By Annaliesa Coupe

To entirely understand characters in The Crucible, their motivations for behaviour can be explained by Kohlberg’s three moral precepts. The pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional principles represent the foundation of basic human nature, which is why characters are identifiable by these precepts. Understanding the significance as to why characters conform to or defy societal expectations is important, because it allows for a rounded understanding of who they are.  

The pre-conventional precept is when a character makes decisions to avoid punishment or obtain a reward. These are actions made without regard to long-term effects, as they are the product of a specific circumstance: characters act irrationally for their own immediate concerns. The Crucible provides many examples of characters who act according to this precept. Sarah Good demonstrates this principle when she dishonestly confesses to witchcraft in order to avoid death. “There are them that will swear to anything before they’ll hang,” John Proctor states, pointing out people lie to avoid punishment, especially one as severe as hanging. Good knew the court would not accept her denial of being associated with the Devil, so she gave a false confession to avoid the consequence of death: a pre-conventional decision. Another character who also acts according to this precept is Abigail Williams. She claimed Elizabeth Proctor used witchcraft to stab her, because she wants Elizabeth to be hung. Hale announces, “Abigail were stabbed tonight; a needle were found stuck in her belly-” in court, revealing to the public the crime that Elizabeth seemingly committed. In reality, Abigail stabbed herself with a needle, because she knew there was a needle inside the poppet given to Elizabeth. Because the village is so strict about witchcraft, this set-up increases the likelihood that Elizabeth will be hung. If she is out of the picture, Abigail can more easily pursue her husband, John Proctor, which is why she is dangerously dedicated to taking the charade to an extreme level. Finally, a pre-conventional decision is made by the prosperous Thomas Putnam, who encourages the death of others so their land will be available for purchase. In court, it was revealed Putnam “is killing his neighbours for their land,” exposing the dark extremity of his greed. Even though Putnam is the richest man in town, he still desires more land and would push any limits necessary to acquire it. He made his daughter, Ruth, accuse George Jacobs of witchery when she and the other girls pretended to be controlled by the Devil. This incriminated Jacobs even more, which helped Putnam: following Jacob’s death, he can buy his land to grow his power. Clearly, there are many characters in The Crucible that demonstrate pre-conventional behaviour. Many are self-absorbed, shallow people acting out of greed, while others are hopeless people who act out of sheer desperation. Either way, these characters behave in a pre-conventional manner to get what they want without regard to how their actions impact others. 

Characters in The Crucible also pose many examples of Kohlberg’s conventional precept. Conventionality is demonstrated when an individual makes decisions to obtain acceptance within a group. This is an indication that a character craves societal approval because they fear independence. Ruth Putnam acts in a conventional manner when she pretends to be possessed by the Devil. She deceives the village, convincing everyone “her soul is taken,” because she wants to fit in with the girls of the village who are fabricating sightings of the Devil for their own benefit. Ruth is specifically faking her condition to match Betty’s, who is also pretending to be unconscious due to the Devil’s ‘influence.’ Pretending to be possessed is easier than facing the town’s questions – rumors of witchcraft are circulating because of the girls’ unusual behaviour at a secret party. Ruth knows that being in a group will provide her with protection, even if the group is held together by shared lies. It is difficult to be blamed when you have others for support, explaining why Ruth is inclined to act conventionally. Another character who illustrates this moral precept is John Proctor, when he debates over whether he should confess his guilt. His shame stems from the fact that he had an affair with Abigail and the town does not know. He tells Abigail he “will cut off [his] hand before ever reach[ing] for [her] again,” making it clear that whatever romantic connection they once had is over because he is married to Elizabeth. He does not want to be known as a lecher, which is the label he will receive if this information is publicized. Society rejects those who are disloyal to their partners; it is perceived as one of the worst things an individual can do. However, his anxiety overrides his regret and he makes the cowardly decision to repress his emotions for fear of standing out in the village. He knows he will be harshly judged. Refusing to confess lechery allows the people of Salem to continue viewing him as a ‘good man,’ but at the cost of his conscience. John Proctor allows conventionality to control his decision making, showing he is desperate for the acceptance of others. Finally, Mary Warren demonstrates conventionality when she backs down from her stance in court. John Proctor tried to force her to give testimony to save his wife, but she tells him she’ll “not hang with [him];” she hates to challenge the group of girls that are on the opposing side in court. Because the backlash and stress are too fierce for her to handle, she cannot stand to be apart from the group she was once in. Knowing there is safety in numbers, Warren abandons her position as the center of attention in court and goes back to the comfort of the group setting. Being in a group will take the attention away from her alone and provide her with support she wouldn’t have otherwise had. There are many situations within the book in which people seek group acceptance, in accordance with Kohlberg’s conventional precept. Motivation to act conventionally is common because this moral precept ties into human nature: the natural instinct to earn approval from society. 

Finally, there are few post-conventional individuals found within The Crucible. Characters act in this manner when they make decisions that reflect their values and not in the interest of reward, punishment, or group acceptance. These decisions often oppose society and highlight individuality, indicating character development as they demonstrate their distinct sense of right and wrong. A prime example of this precept is when Reverend John Hale quits and walks out of the court, famously announcing: “I denounce these proceedings, I quit this court.” Hale came to realize the confessions of witchcraft are false, meaning the church’s convictions hold no real weight. The ‘justice’ of the court involves punishing behaviour that did not occur; he does not want to work for a system so meaningless and corrupt. As a result, he dramatically abandons the court because his faith is lost. He refuses to support something he does not believe in. This shows Hale’s growth because he takes a stand against society by actively opposing the momentum of the witch hunts. John Hale identifies his values and acts accordingly; staying true to himself regardless of what outcome may befall him. This is a defining moment for his character. Another character who is led by their values, uninfluenced by reward, punishment or group acceptance, is Elizabeth Proctor. She tells a lie for the first time in court, in an attempt to save her husband’s life. When asked if he committed lechery, she replied, “no, sir,” denying her knowledge of Proctor and Abigail’s romantic connection. Even though she was hurt by their affair and detests lying because of her Christianity, she still acted in the interest of her husband because she has a clear understanding of what is most important to her. This moment solidifies her as a post-conventional character, as she proved in the most significant way that she conducts herself according to her principles: she chose love above the law. Lastly, John Proctor shifts from his objectively conventional belief system to a post-conventional way of behaving. He “mean[s] to deny nothing” in the final moment of his life, when he admits his confession is fake because he does not want to sign away the last thing he has: his name. Finally, he owns up to his act of lechery with Abigail and refuses to claim he saw the Devil just to avoid being killed, because his priorities do not lie in telling more falsities. He knows he will face death if he does not falsely confess being affiliated with the Devil, but abiding by the truth is his only way to find goodness. He wants to better himself, and he cannot do that if he continues living a lie. Proctor firmly believes this dramatic decision is the noble and righteous thing to do, clearly outlining the actions of a post-conventional character. Post-conventionality is the rarest precept in The Crucible, as it takes significant courage to act in this manner. Consequentially, these actions have the greatest impact on the plot, because they work against societal expectations and speak to the authenticity of a character’s beliefs as well as their willingness to practice them.  

Connecting Kohlberg’s pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional precepts to characters in The Crucible adds another layer of depth to the understanding of human behaviour. These principles explain why people act to reap a reward, gain acceptance, or follow their personal beliefs. Applying these principles to define behavioural patterns not only provides the reader with context on how people think, but also allows them to draw conclusions about the substance of the character. The numerous examples discussed prove the significance of moral precepts in the book, showing The Crucible is a piece of literature that reflects human nature.