I interviewed two girls of 9 years old and one boy of 14 years old. All of the three interviews, in my opinion and analysis, are in different levels and stages. I will write the questions first, then one by one I will write their answers and analysis at the end of each one. I used Kohlberg questions.
Kohlberg questions:
1. Should Heinz have stolen the drug?
2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife?
3. What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any difference?
4. Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman died?
First interviewer: Tatum, girl age 9. Level – Pre-conventional morality
1. He shouldn’t have, but then again he could have done it to save her life.
2. It would change a lot, he wouldn’t have broken in into the chemist and he would have his wife died.
3. It would make a difference, he would probably not broken into the …show more content…
No, because he just wanted the money, he didn’t know that she was dying.
Haven is at level 2, stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. She looks up to the value of family, trust, and compassion to one another. Haven understands Heinz point of view, and relates herself to the approval of others.
Third interview: Gabriel, boy age 14. Level 3 – Post-conventional morality
1.—He is making theories in his mind, he is thinking if he could have done differently, maybe he could have buy the ingredients and make it himself. But then when he realized that the chemist didn’t commit to listen to Heinz, he said -- yes, allow him to steal it, if the chemist doesn’t give mercy.
2.—He is putting himself as if he knows that one of his less favorite friend is dying, he would do it for him.—So he said that Heinz probably would have still done it.
3. It would make a difference, he wouldn’t risk his freedom for someone that he doesn’t know.
4. The chemist is not a murder, he is trying to make a living. This happens everywhere, there are people like that and shouldn’t be arrested because of their
Kohlberg questions:
1. Should Heinz have stolen the drug?
2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love his wife?
3. What if the person dying was a stranger, would it make any difference?
4. Should the police arrest the chemist for murder if the woman died?
First interviewer: Tatum, girl age 9. Level – Pre-conventional morality
1. He shouldn’t have, but then again he could have done it to save her life.
2. It would change a lot, he wouldn’t have broken in into the chemist and he would have his wife died.
3. It would make a difference, he would probably not broken into the …show more content…
No, because he just wanted the money, he didn’t know that she was dying.
Haven is at level 2, stage 3. Good Interpersonal Relationships. She looks up to the value of family, trust, and compassion to one another. Haven understands Heinz point of view, and relates herself to the approval of others.
Third interview: Gabriel, boy age 14. Level 3 – Post-conventional morality
1.—He is making theories in his mind, he is thinking if he could have done differently, maybe he could have buy the ingredients and make it himself. But then when he realized that the chemist didn’t commit to listen to Heinz, he said -- yes, allow him to steal it, if the chemist doesn’t give mercy.
2.—He is putting himself as if he knows that one of his less favorite friend is dying, he would do it for him.—So he said that Heinz probably would have still done it.
3. It would make a difference, he wouldn’t risk his freedom for someone that he doesn’t know.
4. The chemist is not a murder, he is trying to make a living. This happens everywhere, there are people like that and shouldn’t be arrested because of their