Alligator river story free essay sample

Morality of good and bad moral of people Ivan wanted to stay out of the situation because he did not want to get involved with a girlfriend and boyfriend drama. Gregory felt portrayed because his girlfriend Abigail slept with another mans name slug for a favor. Slug felt sorry for Abigail so he decided to get revenge for her by beating up Gregory because he left Abigail. Abigail committed an immoral act by sleeping with Sinbad; however, she did whatever it took to get across the river to see her boyfriend Gregory, even though it was teeming with alligators. Sinbad was an immoral person who wanted to sleep with Abigail because he wanted to receive a sexual payment from Abigail. A definition of moral action are base on ideals that are right or wrong, For instance, a good moral action is a person who does not have sex with others outside of their marriage or being honest on your income taxes. We will write a custom essay sample on Alligator river story or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Helping a homeless person by giving them shelter, food, water and clean clothes. Examples of bad morals would be stealing from a store and running from the police or a person or abusing animals such as not feeding dogs for days, or keep the dog on a very short leash where he is not able to get food or water for days at a time. People and animals in the world should be treated with respect and kindness, no matter if you are a animal or a hum being. it’s easy for people to commit bad morals but it’s hard for them to do good morals. 2_ Gregory 4__ Abigail 3__ Slug 5__ Sinbad 1_ Ivan Explanation of theory Kohlbergs theory was researched and interviewed using groups of boys of 10 through 16 years old; he presented them with a series of hypothetical moral dilemma stories. These stories presented a conflict between the two moral values. Kohlberg examined and followed the participants between three and four year spans within 20 years (Berk, 2010). Kohlbergs stages on moral development proved gradual and slow pace. Stage 1 and 2 diminish early adolescence, while stage 3 increases the mid-adolescence, and then it is rejected. While stage 4 rises over teenagers, until early adulthood, only a few people progress past the 4th stage. Kohlberg explains that only a few individuals would reach the 5th and 6th stages. Though, the individual needs to demonstrate morality and maturity; only few individuals measure up (Gibbs, 2010). Kohlbergs theory consists of cognitive developmental approach of morality, which has been faced with many major challenges. This radical conflict comes from researches, which inconsistency refers to a wide range of moral reasoning. Kohlberg stages for a series of inadequate morality in a person’s everyday life (Krebs Denton, 2005). Kohlberg’s moral reasoning gradually developed into three levels, which contains two different stages. The preconvention level is externally controlled by rewards such as punishments and authority figures. While the conventional level shows consistency among laws, rules and positive human relationships in the community. The post conventional level shows defined as total principles of Justice (Berk, 2010). Gilligan’s theory has a different prospective on Kohlberg’s theory. Gilligan believes that women’s morality give emphasis to the ethic of care, which Kohlberg’s system diminishes. Gilligan is apprehensive for others but for the moral judgment focuses on the impersonal rights. For instance, Gilligan argues how Kohlberg’s advances are misjudged to the moral maturity of females and how he does not support her theory (Turiel, 2006; Walker, 2006). The hypothetical dilemmas do not support everyday moral problems. Adolescents and adult females calculate the same stages as the male but their stages are often higher. Nevertheless, Gilligan makes a more prevailing point; females attended emphasis on care whereas males focus on justice (Berk, 2010). The point of this article is to show the two types of moral logic, Kohlberg’s justice and Gillian’s care which the issues seem to be unresolved. Gilligan does accept the ideal of development morality. Kohlberg’s has some theoretical issues on Gillian care. When comparing Kohlberg’s and Gilligan’s statement there seem to be some conflicts of moral and morality. For years the community has come to accept the two types of moral reasoning, specifically, Kohlberg’s justice and Gillian’s care (Reed, 1997). Gilligan’s theory of moral development supports the existence of moral philosophy. Kohlberg views have been prevailing to the conception of morality. These commitments were shared in order to provide their views against each other theories. However, Gillian’s analysis of Kohlberg is not for personal concern but it is important that he changes his ways of being distance toward females if he wants to gain their respect (Nagel, 1986). Analysis of moral development This interview was conducted on using good and bad morals. The teenager has to use their ideals of good and bad morals. This alligator river story was moral and sexiest toward young women. It was base on the women trying to find a way to see her boyfriend. Instead of the young man making a way to see his girlfriend, she did whatever it took in order for her to see him. In Kohlberg theory he was bias and sexist toward women. He mostly explains how women are virtually unchallenged and imbalance. While Gilligan thoughts on the male prospective was bias and sexist also. However, Gilligan track the cognitive development of models, but in her argument of Kohlberg concerning females was morality supported by the support of their moral thoughts and behavior. Kohlberg and Gilligan are both psychologists with different morals and values of the human race. Psychologists Kohlberg and Gilligan conducted their research studies on young men and women. Kohlberg conducted his research on young men and Gilligan conducted her research on young women. Kohlberg studied several young males on how they interact with other males while growing up to become young men. Kohlberg and Gillian had different ideas on young girls and young men. Gilligan and Kohlberg controversy shows the significance gender variety within the moral theory. Gilligan and Kohlberg theories can go on and on forever, they never come to an agreement but they can compromise in order to give each other a bit of happiness. Conclusion Kohlberg’s recommends that the moral maturity should be found in third and fourth stages. There seem to be a small amount of people who move to the post conventional level. The influences of factors on moral judgments suggest that Kohlberg moral stages should be viewed loosely without overlapping.  Gilligan seem to understand but do not underestimate Kohlberg theory of females. Children and teenagers display a more insubstantial reasoning about conflicts and their personal choice within the obligations of the community.