Explain at least one reason why Kohlbergs theory of moral development has been criticized as being too narrow. Do you agree with the criticism? Please help. It’s worth 15 points

Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987), a Harvard Education and Psychology professor, became famous for a theory that some have called “the most important theory of moral development of the twentieth century” 1). Kohlberg's theory of moral development, which is heavily influenced by Piaget's theory and Kantian ethics, is an attempt to universalize ethics in an era when moral relativism has the popular vote.

Explanation:

The theory (which will not be covered in detail) involves three moral levels, each of which includes two developmental stages (six stages in total). These levels are the Preconventional, Conventional, and Postconventional. The levels and stages do not show a set of rules that we must follow, but are meant to explain how moral reasoning develops and how people from all cultures arrive at their moral conclusions.

As many other prominent theories, Kohlberg's idea has attracted criticism from both psychological and philosophical sources. However, since resistance abounds, we will only focus on some of them in a very basic way, beginning with two general criticisms, identified by Lapsley as the 'naturalistic fallacy' and the 'aretaic judgments' problem 2). We will then explore Kohlberg’s most important critic: Carol Gilligan. Said objections will be followed by a short overview of Kohlberg’s answers to them.

No, I do not agree with the criticism.