Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Heinz dilemma is a frequently used example in many ethics and morality classes. One well-known version of the dilemma, used in Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development, is stated as follows: [1] A woman was on her deathbed. There was one drug that the doctors said would save her.
Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development constitute an adaptation of a psychological theory originally conceived by the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget. Kohlberg began work on this topic as a psychology graduate student at the University of Chicago in 1958 and expanded upon the theory throughout his life. [1] [2] [3]
Lawrence Kohlberg is one example of a psychologist working on descriptive ethics. In one study, for example, Kohlberg questioned a group of boys about what would be a right or wrong action for a man facing a moral dilemma (specifically, the Heinz dilemma): should he steal a drug to save his wife, or refrain from theft even though that would lead to his wife's death? [4]
Moreover, participants' neural activity in response to moral-impersonal scenarios was similar to their activity in response to non-moral decision scenarios. Another study [14] used variants of trolley problem that differed in the 'personal/impersonal' dimension and surveyed people's permissibility judgment (Scenarios 1 and 2). Across scenarios ...
Kohlberg's interview method included hypothetical moral dilemmas or conflicts of interest (most notably, the Heinz dilemma). He proposed six stages and three levels of development (claiming that "anyone who interviewed children about dilemmas and who followed them longitudinally in time would come to our six stages and no others). [ 96 ]
Lawrence Kohlberg (/ ˈ k oʊ l b ɜːr ɡ /; October 25, 1927 – January 17, 1987) was an American psychologist best known for his theory of stages of moral development.. He served as a professor in the Psychology Department at the University of Chicago and at the Graduate School of Education at Harvard University.
Moral injury is a relatively new concept that seems to describe what many feel: a sense that their fundamental understanding of right and wrong has been violated, and the grief, numbness or guilt that often ensues. Here, you will meet combat veterans struggling with the moral and ethical ambiguities of war.
Moral affect is “emotion related to matters of right and wrong”. Such emotion includes shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride; shame is correlated with the disapproval by one's peers, guilt is correlated with the disapproval of oneself, embarrassment is feeling disgraced while in the public eye, and pride is a feeling generally brought about by a positive opinion of oneself when admired by ...