MODULE 8 Aristotle considered goodness of character as a product of the

practice of virtuous behavior. This means that for Aristotle,

HOW IS MORAL CHARACTER DEVELOPED?
virtuous acts are not the end results of a good character. In
Moral Character and its Development fact, according to Aristotle, virtues are tendencies to act, to
feel, and judge, tendencies which are developed from natural
Moral character capacity through proper training and exercise.
 Refers to the existence or lack of virtues such as integrity, It is important to note that for Aristotle, virtue depends on
courage, fortitude, honesty, and loyalty. To say that a “clear judgment, self-control, symmetry of desire, and artistry
certain person has a good moral character means that of means”
he/she is a good person and a good citizen with a sound
moral compass (De Guzman et al., 2017) Virtue can be viewed as a fruit of intelligent pursuit. The virtue
 It can be conceptualized as an individual’s disposition to of excellence, for example, can be achieved by training and
think, feel, and behave in an ethical versus unethical habituation, and that a virtuous character is created by
manner, or as the subset of individual differences relevant repeatedly acting in a virtuous manner.
to morality (Cohen & Carnegie, 2014). This “doctrine of the mean” is a principle that suggests that a
 Development of moral character can be explained by the moral behavior is one that is in the middle of two extremes.
following approaches: virtues, disposition, and circular For example, between gain and disadvantage is justice, and
relations of acts and character, and theoretical between shameless and touchiness is modesty (Temporal).
perspectives (De Guzman et al., 2017 and Indeed, moral virtue can be defined simply as the just mean.
philonotes.com).

Moral Character as Dispositions

Moral Character and Virtues
Dispositions are particular kinds of properties or
Etymologically, the term “character” comes from the ancient characteristics that objects can possess. Examples of
Greek term charaktêr, which initially referred to the mark dispositions include the solubility of a sugar-cube in water, the
impressed upon a coin. The term charaktêr later came to refer fragility of porcelain, the elasticity of a rubber band, and the
more generally to any distinctive feature by which one thing is magnetism of a lodestone.
distinguished from others.
Moral character traits are those dispositions of character for
Aristotle most often used the term ēthē for character, which is which it is appropriate to hold agents morally responsible.
etymologically linked to “ethics” and “morality” (via the Latin
equivalent mores) A trait for which the agent is deserving of a positive reactive
attitude, such as praise or gratitude, is a virtue, and a vice is a
trait for which the agent is deserving of a negative reactive
One way to explain character development is through the attitude, such as resentment or blame.
virtue ethics approach. Virtue ethics represents the concept Moral character traits are relatively stable, fixed and reliable
that individual’s actions are based upon inner moral virtue dispositions of action and affect that ought to be rationally
where Aristotle was the leading figure of it. informed.
Virtue is a central concept in his Nicomachean Ethics wherein It is important to consider that moral character is not
there are two distinct of human excellences: something that is imposed from the outside, but something
(1) Excellences of thoughts that springs from the will of the moral agent. Hence, a moral
character develops as he/she grows into maturity. We may
(2) Excellences of character view moral character as a disposition or tendency to act or
think in a specific way for which a person can be held morally
Now, in virtue ethics, one does not ask the question, “what
responsible.
morally ought we to do?”; rather, virtue ethics posits that the
basic function of morality is the moral character of persons
(Beauchamp, 2001). In relation to this, Beauchamp suggests
that virtue should not be thought of as a moral requirement, The Circular Relation of Acts and Character
because this confuses with a principle or rule. Rather, virtue is The other side of the relation between moral character and
a character trait that is socially valued. action is the effect of action on character. Three aspects of
action relevant to this are repetition of action and its effect on One can be prevented from doing something by external
the person, the type of action, and intention and responsibility. forces, but carrying through with an action has an element of
the voluntary, of willing to do it and therefore cannot be
A. Repetition of Action and its Effect on the Person
forced.
Actions can be repetitive or automatic in (at least) three
Another way the will can be hindered is by lack of knowledge.
different ways: by habit, by education, and by habitus
One may attempt to drive across a flooded bridge thinking the
(Mitchell, 2015). When an action is constantly repeated, over
water is low enough to get through but then get stuck, because
time it can become a habit.
it was really two feet above the bridge. But if one knows that
Another type of automatic action is a skill (education). Actions the water is that high, one would not drive across it or will to
become skills through repetition and experience. drive across it, because one knows the car will stall in the
middle.
A third way actions become automatic is through what Aquinas
calls habitus, that is, inclination or disposition, an inclination, According to Mitchell (2015), the human being is self-
a willingness, to respond charitably to anyone in need as the governing in that he can carry out a human action or not carry
situation arises. it out as he wills.

There is nothing about habitus that requires it to be

good. One may also will to be miserly and act in a miserly way
MODULE 9
and therefore develop a bad disposition or habitus of
miserliness. The morality of the action also determines the STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
morality of the habitus. But not all acts can be cataloged as
The Six Stages of Moral Development
moral or immoral. There are different types or categories of
actions. Lawrence Kohlberg, (born October 25, 1927, Bronxville, New
York, U.S.—died January 17, 1987, Boston, Massachusetts),
American psychologist and educator known for his theory of
B. The Type of Action moral development. Kohlberg was the youngest of four
children of Alfred Kohlberg, a successful silk merchant of
Because human beings are body/soul unities, actions of the
Jewish ancestry, and Charlotte Albrecht Kohlberg, a protestant
body are actions of the self. Digestion of food is certainly an
and a skilled amateur chemist. When the couple divorced in
action, as is jumping when startled or yawning when tired.
1932 after 11 years of marriage, each of the children was
Aquinas calls these acts of a human being (actus humanus) and required by a court order to choose which parent he or she
distinguishes them from human acts (actus humanis) would live with. The two younger children chose their father
and the older ones chose their mother.
Human acts are rational acts and are more closely associated
with character than are acts of human beings, because the Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, a
former actions come from the whole person. comprehensive stage theory of moral development based on
Jean Piaget’s theory of moral judgment for children (1932) and
developed by Lawrence Kohlberg in 1958. Cognitive in nature,
Kohlberg’s theory focuses on the thinking process that occurs
C. Intention and Responsibility
when one decides whether a behaviour is right or wrong. Thus,
Two important aspects of the revelatory nature of action are the theoretical emphasis is on how one decides to respond to
responsibility and intention. Human beings own their actions a moral dilemma, not what one decides or what one actually
and the consequences of them. This even applies to actions does (Sanders, n.d.). Piaget described a two-stage process of
that are accidental rather than willed and chosen. The will is moral development (Scott, & Cogburn, 2020). Kohlberg
the rational power of human beings to act. It is the ability to extended Piaget's theory, proposing that moral development
choose what is good (or what one thinks is good) directed by is a continual process that occurs throughout the lifespan. His
reason. theory outlines six stages of moral development within three
different levels.

Responsibility and intention are rooted in the will, which is the

source of the self- possession and self-governance of human The Heinz Dilemma
beings. Self-possession is different from possession of an
Kohlberg based his theory on a series of moral dilemmas
object.
presented to his study subjects. Participants were also
nterviewed to determine the reasoning behind their
judgments of each scenario (American Psychological Stage 3: Good Boy/Nice Girl orientation
Association, 2018).
Behaviour is determined by social approval. The individual
One example was "Heinz Steals the Drug." In this scenario, a wants to maintain or win the affection and approval of others
woman has cancer and her doctors believe only one drug by being a “good person.”
might save her. This drug had been discovered by a local
Stage 4: Law and order orientation
pharmacist and he was able to make it for $200 per dose and
sell it for $2,000 per dose. The woman's husband, Heinz, could Social rules and laws determine behaviour. The individual now
only raise $1,000 to buy the drug. He tried to negotiate with takes into consideration a larger perspective, that of societal
the pharmacist for a lower price or to be extended credit to laws. Moral decision making becomes more than
pay for it over time. But the pharmacist refused to sell it for consideration of close ties to others. The individual believes
any less or to accept partial payments. Rebuffed, Heinz instead that rules and laws maintain social order that is worth
broke into the pharmacy and stole the drug to save his wife. preserving.
Kohlberg asked, "Should the husband have done that?"
Kohlberg was not interested so much in the answer to whether
Heinz was wrong or right but in the reasoning for each
Level 3: Postconventional or principled level
participant's decision. He then classified their reasoning into
the stages of his theory of moral development At the postconventional level, the individual moves beyond the
perspective of his or her own society. Morality is defined in
terms of abstract principles and values that apply to all
Theoretical Framework situations and societies. The individual attempts to take the
perspective of all individuals.
The framework of Kohlberg’s theory consists of six stages
arranged sequentially in successive tiers of complexity. He
organized his six stages into three general levels of moral
Stage 5: Social contract orientation
development.
Individual rights determine behaviour. The individual views
laws and rules as flexible tools for improving human purposes.
Level 1: Preconventional level That is, given the right situation, there are exceptions to rules.
When laws are not consistent with individual rights and the
At the preconventional level, morality is externally controlled. interests of the majority, they do not bring about good for
Rules imposed by authority figures are conformed to in order people and alternatives should be considered.
to avoid punishment or receive rewards. This perspective
involves the idea that what is right is what one can get away Stage 6: Universal ethical principle orientation
with or what is personally satisfying. Level 1 has two stages.
According to Kohlberg, this is the highest stage of functioning.
Stage 1: Punishment/obedience orientation However, he claimed that some individuals will never reach
this level. At this stage, the appropriate action is determined
Behaviour is determined by consequences. The by one’s self-chosen ethical principles of conscience. These
individual will obey in order to avoid punishment. principles are abstract and universal in application. This type of
reasoning involves taking the perspective of every person or
Stage 2: Instrumental purpose orientation
group that could potentially be affected by the decision.
Behaviour is determined again by consequences. The
individual focuses on receiving rewards or satisfying personal
needs. Kohlberg’s theory was highly influential, especially in
psychology and education. No other account had provided
such a detailed explanation of children’s moral development.
Level 2: Conventional level Moreover, during a time when most psychologists were
behaviorists, Kohlberg’s work broke new ground by
At the conventional level, conformity to social rules remains
concentrating on cognitive phenomena. His theory also
important to the individual. However, the emphasis shifts from
received much criticism, however, most notably from the
self-interest to relationships with other people and social
American psychologist Carol Gilligan, who argued that it
systems. The individual strives to support rules that are set
ignored the distinct patterns of moral development exhibited
forth by others such as parents, peers, and the government in
by girls (Doorey, 2020).
order to win their approval or to maintain social order.