Here, moral norms emerge from group dynamics, informal social contracts, and shared cultural narratives. It is more stable than individual morality, but still limited by groupthink, tribalism, or exclusionary traditions.
3. Authoritative Morality (Authoritative Morality)
This layer institutionalizes morality through laws, religious rulings, or professional codes. It commands obedience via formal legitimacy and organizational power. While it provides coherence, it is also prone to bureaucratic ossification, legalistic minimalism, or even moral hypocrisy.
4. Hegemonic Morality (Hegemonic Morality)
At this level, morality is shaped by dominant ideologies, such as nationalism, neoliberalism, or religious orthodoxy, which impose "common sense" values through education, media, and state apparatuses. It is deeply powerful yet often invisible, naturalizing power relations and co-opting dissent.
5. Transcendent Morality (Transcendent Morality)
This final and most elusive layer is oriented beyond social consensus or institutional structures. It reflects universal ethical intuitions, spiritual insight, or revelatory guidance---often perceived as absolute, yet resistant to codification. It challenges all other levels, especially when systems of power become corrupted or cynical.
3.3 Interactions, Conflicts, and Fluidity
Unlike models that imply moral progression (e.g., Kohlberg) or ideal consensus (e.g., Habermas), Setiawan's hierarchy allows for dynamic interaction and conflict between layers. A person may act out of transcendent morality against hegemonic norms (e.g., civil disobedience inspired by spiritual convictions), or an authoritarian regime may enforce authoritative morality while suppressing individual conscience.
This stratified yet fluid structure reflects a nonlinear moral ecology, where agents must navigate tensions among competing moral demands, often without a single unambiguous guideline. It reintroduces contextuality, power-awareness, and moral ambiguity into ethical reasoning, while still preserving the possibility of principled resistance and authentic virtue.
4. Comparative Analysis and Theoretical Implications
