Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development and Iino Miko's "Childish Justice"
Satorin (Head of Ishimikology Research, University of Kaguya)(Spoilers for the Kaguya-sama manga up to chapter 233.)
Before I start talking about Iino Miko, here's some reading on the main theory that I'll be using to analyse her character arc.
Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development is a theory in developmental psychology that holds that moral reasoning, or the reasonings behind what people think is ethical or not, develops over time in categorisable stages. In this prominent theory, Kohlberg attempts to analyse the reasonings and processes by which people think things are "right" or "wrong", and separate them into different stages based on how sophisticated the reasonings are.
Based on Jean Piaget's earlier theories on moral realism and relativism, Kohlberg's theory divides moral development into three different levels: pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional. Each of these levels are subdivided into two stages, giving six stages in all.
NB: One of the major critiques of this theory is that it places too much focus on "justice" in exclusion to other moral values such as caring for others, but that suits the purpose of this essay in analysing Iino Miko's personality and her defining characteristic, what is described as her "childish justice". In fact, I'll describe Kohlberg's six stages below within the frame of justice itself.
FIRST LEVEL: PRE-CONVENTIONAL
Pre-conventional thinkers are concerned with the self — society's conventions on "right" and "wrong" are not considered at all, and all that matters is what the consequences of an action may be in relation to them. This level of moral thinking is very commonly seen in children (and occasionally in adults, too).
- STAGE 1 — JUSTICE AS OBEDIENCE
People operating at this stage of moral development focus on the consequences of an action. If an action is followed by a consequence perceived to be bad, then that action is by definition bad. It doesn't matter what the action actually is; as long as doing something has (real or perceived) negative consequences, then that action is wrong and should not be done.
On the other hand, this also means that people who don't suffer negative consequences for an action are correct in doing so: in other words, "it's okay to do something if you don't get caught". - STAGE 2 — JUSTICE AS SELF-INTEREST
People operating at this stage define what is right or wrong by what they think is in their best interest. Anything that they want to do at the moment is automatically seen as being good, and things that they don't want to do are seen as bad. This "best interest" only considers what they want at the time, and does not take into consideration their reputation, the wants of others, societal standards, and so on.
SECOND LEVEL: CONVENTIONAL
Conventional thinkers base their judgements on what is "right" or "wrong" based on how society would view these actions. These people unconditionally accept what society thinks is right and wrong, and follow these norms even when there are no direct consequences or benefit to them. This level of moral reasoning is typically found in teenagers and adults.
- STAGE 3 — JUSTICE AS SOCIAL STANDARDS
In stage 3, the approval of other people comes into play — people operating at this stage define what is right or wrong by what the people around them think is "good". These people try to be a 'good boy' or 'good girl' to live up to these expectations, and the effect of one's actions towards one's relationship with others as well as a person's intent is also taken into consideration. - STAGE 4 — JUSTICE AS SOCIAL ORDER
Unlike stage 3, the approval of others is not required in this stage: all that matters is whether the action that is being judged contributes to the maintaining of a functioning society. A central ideal or ideals (for example, to prevent society from falling into chaos) often prescribes what is right and wrong for people at this level; going against this central ideal is unequivocally seen as being in the wrong, while everything else that does not is not seen as such.
THIRD LEVEL: POST-CONVENTIONAL
Post-conventional thinkers base their judgements on understanding how different individuals perceive society. People operating on this level perceive actions through the lens of ethical principles, and may disobey rules because they are inconsistent with them. These people consider rules not to be absolute guidelines to be enforced without question: differing opinions can make another viewpoint as equally valid as that prescribed by society as being correct in the form of rules and laws.
- STAGE 5 — JUSTICE AS SOCIAL CONTRACT
People operating at this stage understand and respect that people hold different opinions and values, and does not automatically perceive actions inconsistent with societal norms as being incorrect by definition. Laws and rules are seen as tools for the maintenance of the greater good, but does not define it: these rules can and should be changed if they do not serve it. Compromise and majority decision are major features of this stage. - STAGE 6 — JUSTICE AS UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
(Empirical evidence has weak support for the difference between this stage and stage 5, but the partition is included here for completeness.) Stage 6 thinkers would think of ethical principles as being the centre point from which justice arises, and being committed to executing justice would also come with an obligation to disobey any rules or norms that go against it. These thinkers see things as being "right" or "wrong" by comparing them to abstract principles, not what they themselves want or what others think, and would analyse the actions of others by putting themselves in their shoes and considering what they know and think to be true.
Let's then look at how we can correlate these stages of moral development to Iino Miko's character arc in the Kaguya-sama manga.
Firstly, we have this early scene from Miko's childhood:
Here, we see Osaragi tell us that the elementary schoolers from Shuchiin saw justice as "something that takes away their freedom". In other words, they perceive Miko's actions as being incorrect as Miko's proposals are not in their direct self-interest — as they "love to play", given the choice of voting for a girl who proposes to take their toys away or not, of course they wouldn't. This can be correlated to the pre-conventional level of moral reasoning, specifically stage 2: her classmates believe that bringing toys to school are in their immediate best interest; and as Miko is going against said best interests, she is therefore "wrong" and is thus alienated and ostracised for it. This is what Miko grew up fighting against: people who believed that whatever was in their best interests defined "right" and "wrong". Faced with people who act in their own self interest, Miko digs herself further into her entrenched views on "justice" and becomes the Miko that we see during her introduction during chapter 65.
How about Miko's own views on justice, then? For a quick summary of Miko's characterisation with respect to justice, let's look at her character profile in the Volume 8 summary:
In a much more recent chapter, we also hear from middle school Miko herself how she personally views justice as being:
Her characterisation of what justice means to her matches almost exactly that of the definition of stage 4 in Kohlberg's theory: in this case, she claims to not need the "need for individual approval" that is a defining characteristic of stage 3 and doesn't mind being seen by others as being the "bad guy" in a certain scenario, because it causes society overall to become a better place. She wants everybody to follow a prescribed set of rules that in her eyes constitute justice (here being school rules) because she thinks that's what will bring about a happy society. "To make a place where everyone is able to have fun together": this is the central ideal through which Miko prescribes her insistence on everybody following the rules and her sense of justice from.
Additionally, she sees upholding her ideal as a sort of duty of hers, and while she doesn't enjoy being on the disciplinary committee all that much (232 4), she sticks to it because she feels that it is her duty to do so, and she derives this duty and the authority for being the one to execute justice (instead of e.g. merely complaining about rulebreakers) from being first in her class (105 8).
However, there's a phrase in her character description that I'd like to point out here:
"...she possessed [...] a sense of justice for the sake of justice. It's safe to say that this stemmed from her lack of maturity."
(Emphasis present in the original Japanese text).
This is where Kaguya's criticism of Miko's sense of justice as "childish" in 233 comes in: One major feature of stage 4 in Kohlberg's theory is that "when someone violates a social norm or rule, it is morally wrong" — rules and norms are a set of rigid, immutable, and prescriptive guidelines that define morality and what acceptable behaviour is, instead of morality guiding what rules and laws should be (i.e. rules and laws are descriptive of moral behaviour and do not define it, as in stage 5).
Osaragi's act of talking trash behind Miko's back is seen both in-universe by Miko and by us as the readers as being at the very least morally inappropriate and at most the ramblings of a girl who needs urgent help with her mental health, and it's obvious that the author wishes us to view it as such; that much is out of the question. (It's open to interpretation whether Osaragi's motivations and actions are enough of a reason for Miko to cut her off entirely: there are good reasons for both doing and not doing so that is out of the scope of this essay.) Us manga readers have enough information to formulate an informed opinion on Osaragi's actions with, but one thing that's easy to forget as an omniscient reader is that Miko does not have the full story: there are many details in Osaragi's story that Miko is unaware of due to Osaragi actively shutting herself off from her. Try putting yourself in Miko's shoes and consider what she knows and what she thinks to be true, like in stage 6 of Kohlberg's theory: from what we know of Miko and Osaragi's interactions, the chronology of how Miko views Osaragi goes like this.
- Osaragi is a good (only?) friend of mine who has been supporting me for a decade and genuinely cares about me (~68 17)
- I've got more friends, but Osaragi's been cold to me for no good reason, especially when I try to raise the topic of something that's been concerning me (~190 1)
- I walked in on Osaragi trashtalking me and calling us "friends in name" even though she did care for me in the past (~231 11)
Crucially:
Miko says directly to Osaragi in 231 that "she's never really opened up to her before", which goes to show that she doesn't know why an old friend is doing this. Consider how reader opinion of Osaragi changed drastically after chapters 192 and 232 dropped respectively, and then remember that Miko has absolutely no idea about what happened in those chapters! It's not even a matter of whether any of us think Osaragi is right or not here: the fact remains that Miko does not have enough information on her side to formulate an informed answer. Even if you think Osaragi is an unsalvageable asshole, Miko doesn't have the information you do to be able to tell that Osaragi is an unsalvageable asshole. Indeed, after gaining sufficient information, Miko may decide that Osaragi is a toxic friend not worth keeping around and cut her off entirely. Or she might decide to become best friends with her after forgiving her for what she's done, or somewhere else in between those two extremes. Osaragi might even simply refuse to open up to Miko, and she would be justified in dropping her like a sack of potatoes if so. These are all possible pathways that Miko might take. But her "no excuses, wrong is wrong" prescriptivism is what's getting her into trouble here, even though it's wouldn't be that much of a problem elsewhere. For most of us, conventional moral reasoning is definitely enough to get by with in modern society; most people would be justified in cutting Osaragi out from their life at this point. But we aren't Miko. As Miko's position as an extraordinary girl gunning for an extraordinary position, it simply isn't enough to be on stage 4 anymore, and Kaguya is giving her that shove — to be able to sit down and listen to people's viewpoints, even if it's of a person whom you were close to and has hurt you. (Side note: The "it's okay if it's a colleague but not okay if it's a friend" argument doesn't really apply here; as President to your classmates, some of which are ostensibly your friends, conflicts of interest like this are prone to happening at some point. If the "open door policy" is any indication, she's going to have to listen to a lot of illogical ranting in the near future.)
Although Kaguya couldn't do anything about Osaragi's warped worldview (as we saw her attempt to do in 231) other than to bemoan how women are troublesome to Shirogane, the point is that Kaguya gave up after listening to her: what Kaguya wants to do is for Miko to do the same thing. This is the true nature of Kaguya's Impossible Challenge — as we can see from the previous Impossible Challenge with Ishigami, Kaguya's true intention is not to force Miko to reconciliate with Osaragi before she can support her to become President*, but to refine her sense of justice into something more before she can feel safe in doing so (or simply because Kaguya has grown to care for her like she does Ishigami over these months) in the form of requesting her to sit down with Osaragi.
(Still, it's a very tall ask of Kaguya's; to be fair to Miko, even Kaguya, who was the one who criticised Miko for her failings, isn't immune to slipping back into the occasional impulsive act of "childish justice" herself, like how she said that Kashiwagi's boyfriend was definitely cheating on her in chapter 97, or how she snapped and yelled that Hayasaka was a thieving harlot in 182; you could criticise Kaguya here for demanding somebody do something that she herself has trouble doing sometimes, but that doesn't invalidate her point about Miko refusing to listen at all despite knowing nothing.)
In summary, Miko is stuck in a weird sort of "middle ground": her conventional moral reasoning was enough to put her above her peers in elementary and middle school, but she's stagnated at that level and is actively refusing to move on to the next stage, something that aiming for President would require her to do; the problems that her childish justice causes her in high school are wide-ranging, from her extreme gullibility to praise, her internal conflict about a boy she likes (both covered below), and now in 233 her unwillingness to resolve a conflict due to her refusal to understand the reasoning behind the actions of others.
*There are several parallels between the two Impossible Challenges (between forcing Ishigami to "make Tsubame his" and forcing Miko to "reconciliate with Osaragi") that make this apparent that this is Kaguya's intention in Miko's case: both are her kouhais she finds an obligation to help mature. Chapter 203 p.16 shows that she was not disappointed in Ishigami when he failed her task; on the other hand, she felt irritated at Osaragi for her insistence that Ishigami should fight on despite being rejected. It naturally follows that what Kaguya wanted from Ishigami was not for him to get Tsubame or die trying, but at least try to win her heart and grow from the experience no matter whether he succeeds or not. One could then make the inference that this is what Kaguya actually wants from Iino as well. Another parallel is that Kaguya isn't exactly perfect at what she's requesting the two to do: in comparison to Kaguya reverting to childish justice sometimes, we have her failing in the entirety of the manga up until 160 before she finally manages to make Shirogane hers.
Before I proceed with the second half of this analysis, I'll take a bit of space to explain two more terms that I'll be using later on.
In English, the phrase "to save face" refers to avoiding humiliation. In Japanese culture, this concept is amplified and further expanded: the "face" that needs to be saved is called a tatemae (lit. "façade"), which refers to one's public actions that match social expectations and norms (compare and contrast this to the conventional level of moral reasoning). The corresponding concept for what you actually think in comparison to what you tell others that you think is called the honne (lit. "origin-voice"), and this is the part you allow to be shown only to yourself and perhaps some closest friends.
Parallels to this distinction can be found in many different psychological and sociological theories, such as Freud's "id/ego", Mead's "I/me", Winnicott's "true/false self" and so on. These are more relevant to Kaguya's arc and I shall not be discussing these theories here in depth.
In this second half, we will use Kohlberg's stages to analyse Miko's views on romance and other relationships.
Chapter 190 is the first time romance is directly brought up by Miko in reference to her own feelings towards Ishigami. At this point in time, we see that Miko claims to hate Ishigami but simultaneously feels jealous that he was getting along well with Tsubame. One of the reasons that Miko tells Shirogane why she didn't "actually" like Ishigami is because he does not conform to (in Miko's eyes) what a student should be doing: to follow the school rules. Her sense of justice demands that everybody should follow the rules, and Ishigami blatantly breaking those rules in front of her day after day is taken by Miko as a direct affront to her identity, which is why she's still so brash at him after developing a crush. Overall, the three reasons that Miko convinces herself that she does not like Ishigami with are all related to how Ishigami is not living up to the social norms in Miko's eye of what "good" should be (not taking things seriously, not following the rules, being dumb): applying Kohlberg's stage 3 to Miko in this scenario, she sees herself as a "good girl", therefore she "should" fall in love with a "good boy" — not "good" as in whether Ishigami is a principled person with positive intentions but "good" as in whether Ishigami conforms to her model of what a "good boy" should be like.
The sutera is a good example of this in action: the limited information that she has on the person who gave her the flower correlates with her idealistic, fairytale-like ideals on what consists a "good boy". Therefore the person fits her "good boy" requirement and she's been hanging on to that flower ever since.
As for how she feels about being a "good girl"? Instead of talking, I'll let her speak for herself:
It's safe to say that Miko feels that her "being a good girl" in relation to romance is a tatemae of some sort, and she can't prevent her honne from leaking out at times, which causes her much distress due to the conflict between the two (the tatemae is a "good girl" who wants to be loved back by an idealistic "good boy", honne is simply a teenage girl who feels possessive over her crush and wants to be with him, "good" be damned). This is further evidenced by a later scene:
Apart from the immediate implications of this scene, in contrast to Chika who uses the phrase "playing the bad girl" (i.e. she thinks that the bad girl is the tatemae and the good girl is the honne), Miko explicitly calls her being a good girl in relation to romance "an act"; i.e. she is aware that the "good girl" is her tatemae and the "bad girl" her honne; she then proceeds to go full Waluiino mode in chapter 227 because of this realisation, which was overkill and backfired on her. Still, she drops her "good girl" ideal of romance because it's conflicting too much with her honne, and last we see of this plotline, she's trying to get closer to Ishigami by following her honne's desires but toning it down with slower-paced stratgies.
We can further extend this examination of this "good girl" aspect of Miko to her relationships outside of romantic ones.
An aspect of Miko's personality with her relationships with other people (that is commonly played for laughs in the manga) is that she is extremely susceptible to being pushed around by others simply by being praised, as seen in the above panel and even in the 4koma (chapter 24). Chika teaches Ishigami that to get on Miko's "good side", one simply has to praise her enough and she'll warm up to you in quite literally no time at all and even forgive past transgressions, to the point where Ishigami points out that Miko sounds like a victim of domestic violence. Much of the reason why she likes praise to this extent lies in the fact that she didn't receive much affection growing up as her parents were distant, and therefore likes signs of warmth such as praise and hugs "about 5 times more than the average person" (206 12). Sometimes, this want for warmth manifests in ways I can only describe as problematic:
Wanting warmth and affection in and of itself isn't actively causing a problem with her social life — she has her tatemae of justice to help her with that. The problem is that her insecure style of attachment means that she becomes very gullible to praise and seems to be unable to perceive people's actual intentions when being showered with such.
So why is she so gullible when faced with praise? It's because praising her is not simply a way of making her feel good and warm, it's also a validation of her entire identity: logically, she's okay with being treated badly for the sake of her justice, but she's still a young girl starved of validation at heart.
In her honne, she still has the human desire to be liked and well thought of, but when seemingly everybody thinks poorly of her because she's a social outcast due to her own ideals, she is subconsciously very receptive to anything that validates her (which explains her likings towards those "hot dudes validating you CDs" she's seen listening to in chapter 95 and the self-insert fics in 158). This is borne out by the fact that she does not seem to actively seek validation from others but still changes to become much more amiable and willing to compromise on certain aspects when she passively receives it, the most extreme example being that of chapter 174 where she seems to have a personality change on the spot to become mellow and easygoing (and even turning a blind eye to him breaking school rules!) when her crush Ishigami compliments her, even though she's usually very brash with him due to her insistence on her ideals on justice. Simply having somebody she subconsciously cared about validate her identity was enough to send her into full shoujo manga mode.
Overall, one could say that in terms of the need for validation, she acts on a stage 4 basis when it comes to maintaining her ideals dealing with other people, but inside that tatemae that she uses to face others, she's still at stage 3 by subconsciously being very receptive and vulnerable to praise, used offensively or otherwise.
In conclusion, Iino Miko's views towards love, relationships and justice are interrelated — using Kohlberg's stages of moral development to analyse her thought processes, one can say that she is overall at the conventional level of moral reasoning, as is typical of adolescents and adults. She believes in justice for justice's sake, and will (attempt to) not defer justice purely for personal gratification: both admirable feats in and of themselves. However, Chapter 233 is the point where Kaguya forces the question of whether she will choose to stay at the conventional level, or whether she will crystallise her sense of justice into that of one guided by an understanding of other people — to move beyond the pale of simply requiring obedience of others towards a real and true justice. Only through this growth can Miko start fixing her personality defects and see people for who they truly are. The Impossible Challenge Miko has to take on requires her to develop her moral reasoning to a stage many fully-grown adults will never reach. What remains to see is how Miko will take it on, and if she will successfully complete her character arc.