1

Millersville University Matthew J. Monahan

EDFN 603: Philosophy of Education July 8, 2017

MORAL PHILOSOPY

Nel Noddings’ coverage of Lawrence Kohlberg’s cognitive development theory

was my introduction to his stages of development. Aware that my opinion of Kohlberg

has been shaped by one of his critics, I reject the argument that morality develops in

progressive stages because this linear movement is problematic. It is incongruent with

physical and psychological development, and it does not take experience into account.

Anecdotally, people make lots of mistakes, some of which may be immoral, between

their teenage years and their thirties. If the trajectory of moral development can be

traced, perhaps it would take a shape other than a rising slope. In addition, there are just

too many examples of people behaving morally and immorally at various ages for

Kohlberg’s cognitive development theory to pass the proverbial sniff test.

For many people morality is intertwined with a religious practice. An important

function of religion is to prescribe behavior, largely around a moral organization. In

addition to stipulating how people express their faith, religion prescribes correct

behavior. That behavior is subject to moral judgment regardless of whether one is, for

example, a Hindu adhering to one’s dharma, or a Christian striving to live the example of

Jesus in the Gospels. Philosophical and moral conversations among people with differing

religious ideologies can be fruitful if the participants speak to what their religions believe

to be true and good. Such conversations challenge and refine a sense of truth for all

involved, even if they disagree about what is ultimately true.

 2

Kantian ethics leave me unsettled because I would prefer that people act morally

out of care. I would rather people do good because they are good, or at least because they

are being good. However, Kant’s “deontological ethics [which] elevate duty over love,”

may be essential for public servants who have sworn to work for the benefit of society

(Noddings, 2016, p. 151). Sworn protectors like police officers and military personnel,

and mandated reporters like teachers, should act out of a deep sense of duty. It is

unacceptable if they fail to protect as the result of their own personal choice.

By asserting that behaving virtuously makes a person virtuous, Aristotle seems to

leave us with a paradox. If one is not virtuous enough to behave virtuously, it may not

follow that virtuous behavior is the path to virtue. Utilitarian ethics are appealing

because they seem to account for imperfect humanity. This ethic offers a chance to

consider situations on a case-by-case basis, rather than conforming to an unchanging

ethic. By adhering to a categorical imperative, a disciple of Kant risks being robotic,

uncourageous, and irresponsible. While abhorring “blind obedience to the laws of God,”

Kant is guilty of blind obedience to his own categorical imperative. (Noddings, 2016,

p.152). Utilitarianism is more adaptable to human beings acting among many

complementary and competing variables and circumstances.

I struggle with the place of unanticipated outcomes in a moral framework. We

must consider intentions behind actions in a moral framework. However, if someone acts

with truly moral intentions and catastrophic results ensue, am at a loss to form a solid

opinion. I am not certain if John Dewey’s consequentialist ethic that an “act is judged

ethically acceptable or unacceptable according to the consequences it produces,” is valid,

but I am sure that history is consequentialist. Americans have dubbed the colonists who
 3

won independence from Great Britain our “founding fathers.” If their enterprise had

failed, they would have been executed as traitors.

 4

REFERENCES

Noddings, N. (2016). Philosophy of Education, 4th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.