The child needs a few years to learn and understand the principles of good and evil. That is why a parent must wait until the child develops the mental ability to apply in similar cases the principles learned in a particular situation. Any attempt to force a young child to learn a certain skill, is simply doomed to failure. First, the child learns to apply a specific principle in a specific situation. When he learns to generalize and to identify good and evil in different, but similar in other situations, we will eventually begin to apply learned principles to different cases. However, the child of preschool age are not capable of. Good behavior in the understanding of a little child means to obey your mother, to help other people or to come home on the first call. Bad behave — then do not do any of the foregoing.

According to the famous Swiss behaviorist piaget, the pioneer of the mechanisms of moral learning, between the ages of two to five years, children are hardly aware of the rules when playing marbles. Children of this age are not trying for someone to win. They just get the pleasure that rolled the balls and throw them. Often they do it by themselves. But when the children are approaching the five-year milestone, we are trying to understand the rules by watching the older children and mimicking them. They still do not understand the rules and don't know how to play this game with other children on the rules.

Aged 5 to 10 years they formed different attitude towards the game and other behavior. Children begin to be interested in the rules. They ask questions like: "this game always play this way?" "Why?" "And you can play it differently?"

When children are ten years old, they often try to invent their own game rules. What is the difference between playing seven-year and twelve-year-old children? Young children believe rules are sacred and untouchable. They believe that these rules are transferred unchanged by parents, authority figures or God. Since the rules remain unchanged for many years, they cannot be questioned or changed. If you break one of the sacred rules, the game will be unfair, but at this stage of development children are not able to even think about it. Obedience is always praiseworthy, disobedience always bad. Kids only think in absolute categories and not take into account General concepts.

Growing up, children start to think differently. They no longer believe the rules are sacred and unchangeable. If the players agree among themselves, they can change the rules. Children refuse categorical judgments about what is right and what is wrong. Correctly from their point of view everything that is supported by most of those present, i.e., there is a social category. At this stage of development children think that laws are not so much the order of the parents or of God as finding the people who have agreed to fulfill them.

What is the impact of changing views of children have on character development? The average parent is much more upset when the child accidentally breaks an expensive crystal vase than when he drops cheap glass from ordinary glass. In most cases, the more expensive a broken or damaged item, the harsher the punishment. This child will most likely draw a conclusion that right or wrong is the result of the act, and not intent.

However, after seven years, children are able to distinguish the deliberate lie from a mistake. The child denies any false message, while the adolescent assesses the question whether the act is intentional or not. By the time when the child is 8 or 9 years old, he in some way can give rationalistic explanations for these actions. For example, he understands that it is wrong to lie to not only the mother, but to speak the truth. For five kid stealing is always bad. After 10 years the child begins to take into account the motive of the act. When a hungry child around this age steals an Apple, he sees the act differently than ordinary theft, in consideration of the different circumstances influencing the deed. At this stage the child is able to look at the problems from different points of view and to use more options for their solution.

Limited cognitive abilities of the child were demonstrated last summer when I was visiting my sister. One evening I was surprised by the experiment conducted by our friend, which was used as a test of my nephew Brent. Michelle has put before this clever eight-year-old boy two of the same pitcher. Each of them was poured the same amount of water. In front of Brent, carefully watching her actions, Michelle poured the contents of one jar in a plastic bag, and then poured in a tall, narrow vase. With jokes and quips Michelle asked Brent to carefully watch what she's doing. Then she took a second jug, poured water from it into a plastic bag and poured in a low, wide bowl. Then Michelle asked Brent, in which of two vessels more water. Although the boy saw that both jugs are initially filled with the same amount of water, he pointed to a tall, narrow pitcher, because he it seemed what it more water.

Michel has proven the validity of the theory of piaget that young children are not able to foresee the consequences of their behavior. They have not yet developed the cognitive abilities necessary to give an abstract of judgment. Children who are enrolled in primary school, first of all, pay attention to the fact that the water level high in the vase higher than in a flat bowl, but because it seems like there's more water. They base their conclusion on the visual perception of the final result. The child comes to the wrong conclusion, despite the fact that the jars originally had the same amount of water, and he saw it. The child has accurate information, but due to his perception of reality he comes to the wrong conclusion.

This is only one illustration of the limited ability of the child to go from cause and effect. Only by trial and error the child learns to distinguish good from evil. Growing up year by year and experiencing the natural consequences of their behavior, the child will gradually learn to make the right choice. Parents sometimes forget that the character is formed gradually. If they once taught something of their child, but they think that it needs to remember the lessons forever.