Moral competence

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Icon tools.svg

This article was entered on the quality assurance page of the wiki psychology project . This is done to improve the quality of the articles on the subject of psychology. Articles are improved or suggested for deletion if they do not meet the criteria of Wikipedia. Help with the improvement and take part in the discussion in the Psychology project .

Moral competence or moral competence is, according to Georg Lind, the ability to solve moral problems and conflicts on the basis of moral principles through thinking and discussing, instead of through violence, deception or submission to the leadership of others. Lind developed this concept of moral competence in his two main works "Morality is teachable" and "Is morality teachable?" As well as in numerous essays.

Moral competence is expressed in the behavior of people, especially when a decision has to be made between different options, all of which are morally undesirable. We then speak of a moral dilemma situation. Moral competence can be made visible with the help of the Moral Competence Test (MKT) developed by Lind in the 1970s and thus measured objectively and validly. The MKT, formerly known as the Moral Judgment Test (MUT), has now been translated into 39 languages ​​and most of it has also been validated.

According to Lind, moral competence of people can be promoted in a similar way to other human abilities, namely by offering them opportunities for their application and thus development. This can be done in a targeted manner with the “Constance Method of Dilemma Discussion” (KMDD) that he designed. The KMDD was developed primarily for use in educational institutions (school from the 3rd grade, universities, vocational training centers, prisons, military academies, etc.). It does not require changes to the curriculum. According to Lind, one or two sessions of 90 minutes each show clear effects. However, the teacher must be thoroughly instructed in the method. In recent years, the discussion theater has established itself as another public format that is intended to address people outside of educational institutions.

Lind advocates the thesis that moral competence is a "key qualification" for living together in a democracy. If people cannot resolve conflicts and problems by themselves through thought and discussion, they are dependent on the use of violence and deceit or have to “use a higher power”. Education, democracy and morality are therefore closely linked.

“Society does not yet seem to understand how important the moral-democratic competence of all citizens is for peaceful coexistence in a democracy, and that therefore all people must be given the opportunity to develop their moral-democratic competence through practice and instruction. "

Concept history

The concept of moral competence is still relatively new in psychological research and pedagogical application, with Socrates already speaking of the ability to do good and Darwin, for example, speaking of moral ability.

Lind's concept of moral competence is based, among other things, on the scientific preparatory work from the cognitive developmental psychology of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg . The latter defines moral judgment as “the ability to make decisions and judgments that are moral, that is, based on internal principles and act in accordance with these judgments”. Lind builds on Kohlberg's definition, but criticizes the lack of reference to the difficult task of coping with dilemma situations and the missing aspect of communicative action, as discussed by Jürgen Habermas .

The conceptual development of Kohlberg's definition is carried out by Lind taking into account the work of Habermas , Apel and Keasey. Moral competence, however, is only one of two aspects of people's moral behavior. According to Lind's “two-aspect theory of morality”, which he traces back to Socrates and Piaget , moral behavior is characterized by the two aspects of moral competence and moral orientations .

Moral Competence Test (MKT)

In the “Moral Competence Test” (MCT), the test subjects are presented with two stories in which the protagonist has to make a difficult decision. The subjects are asked whether the protagonists' decision was right or wrong. In addition, they are asked to rate six pro and six contra arguments on a scale from −4 to +4 according to their acceptability. In their structure and the quality of their content, the arguments correspond to the six moral orientations that Lawrence Kohlberg established in his step model of morality.

"The test measures the extent to which the respondents orientate themselves to the moral quality of the arguments instead of their conformity to opinion."

Constance Method of Dilemma Discussion (KMDD)

The Constance Method of Dilemma Discussion (KMDD) serves to promote moral competence. The method originally goes back to Blatt and Kohlberg (1975). Kohlberg gave it up because it was not accepted by teachers. As with Blatt and Kohlberg, at Linds KMDD the participants are confronted with a dilemma story. But otherwise Lind has revised the method significantly:
(a) He has given up the so-called "plus-1" convention, according to which the teacher should give the students moral arguments adapted to their level of development and instead let the participants discuss each other.
(b) He gives the participants more time and lets them discuss only one dilemma story instead of several.
(c) And he lets the participants moderate themselves by calling on each other.
A KMDD session lasts approximately 90 minutes.

Lind has also developed advanced training for teachers in the KMDD.

The method has already been used successfully in educational and training institutions, in prisons or old people's homes at home and abroad, in secondary schools, in the penal system, in social work and in the context of some teaching subjects.

Discussion theater

The discussion theater is an alternative format to the KMDD. It is intended to address a broader public outside of schools, universities or other educational and social institutions. It offers a low-threshold entry into the promotion of moral competence. Participation does not require any special training or language skills.

As with the KMDD, the aim of the discussion theater is to practice the ability to solve problems and conflicts on the basis of moral principles through weighing and discussion. As with a KMDD, the discussion theater begins with a dilemma story. The structure is structured in nine acts. There is no script, no classic roles of viewers and actors, only participants. Lind defines the discussion theater as inclusive, democratic and without instruction.

In principle, the discussion theater can also be practiced wherever the KMDD has previously been held.

literature

  • Habermas, J. (1983). Moral awareness and communicative action. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
  • Hemmerling, K. (2014). Morality Behind Bars: An Intervention Study on Fostering Moral Competence of Prisoners as a New Approach to Social Rehabilitation. Peter Lang: Berlin.
  • Hemmerling, K., Scharlipp, M. & Lind, G. (2009). “The Constance method of the dilemma discussion for educational work with risk groups.” In: Klaus Mayer, Huldreich Schildknecht (Ed.) Dissociality, Delinquency, Criminality: A Handbook for Interdisciplinary Work ( pp. 303-311). Zurich: Schulthess.
  • Hemmerling, K. (2014). Morality Behind Bars: An Intervention Study on Fostering Moral Competence of Prisoners as a New Approach to Social Rehabilitation. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
  • Keasey, CB (1974). The influence of opinion-agreement and qualitative supportive reasoning in the evaluation of moral judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30 , 477-482.
  • Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development. Vol. 2: Essays on moral development . San Francisco: Harper & Row.
  • Lind, G. (1978). How do you measure moral judgment? Problems and alternative ways of measuring a complex construct. In G. Portele, ed., Socialization and Moral, pp. 171-201. Weinheim: Beltz.
  • Lind, G. (2002). Is morality teachable? Results of modern moral-psychological research . Berlin: Logos-Verlag.
  • Lind, G. (2019). Morality can be taught! New: discussion theater . Berlin: Logos, 4th edition.
  • Lind, G. (2019). How to Teach Moral Competence. New: Dilemma Discussion . Berlin: Logos, 2nd edition.
  • Nowak, E. (2016). "What Is Moral Competence and Why Promote It?" Ethics in Progress (ISSN 2084-9257). Vol. 7 (2016). No. 1, Art. # 21, pp. 322-333. doi: 10.14746 / eip.2016.1.18.
  • Nowak, E., Schrader, D. & Zizek, B., eds. (2013). Educating competencies for democracy . (Festschrift for Georg Lind.) New York: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment in the child . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
  • Schirrmacher, T. (2012). “On the Constance Method of Dilemma Discussion (KMDD).” In: Thomas Schirrmacher and Edwin R. Micewski (eds.) Ethics in the context of individual responsibility and military leadership. Institute for Religion and Peace: Vienna, pp. 93–125. Link: https://www.afet.de/download/2012/Schirrmacher_KMDD.pdf
  • Stangl, W. (2020). Keyword: 'moral competence'. Online encyclopedia for psychology and education. WWW: https://lexikon.stangl.eu/24245/moralkompetenz/ (2020-01-23).
  • Prehn, K. (2013). "Moral judgment competence: A re-evaluation of the dual-aspect theory based on recent neuroscientific research." In: E. Nowak, D. Schrader & B. Zizek (eds.) Educating competencies for democracy , pp. 9-22 Frankfurt: Peter Lang Verlag.
  • Vojta, A. (2010). “Morality as competence. Review by Georg Lind, morality is teachable. Handbook on the theory and practice of moral and democratic education “ Ethics in Progress Quarterly 1 (1), http://ethicsinprogress.org/?p=158

Web links

supporting documents

  1. ^ Lind, G. (2019): Morality is teachable . Berlin: Logos, 4th edition. English language version: Lind, G. (2019). How to Teach Moral Competence. Berlin: Logos, 2nd edition.
  2. ↑ Lind, G. (2002): Can morals be taught? Results of modern moral-psychological research . Berlin: Logos-Verlag.
  3. ↑ Schirrmacher, T. (2012): “On the Konstanzer method of the dilemma discussion (KMDD).” In: Thomas Schirrmacher and Edwin R. Micewski (Ed.) Ethics in the context of individual responsibility and military leadership. Institute for Religion and Peace: Vienna, pp. 93–125. Link: https://www.afet.de/download/2012/Schirrmacher_KMDD.pdf
  4. ↑ See Lind, G. (1978).
  5. ↑ Nowak, E. (2016). "What Is Moral Competence and Why Promote It?" Ethics in Progress (ISSN 2084-9257). Vol. 7 (2016). No. 1, Art. # 21, pp. 322-333. doi: 10.14746 / eip.2016.1.18.
  6. ↑ See http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/mut/MJT-d-kurz.htm
  7. ↑ http://www.uni-konstanz.de/ag-moral/moral/dildisk-d.htm
  8. ↑ See Lind, G. (2002).
  9. ↑ Lind, G. (2019). Morality can be taught, p. 25.
  10. ↑ Lind, G. (2019). Morality can be taught, p. 24.
  11. ^ Piaget, J. (1965).
  12. ↑ See Kohlberg, L. (1984).
  13. ↑ Lind; G. (2019). Morality is teachable, p. 63.
  14. ↑ See Habermas, J. (1983).
  15. ^ Piaget, J. (1976). The affective unconscious and the cognitive unconscious. In: B. Inhelder & HH Chipman, eds., Piaget and his school, pp. 63-71. New York: Springer.
  16. ↑ Stangl, W. (2020). Keyword: 'moral competence'. Online encyclopedia for psychology and education. WWW: https://lexikon.stangl.eu/24245/moralkompetenz/ (2020-01-23).
  17. ↑ See https://www.afet.de/download/2012/Schirrmacher_KMDD.pdf
  18. ↑ See Lind, G. (2019)
  19. ↑ See Hemmerling, K., Scharlipp, M. & Lind, G. (2009). “The Constance method of the dilemma discussion for educational work with risk groups.” In: Klaus Mayer, Huldreich Schildknecht (Ed.) Dissociality, Delinquency, Criminality: A Handbook for Interdisciplinary Work ( pp. 303-311). Zurich: Schulthess. And: Hemmerling, K. (2014). Morality Behind Bars: An Intervention Study on Fostering Moral Competence of Prisoners as a New Approach to Social Rehabilitation. Peter Lang: Berlin.
  20. ↑ See Lind (2019).