| Subject: Re: Assignment #4 |
Author:
Savannah Simpson
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 19:04:57 06/30/10 Wed
In reply to:
Dr. Magun-Jackson
's message, "Assignment #4" on 20:31:48 06/28/10 Mon
>Assignment 4 (Kohlberg vs Erikson): June 31
>This posting has several parts:
> 1) What do you like and dislike about Kohlberg's
>theory of moral development? What is it in this
>theory that speaks to you personally? In which stage
>of moral development would you place yourself? Why?
> 2) What do you like and dislike about Erikson's
>theory of self development? What is it in this theory
>that speaks to you personally? In which crisis to you
>find yourself? Why?
> 3) Of the two theories, which is most relevant to
>your career/ major/life? Why? How would you use
>these theories?
In Kohlberg's stages, I like the clear relationship between the stages and one's cognitive development. I do believe that being more cognitively competent is a factor in progressing to the next stage. It also makes sense to me that maturation is not an effect of each stage. Just because one is cognitively competent, doesn't mean they are mature. I dislike the cultural and gender differences concerning this theory of development. This theory would not apply to someone from an extremely different culture, which can make it hard to apply it a broader sense across a variety of different people. This theory speaks to me personally because I can relate every stage up until social contract to events and experiences in my own personal life. I believe I am in stage five, social contract. I think this because I value the law, and the majority of others in decision making. However, I do not think I am in this stage fully, as I do not think I have full formal operations as of yet. I do not know if I will ever make it to stage six, as many people rarely see this stage of Kohlberg's theory.
In Erikson's stage, I like the healthy ego development that follows after each core task is experienced. I think this is especially true when taking a look at Erikson's stages. Each stage is specific to a critical time in one's life and I believe that something positive for the development of the healthy ego comes out after experiencing each stage. I dislike that this is based on Frued's work. I do not agree with Frued's psychosexual stages. I believe that Frued's stages have mostly no value and should not be the basis for another theory of value. This theory relates to me personally because I an definitely see the two struggles that create a crisis in parts of my life concerning each stage. For example, in crisis five, I can remember wanting to fit in with my own peers. I am thankful I did not choose a bad path at that time in my life and found my own identity. I believe I am in crisis six, intimacy v isolation. I believe this because I am in young adulthood and just got engaged to the love of my life. I have found intimacy and have avoided isolation regarding relationships, and I want to continue to grow and be happy with my future husband.
I think that Erikson's theory is more relevant to my own personal life at this point. I have learned to love others and be in love, which is the virtue learned at this stage. Being engaged and in a serious relationship is a huge part of my life right now. I can definitely relate this part of my life to Erikson's theory in crisis six, rather than Kohlbergs.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 