I believe that the attached paper would be of interest to this group:
Distentangling Related Domains of Moral, Cognitive and Ego Development
I found the passage below to be particularly illuminating, so I wanted to share it here as well:
Although Kohlberg (1986) saw it as more
speculative and outside of his main concern
of articulating the course of moral
development, he collaborated with John
Snarey and Gil Noam to articulate a distinct
theoretical expression of the structural
relation of moral development with
other distinct strands of development. In
particular, Snarey, Kohlberg, and Noam
(1983) postulated three separate structural
subdomains within a unified ego that
stand in cognitive relation to each other.
The three subdomains are epistemological
(e.g., Piaget, 1972), ethical (e.g.,
Kohlberg, 1986), and metaphysical (e.g.,
Fowler, 1981). Each is considered a subdomain
of “reasoning” in a broad meaning-
making sense that “reunites what a
person thinks, feels and does” (p. 309). In
turn, each implies a particular reference
point: “the natural environment,” “the
social environment,” and “the ultimate
environment.” (page 3)
Looking forward to continuing the conversation...
New York, NY
The mention of Kohlberg immediately raises the question about how whether Haidt's social intuitionist approach really does eclipse Kohlberg's work...! ;-)
Funnily enough I'm just starting to read that large book by Alverno College's Marcia Mentkowski, titled 'Learning that Lasts'.
I suspect if you want to disentangle subdomains of development, you need to have read about the major longitudinal studies of adult development.
They are, er..., off the top of my head (I'm not an expert in this):
- William Perry
- Alverno college/Mentkowksi
- Marcia Baxter Magolda
- Kegan (though I'm not sure he's written up the people he's following; or maybe I imagined it all)
- King and Kitchener
- The 'Women's Way's of Knowing' crowd might have done longitudinal research too (even if they try to avoid anything that looks too hierarchical/developmental).
- Come to think of it, there must be a ton of Elliot Jaques-related tracking of individuals - though often stuck inside corporate talent management systems...
There have been one or two other longitudinal studies looking at groups of women, I think. (Josselson, Labouvie-Vief?)
By the way, Snarey did that 1985 global survey of whether Kohlberg's model is valid. He did a second one a year or two back - I think I just found it on Google Scholar.
The anti-WEIRD authors probably ought to have responded to it - but didn't even seem to notice it.
Somehow we need to work out how all the 'lines of development' relate - but also how it all relates to the differing systems - Elephant and Rider - that Haidt talks about, presumably the same as Kahnman's thinking fast and slow.
Is anyone discussing such dual-system theories and relating them to adult development?