The purpose of this essay is to provide readers with a better understanding of the characters found in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. These individuals act in a manner which may confuse the reader. However, by using Kohlberg’s moral perceptions, one may gain understanding for the reasoning behind each character’s behaviour. This essay will examine Kohlberg’s three categories and use them to uncover the motivation felt by each individual. These categories are pre-conventional, conventional, and post conventional.

            There are many pre-conventional characters within the Crucible. Pre-conventional characters behave in such a way that allows them to avoid punishment and obtain reward. The first example of such a character is Reverend Parris. He shows pre-conventional reasoning when he finds a dagger embedded in his door and says, “There is danger for me”. Knowing that he will become a target after persecuting Salem’s finest individuals, he becomes desperate to avoid the punishment that will soon come his way, therefore displaying Kohlberg’s first precept. The second character that acts in a way to avoid being punished is Sarah Good. When Mary Warren reports that “Sarah Good confessed” to witchcraft, it becomes evident that she did this to escape being hanged, displaying a pre-conventional nature. Another character that illustrates these characteristics is Abigail Williams. When pulling a needle from her stomach and claiming that “it [was Elizabeth Proctor’s] familiar spirit [that] pushed it in”, she wishes to obtain reward. By telling the town that Goody Proctor attacked her with witchcraft, Abigail hopes that Elizabeth will be hanged, and that she may take Elizabeth’s place beside John. By telling this lie, she displays her pre-conventional way of thinking. Various characters in The Crucible act in a way to avoid punishment and obtain reward.

            The Crucible not only contains pre-conventional characters, but conventional thinkers as well. Such behaviour consists of an individual acting in a specific way to receive approval and acceptance from a group. An example of a conventional character is John Proctor. He shows this reasoning when speaking to the underage Abigail about their affair. Abigail claims that they touched and knew each other, to which John replies, “Aye but we did not”, telling her that he will not verbally admit to anything that took place between them. He does so to remain seen as a good man, and to fit into the “pure” Christian community, therefore making him a conventional character. Such behaviour is also shown by John Hale. He shows this form of reasoning when speaking of Reverend Parris in response to John Proctor’s concerns regarding his holiness. Hale replies, “The man’s ordained, therefore the light of God is in him”. Hale wishes to fit into the majority and not question the Reverend’s purity since it might disturb peace, even if he himself does not trust Parris. Hale’s reasoning is categorized as conventional since he wants to remain diplomatic and passive in order to be accepted by society. Another character that acts in this fashion is Ezekiel Cheever. When Cheever is retrieving the accused Elizabeth Proctor, he says to John, “You know yourself I must do as I’m told”. Within this statement, we see that Cheever will do anything, even drag a friend’s wife to jail, to fit in with those around him. By compromising his morals to be seen as competent by his peers, it is clear that Cheever has a conventional way of thinking. Through the examples given, one can see that Miller’s play features multiple characters that behave in a way to receive approval and group acceptance.

            In addition to those who display Kohlberg’s first and second precepts, post-conventional characters can be found in The Crucible. Those who act in this manner have an internalized sense of right and wrong which cannot be affected by punishment, reward, or group acceptance. One such character is Elizabeth Proctor. Her post-conventional nature can be seen when she is questioned by John Hale prior to her arrest. When Hale asks her if she believes in witches, she responds with, “If you think that I am one, then I say there are none”. This statement shows that Elizabeth will not lie about the existence of witches when she does not believe it. She will say and do what she feels is right and does not mind if it separates her from society, therefore making her a post-conventional character. Another like-minded individual is Giles Corey. Giles illustrates this reasoning when he is being “pressed” for not naming the man who provided him with valuable information. During his torture Giles says two words, “More weight”. Through this statement, one can see that Giles is willing to die for what he believes in, and that he cannot be swayed by punishment, reward, or group acceptance. This behaviour is also shown by John Proctor and can be seen when he decides to destroy the confession he has signed, choosing instead to be hanged for witchcraft. Hale tells John that he will die and that he cannot do this, to which Proctor replies, “I can”. John would rather perish than be rewarded with a life saved by lies, and by disregarding what Hale says, it is evident that he does not strive for group acceptance. John’s statement allows readers to see that he is a post-conventional character. As shown by the prior individuals, Miller’s play contains characters that have a strong sense of right and wrong, which cannot be affected by punishment, reward, or group acceptance.

            This essay has illustrated that multiple characters within The Crucible behaved in a strange and possibly confusing manner. However, by taking a quote from each character and deconstructing their motives, their reasoning has become clear. For this reason, Kohlberg is a valuable asset in aiding the reader’s understanding of the play, as well as human nature as a whole. This paper has achieved what it was created to do, give deeper insight into the literature and those found within it.