This discussion uses Rousseau’s Emile to explicate Kohlberg’s characterization of moral development and to illuminate several theoretical problems for Kohlberg’s cognitive-developmental account. Their writings display remarkable similarities in the descriptions they give of moral growth, but they also reveal important disagreements about the relation of affect and cognition, the role of affect in development, the process of differentiation between developmental stages, the existence of conventional moral structures, and the nature of adult moral orientations. Analysis of these issues reinforces the importance of holistic approaches to affect, cognition, and the mechanisms of development, while implying that there are neither conventional nor adult stages of development. The analysis also supports contentions that Kohlberg’s concept of morality is unduly narrow and suggests that his one-sidedly rationalistic approach exaggerates the behavioral potential of moral education.