Gibbs John C
Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, 1885 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Psychol Rev. 2006 Jul;113(3):666-71. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.3.666.
Krebs and Denton (2005) proposed that Kohlberg's cognitive developmental approach to morality be replaced by a pragmatic approach more relevant to everyday social behavior and the cooperative moral orders of society. Although the Krebs and Denton article raises some legitimate questions, their proposal is at best premature and provokes some serious concerns. Their starting point, that Kohlberg's model of morality is inadequate, is an evaluation shared by many neo-Kohlbergians. Before the cognitive developmental approach is replaced, however, important contributions (e.g., Rest's schema interpretation of the stages) toward refining or improving the approach must be adequately considered. Evidence suggests that Krebs and Denton may have underestimated relations between moral judgment stages and social behavior, including sudden behavior in emergency situations.
克雷布斯和丹顿(2005年)提议,用一种与日常社会行为及社会合作道德秩序更相关的实用方法来取代科尔伯格的道德认知发展方法。尽管克雷布斯和丹顿的文章提出了一些合理的问题,但他们的提议充其量只是为时过早,还引发了一些严重的担忧。他们的出发点,即科尔伯格的道德模式不充分,这是许多新科尔伯格派人士都认同的一种评价。然而,在取代认知发展方法之前,必须充分考虑对完善或改进该方法的重要贡献(例如,里斯特对各阶段的图式解释)。有证据表明,克雷布斯和丹顿可能低估了道德判断阶段与社会行为之间的关系,包括紧急情况下的突发行为。