In the absence of a compelling model of moral functioning, the field of moral development has been languishing and is in critical need of resuscitation. Although in recent years some important conceptual insights have been advanced, corresponding empirical paradigms have been in short supply; and so the most promising theories remain largely unsubstantiated and without practical “legs.” As a further consequence, moral educators have had few viable frameworks on which to base intervention efforts. This vacuity is primarily attributable to the once inordinate interest in moral rationality, an interest that initially gave spark to the field and fanned its flames for a time, but is an enterprise now reduced to a few smoldering embers.

This focus on moral cognition arose through the magisterial contributions of Piaget (1932/1977) and Kohlberg (1969) who heralded the cognitive revolution within psychology. These structural-developmental theorists forcefully advocated the notion that the fundamental core of moral functioning entailed processes of deliberative moral judgment. Their models embraced the formalist assumptions of the philosophical mindset of the Enlightenment Era, which conceptualized human nature dualistically, pitting rationality against personality. Moral rationality was hoisted onto a pedestal, regarded as not only necessary to define the moral quality of situations, but also as imbued with sufficient oomph to motivate moral action. In striking contrast, however, emotions, personal desires, and other aspects of personality were tossed into the garbage “bag of virtues” (Kohlberg, 1981, p. 78), regarded as potentially contaminating influences that the moral agent must eschew in order to adhere to the purer dictates of reason.