Debating Human Morality
The Association for Moral Education Conference Comes
to HGSE
Posted: November 17, 2005
Former
HGSE Professor Lawrence Kohlberg in 1975 (photo from HGSE archives) "Such
a wonderful sense of collaboration" is how Mary Casey, lecturer
of education at Harvard Graduate School of Education, describes the atmosphere
at the 31st annual conference of the Association for Moral Education (AME).
The event, which took place November 3, 4, and 5 at HGSE and the Sheraton
Commander Hotel on Garden Street in Cambridge, brought the AME conference
together, for the first time, with the annual meeting sponsored by Harvard
Law School (HLS) and Facing History and Ourselves, a nonprofit organization
that helps increase student and teacher awareness of racism, prejudice,
and anti-Semitism by examining the historic conditions that led to examples
of collective violence such as the Holocaust.
"The whole weekend is very interdisciplinary," says Casey,
who cochaired the event with psychology professors Sharon Lamb of Saint
Michael's College in Colchester, Vermont, and Kaye Cook of Gordon
College in Wenham, Massachusetts. "The AME came into being to support
and further the work of Lawrence Kohlberg, who was such a huge influence
on the fields of education and psychology and who inspired so many of
the people at this conference. The Kohlberg Memorial Lecture, which is
hosted every year by the AME, was delivered by [HGSE and HLS faculty member]
Martha Minow, whose work at the Law School is involved with Facing History
and also with students from HGSE."
Indeed, the keynote address by Minow, the Bloomberg Professor of Law
at HLS, continued the collaboration, which provided a fitting example
of the kind of community-building promoted by Kohlberg, a professor at
HGSE in the 1970s and '80s who has influenced several generations
of scholars with his theory that children are inherently moral agents.
Kohlberg's stages of moral development are today taught in nearly
every Psych 101 course and analyzed exhaustively by moral-education students
around the world. Beginning with toddlers realizing their actions have
consequences, Kohlberg's six stages progress through the "what's
in it for me" approach of early childhood to the ideals of social
justice achieved--it is hoped--in young adulthood and beyond.
In her introduction to Minow, Casey pointed out that in helping to smuggle
Jews out of Europe during World War II, Kohlberg himself was one of the
"limited number" of people--along with such legendary
figures as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King--who reach the final
plateau, developing and acting on higher principles rather than merely
conforming to society's norms.
Minow explored Kohlberg's philosophy in light of the rule of law
and what it should mean to civics education. She began with the "gold
standard" of the Nuremberg Trial and touched on the genocides in
Bosnia, Rwanda, East Timor, and Sierra Leone to arrive at the recent trial
of Pfc. Lynndie England, the Abu Ghraib guard who posed for photos while
humiliating Iraqi prisoners, igniting an international human rights scandal.
The dilemma: The rule of law says individuals must disobey orders that
they know are illegal. But how can they be certain what's illegal,
particularly when it's a question that scholars, the military, and
White House lawyers have been grappling with for years? And who's
at fault, the officer who issued the orders or the private who carries
them out? Finally--and perhaps most importantly to the audience of
moral educators--what would it take for someone like Pfc. England
to do the right thing?
"How can the capacity to think--and,
crucially, act--for oneself be taught?"
–Faculty Member Martha Minow, giving the Kohlberg Memorial Lecture
"She would have to think for herself," Minow said in answer
to her own question. This perfectly logical response, of course, brought
a whole new set of queries, from "How can the military run efficiently
without the unquestioning acquiescence to authority?" to "How
can the capacity to think--and, crucially, act--for oneself
be taught?"
Minow likened the military, in this situation, to "what students
face in schools--with friends, with teachers, with gangs. It's
a set of questions you bring to the rest of your life," she said,
concluding, to a standing ovation, that thinking for oneself is even less
likely to be taught in this country in the aftermath of the Columbine
shootings and 9/11.
Minow's questions continued to be debated the next day in a lunchtime
discussion led by Robert Selman, Larsen Professor of Education and Human
Development at HGSE and a professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School,
who studied under Kohlberg and is known among students and colleagues
as a generous mentor. Centered on moral dilemmas regarding racism and
how to both study and teach sensitivity to the issue, the conversation--while
lively and intellectually challenging--seemed, like many debates
on morality, only to result in even more possible responses to some of
the complexities Minow raised.
The discussion came full circle with Jerome Kagan's special plenary
address on human morality. Kagan, Starch Research Professor of Psychology
who is best known for his research that showed temperament--in particular,
the "high-reactive" or "low-reactive" states exhibited
by infants as young as 16 weeks--remains a force throughout one's
life.
Kagan began his talk by noting that of the four or five distinguishing
features of humans, as distinct from apes, "the fifth--a sense
of right and wrong, a conception of self as virtuous and nonvirtuous,"
is not only the most important, but also, "probably the most adaptive
[and indeed] the competing motive for evolutionary fitness." Or
at least it was, when Homo sapiens were living on the savannah, in hunter-gatherer
groups of 40 or 50 mostly genetically related individuals. "That
social ecology required cooperation, loyalty, suppression of self-aggrandizement,
and absolute suppression of narcissism," he said. But today, "the
capacity to be selfish, narcissistic, and individualistic" is more
important in industrialized nations--which accounts, he postulated,
for much of the tension between the Islamic world and the West.
Both stances, Kagan maintained, are equally friendly to the human genome,
but history has forced on us a very unnatural ethical posture. "And,"
he concluded, "it's exacting a price."