, created a three stage theory of morality in children. Jean Piaget’s theory of moral development was one of the first created and is still taught in psychology classes today. These three stages are known as the the preoperational stage, the concrete stage, and the formal operations stage. Piaget’s first stage corresponds to children age’s two to ...
... middle of paper ...
...tages.” N.d. www.appsychologybhs.wikispaces.com. Web.
1Nov 2012. .
Papalia, D. E., S. W. Olds, and R. D. Feldman. Human development. 11. Boston: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages, 2010. Print
Rachels, James. "2.1 How Different Cultures Have Different Moral Codes." The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. N.p.. Web. 1 Nov 2012. .
Research: Marsh, A., Crowe, S., Yu, H., Gorodetsky, E., Goldman, D., & Blair, R. (2011). Serotonin Transporter Genotype (5-HTTLPR) Predicts Utilitarian Moral Judgments PLoS ONE, 6 (10) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025148
United States. Drug Enforcement Agency. What is "distribution"? What's drug "trafficking?".Web..
Crandell, Thomas. Crandell, Corinne Haines. Zanden, James W. Vander. (2009). Human Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
The Nature versus Nurture debate has been one of longest most withstanding debates of our world. Despite all the differences in beliefs, I believe significant evidence suggests that there is a reason to believe that our morality is not simply learned from imitation, coached ethics, or social cues (though those do play a part in growing it), but that it, like so many other natural abilities of the body, is a part of us beginning with the development of our brains in utero.
Cultural Relativism and the Divine Command Theory both had a tough time explaining why culture and God had the rights to state what is considered moral behavior. Especially when you lay your trust on God to guide you on what is moral or not, you face dangerous risks because there is a possibility that God is just a make-believe person up in the sky. Hence, humans who follow God’s words can misinterpret his meanings and cause immoral behavior in society. On the other hand, Ethical Relativism appeals to an authority that is present on this in this world, society and cultures. Nevertheless, society and cultures should not be relied on to indicate moral and immoral behavior because it is questionable to believe that our actions become moral just for the reason that our culture or society accepts them as normal. Despite the differences between The Divine Command Theory and Cultural Relativism, they both are theories that just fall short of their
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
K., & Veenstra, R. (2014). The interplay between peer rejection and acceptance in preadolescence and early adolescence, serotonin transporter gene, and antisocial behavior in late adolescence: The TRAILS study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982-), 60(2), 193-216. doi:10.13110/merrpalmquar1982.60.2.0193
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
Moral standards of behavior differ between peoples because the goals, norms, beliefs, and values upon which they depend also differ…because of variations in the religious and cultural traditions and the economic and social situations in which the individuals are immersed (p. 3).
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
Lawrence Kohlberg conducted research on the moral development of children. He wanted to understand how they develop a sense of right or wrong and how justice is served. Kohlberg used surveys in which he included moral dilemmas where he asked the subjects to evaluate a moral conflict. Through his studies, Kohlberg observed that moral growth and development precedes through stages such as those of Piaget’s stages of cognitive development. He theorized that moral growth begins at the beginning of life and continues until the day one dies. He believed that people proceed through each stage of moral development consecutively without skipping or going back to a previous stage. The stages of thought processing, implying qualitatively different modes of thinking and of problem solving are included in the three levels of pre-conventional, conventional and post conventional development. (2)
Rachels, J. (1986). The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. The elements of moral philosophy (pp. 20-36). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
...s. Throughout the stages of development Freud argues that the powerful human influence came from the parents. Piaget believed that peers are as important or more important than parents are. They both agree that a young child is affected by his parents’ standards, but he is not simply a passive recipient of those standards. Piaget did seem to build on one of Freud’s ideas in that while Freud was only interested in moral feelings like guilt and shame, Piaget expanded his theory to look at the development of moral judgment.
In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits. The takeaway is that both theories share the guiding principle that morality is bounded by culture or society.
Craig, G. J., & Dunn, W. L. (Ex.: 2010). Understanding human development (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.
“Different cultures have different moral codes”, James Rachels discusses in his article Why Morality Is Not Relative? (Rachels, p. 160). A moral code is a set of rules that is considered to be the right behavior that may be accepted by a group of individuals within a society. Each culture tends to have their own individual standards and moral codes. Moral codes are guidelines laid out by a cultures ancestors. Standards are guidelines set forth by the individual themselves. Standards and morals don’t always have to be the same, but there are instances where they are. The moral codes claim what is “right” and what is “wrong”. Moral codes outline what behaviors individuals are supposed to make. These codes are basically laws, but specifically