Question

Consider the following moral dilemma:

You are an eyewitness to a crime. A man has robbed a bank, but instead of keeping the money for himself, he donates it to a poor orphanage that can now afford to feed, clothe, and care for its children. You know who committed the crime. If you go the authorities with the information, there is a good chance the money will be returned to the bank, leaving a lot of kids in need.

What would a child in each of the moral stages do and why?

Stage 1______

Decision reasoning

Stage 2 ______

Decision reasoning

Answer 1

In stage 1, a child is considered unquestioningly obedient which means that she/he would attempt to stay out of trouble and simply do a task assigned to them. This means that not reporting the case in order to risk anything towards them would be a possible choice made by a child in this stage. On the other hand, for a child in the second stage, the child may now consider what is in it for her/him. This means that personal benefit would now be taken into account by the child before making a choice in case of a moral dilemma. The child, if seeking for recognition or reward by the police for bringing such a thing to the notice of authorities (being the face of courage of sorts) may now considering reporting the case. The objective for the same may not be to teach the man (robber) a lesson or to cause harm to the children involved, but simply to seek for own benefits in the process.