Levels of Moral Reasoning
Level 1 (Pre-Conventional)
1. Obedience and punishment orientation - motiving question: How can I avoid punishment? Reasoner concludes that it is
wrong if it elicits punishment. EXAMPLE: __________________________________________________________________
2. Self-interest orientation - motiving question: What's in it for me? Reasoner concludes that it is right if I receive a reward.
EXAMPLE: ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Level 2 (Conventional)
3. Interpersonal accord and conformity to social norms - motiving question: What is expected of me? Reasoner concludes that
it is right if it improves relationships and pleases others. EXAMPLE: ______________________________________________
4. Authority and social-order maintaining orientation - motiving question: What does authority and what do the laws say is
right and wrong? Reasoner concludes that it is right if the law says so and if the powerful (those I see as authorities say so. It
is wrong if it breaks the law or if it is rejected by powerful authorities. EXAMPLE: ___________________________________
Level 3 (Post-Conventional)
5. Social contract orientation (Respecting human rights, care and concern for others, and the common good) – motiving
question: What provides for people’s needs? Reasoner concludes that it is wrong if it violates people’s needs. It is right if it
provides for people’s needs. EXAMPLE: _____________________________________________________________________
6. Universal ethical principles (Principled conscience based on Consistent Life Ethic, respect and protect all life – motiving
question: What does each life form and all life need in order to survive and thrive? Reasoner concludes that it is right if it
provides conditions for that human/creature to survive and thrive. It is right if it contributes to each person recognizing
dignity and each creation being given respect. It is wrong if it strips people of the ability to recognize their worth and if it is
disrespectful to creation. EXAMPLE: ________________________________________________________________________
Moral Reasoning; pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional
Humans typically make moral/ ethical decisions based on certain standard reasons. The earlier levels of moral reasoning are called preconventional. These levels of moral reasoning are appropriate for young people. In childhood, it is normal to make decisions based on
whether or not there will be negative consequences such as punishment. And the young child believes that certain things are wrong because
they elicit punishment. Adults who reason this way cannot reach higher development and have relationship problems throughout life.
In early adolescence, it is common for people to make decisions based on the reward. They believe that what is correct or right is that
which is rewarded. There is the tendency to reason based on whether the decision will lead to a good or desired outcome for the individual
(self-focused). Adults who reason this way remain selfish and cannot reach maturity.
A higher stage of moral reasoning is called conventional. Conventional means that which is widely accepted and practiced. A person who
is at this level of reasoning conforms to established practice or accepted standards. A person in this stage believes that correct action is
doing what others expect or what pleases others and or doing what the authorities (courts, police, teachers, professionals, politicians,
doctors) say is right. At this stage of moral reasoning the reasoner is interested in harmony, in order, and in being a good law abiding citizen.
This is the level of reasoning that many adults remain in for the rest of their lives.
The highest level of moral reasoning is post-conventional. This stage requires the reasoner to think for himself /herself. The reasoner
recognizes that authorities are not always correct and that sometimes those authorities are working to maintain structures of sin or are
actively creating structures of sin. The reasoner determines that correct action is that which serves people’s needs and benefits the common
good. The highest level of reasoning is where the reasoner determines that all life is sacred (including animal life and natural environment)
and thus life must be provided the conditions to survive and thrive. The reasoner makes decisions based on respecting and protecting
human life in all circumstances (Consistent Life Ethic). If respecting and protecting life requires breaking the law, then the law must be
broken.
Human Development, Vocation and Levels of Moral Reasoning
Directions; highlight the important parts
Post Conventional Reasoners
In order for humans to develop to their fullest, they must have an informed conscience and an ability to reason at a post
conventional level (needs). People who are post conventional thinkers and reasoners are able to think more freely beyond
dominant cultural values, beyond social expectations, beyond the law and order understanding. Post-conventional reasoners are
self-actualized and often reach transcendence because they make decisions based on love/ respect for all. Often post
conventional reasoners are deeply connected to their vocation and they know their purpose is to fulfill God’s will (creating what
is good for everyone). God’s grace is what gives these people the motivation and courage to reason and act based on what they
and other people need. Those who have progressed beyond conventional moral reasoning are free, compassionate, and wise
individuals.
Vocation and Post Conventional Reasoning
Those people who see their life as a vocation, a call from God to love others are more likely to develop post conventional
reasoning. This is because they have chosen to live their life from a power with perspective. They are in the habit of reflecting
and praying in order to receive grace and guidance from God. They inform their conscience through the Circle of Faith in
Action. They try to live by the beatitudes and the Catholic Social Teachings. They know and consider Church teachings on
ethical issues. They have the support of a faith community and the wisdom of others to help them make tough moral choices.
They know, like their savior Jesus, that they may be persecuted for righteousness sake.
Importance of Vocations and Post Conventional Reasoning
In order for society to improve and evolve as God intends, more people must see their life as a vocation and also be taught
the importance of post conventional reasoning and HOW to reason at post conventional levels. All the major social/ global
challenges humankind faces are moral challenges. Poverty, global climate change due to consumerism, violence and war, and
religious conflict are just some of the moral problems we face. We have the technology, the expertise, the manpower, the
resources to make life fair and of a decent quality for each and every person. The problem is we do not currently have the
critical numbers of people discerning their vocation in order to help them reason at higher moral levels. Following God’s call
and putting love at the centre of one’s life is the only way to overcome the structures of sin that cause violence, family
breakdown, sexual exploitation, poverty, excessive resource exploitation, consumerism, war, and religious fundamentalism.
Promoting Vocations and Post Conventional Reasoning
In order for humans to reach our fullest potential together, we must put more effort into developing people who reason more
selflessly. Such people make fewer selfish decisions while making more generous and compassionate decisions. As a society,
we need to foster spiritual and moral education that trains people HOW to reason at higher levels. Part of this spiritual
education and training requires providing more opportunities for young people to discern their vocation while acting on postconventional thinking. Too often schools stifle spiritual seeking and push students into conventional action.
Volunteering is one of those opportunities that can prompt young people into discerning their call and living out post
conventional thinking and action. Mission trips also prompt us to follow God’s call through post conventional thinking and
action. Social justice opportunities also require post-conventional reasoning and action as most social justice initiatives
challenge social norms. Finally learning about spiritual leaders, especially those who have a religious life vocation, gives
students role models and inspires students to follow their example.
Case study: Sister Helen Prejean
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/rachel-maddow/52247588#53976999
Sister Helen Prejean, C.S.J., is a Roman Catholic religious sister, a member of the Congregation of St. Joseph, who has
become a leading American advocate for the abolition of the death penalty. She counsels death row inmates and
provides spiritual direction before their death. She got involved in this work when she visited convicted murderer
Elmo Sonnier in prison and agreed to be his spiritual adviser in the months leading up to his execution. The
experience gave Prejean greater insight into the process involved in executions, and she began speaking out against
capital punishment. At the same time, she also founded Survive, an organization devoted to counseling the families of
victims of violence. Prejean has since ministered to many other inmates on death row and witnessed several more
executions. She served as National Chairperson of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty from 1993 to
1995.
1. Describe the structure of sin (death penalty). How does her work attempt to break structures of sin?
2. How does Sr. Helen’s work demonstrate post-conventional moral reasoning and action? How does Sr. Helen
prompt people to think in a post-conventional manner (Consistent Life Ethic issues)?
3. How do you think her religious life vocation motivates her to engage in prison ministry?