Gilligan’s Theory of Feminine Morality
I. Introduction
Gilligan’s primary focus was the moral development of young women. In 1970, she
became a research assistant for Lawrence Kohlberg, whose stage theory of moral
development is now well-known. Gilligan’s interest in moral development was deeply
affected by her interviews with young women contemplating abortions in the 1970s.
II. Problem of Biased Results
Over time, Gilligan began to question Kohlberg’s methodology and the
assumptions that grounded his theory. First, the participants in his studies were all
privileged white men and boys. Gilligan felt that this biased his theory against women.
Second, Kohlberg privileged the consideration of individual rights and rules over the
consideration of the importance of caring in human relationships. Gilligan took this to
represent the privileging of a male perspective over a female perspective.
Research by Constance Holstein (1976) appeared to support Gilligan’s claim that
there is a gender bias in Kohlberg’s theory. Holstein’s longitudinal study found that
female participants typically scored at stage 3 of Kohlberg’s moral stages (which
emphasizes interpersonal relationships and issues of social duty and obligation),
whereas male participants typically scored at stage 4 (which emphasizes abstract issues
of rights, laws, and social contracts). According to these results, males are generally
more morally developed than females. However, Gilligan argued instead that these
results show that Kohlberg’s stages are unfairly biased in favor of the kind of moral
reasoning in which males, but not females, typically engage.
III. Overview of Kohlberg’s Moral Stages
In 1969, Kohlberg published his stage theory of moral development. He argued
that moral development occurs through a series of invariant stages, in a manner similar
to Jean Piaget’s cognitive development stages. Kohlberg’s model is not only descriptive
of how moral development occurs, but also prescriptive of how moral development
should occur. Insofar as each stage represents a higher level of moral reasoning (i.e., a
stage that is more adequate, stable, and “ideal”), people should strive to attain the
highest stage of moral development.
Kohlberg identified three levels of development with six stages, two stages per level, as
follows:
Level 1—Preconventional (concrete individualistic perspective): stages 1 to 2
Level 2—Conventional (member-of-society perspective):stages 3 to 4
Level 3—Postconventional (prior-to-society perspective):stages 5 to 6
Although Kohlberg’s stages vary in what factors are salient to people engaged in moral
reasoning, each stage involves what Kohlberg called “justice reasoning.”
Thus, each stage of development revolves around how best to adjudicate
interpersonal conflicts, balance conflicting claims and competing interests, and most
fairly distribute goods and rights (the “benefits and burdens” of social life).
, Gilligan challenged Kohlberg’s claim that all moral reasoning is “justice reasoning.”
She argued that Kohlberg’s stage theory makes assumptions—for example, that the
moral ideal is attained through an abstract, impersonal, individualistic “prior-to-society”
perspective—that do not respect the experiences of women, who prioritize interpersonal
relationships. Kohlberg’s theory thus estranges women from the process of moral
development.
Gilligan argued that women’s moral judgments necessarily include feelings of
compassion and empathy for others, as well as concern for commitments that arise out
of relationships; Women engage in “care reasoning,” not “justice reasoning,”
And thus consider their own and other’s responsibilities to be grounded in social context
and interpersonal commitments.
Women were NOT inferior in their personal or moral development, but that they were
different.
Gilligan identified (2) two moral voices that arise from two distinct developmental
pathways.
1. According to Gilligan, the male voice emphasizes independence (“separation”) and
responsibility for oneself,
Whereas the female voice emphasizes interdependence (“connection”) and
responsibility to others. (Males are encouraged to be active agents, females to be
passive recipients. When faced with moral problems, males seek solutions that are
just and fair; females seek solutions that are caring and benevolent)
2. For males, moral wrongness is linked to the violation of rights and justice;
For females, moral wrongness is linked to a failure to communicate and to
respond.
(For males, moral interactions take place primarily at the political and legal level, in
the realm of abstract laws and social contracts; for females, moral interactions take
place primarily at the level of personal relationships, in the family and the social
network of the community in which they live)
I. Introduction
Gilligan’s primary focus was the moral development of young women. In 1970, she
became a research assistant for Lawrence Kohlberg, whose stage theory of moral
development is now well-known. Gilligan’s interest in moral development was deeply
affected by her interviews with young women contemplating abortions in the 1970s.
II. Problem of Biased Results
Over time, Gilligan began to question Kohlberg’s methodology and the
assumptions that grounded his theory. First, the participants in his studies were all
privileged white men and boys. Gilligan felt that this biased his theory against women.
Second, Kohlberg privileged the consideration of individual rights and rules over the
consideration of the importance of caring in human relationships. Gilligan took this to
represent the privileging of a male perspective over a female perspective.
Research by Constance Holstein (1976) appeared to support Gilligan’s claim that
there is a gender bias in Kohlberg’s theory. Holstein’s longitudinal study found that
female participants typically scored at stage 3 of Kohlberg’s moral stages (which
emphasizes interpersonal relationships and issues of social duty and obligation),
whereas male participants typically scored at stage 4 (which emphasizes abstract issues
of rights, laws, and social contracts). According to these results, males are generally
more morally developed than females. However, Gilligan argued instead that these
results show that Kohlberg’s stages are unfairly biased in favor of the kind of moral
reasoning in which males, but not females, typically engage.
III. Overview of Kohlberg’s Moral Stages
In 1969, Kohlberg published his stage theory of moral development. He argued
that moral development occurs through a series of invariant stages, in a manner similar
to Jean Piaget’s cognitive development stages. Kohlberg’s model is not only descriptive
of how moral development occurs, but also prescriptive of how moral development
should occur. Insofar as each stage represents a higher level of moral reasoning (i.e., a
stage that is more adequate, stable, and “ideal”), people should strive to attain the
highest stage of moral development.
Kohlberg identified three levels of development with six stages, two stages per level, as
follows:
Level 1—Preconventional (concrete individualistic perspective): stages 1 to 2
Level 2—Conventional (member-of-society perspective):stages 3 to 4
Level 3—Postconventional (prior-to-society perspective):stages 5 to 6
Although Kohlberg’s stages vary in what factors are salient to people engaged in moral
reasoning, each stage involves what Kohlberg called “justice reasoning.”
Thus, each stage of development revolves around how best to adjudicate
interpersonal conflicts, balance conflicting claims and competing interests, and most
fairly distribute goods and rights (the “benefits and burdens” of social life).
, Gilligan challenged Kohlberg’s claim that all moral reasoning is “justice reasoning.”
She argued that Kohlberg’s stage theory makes assumptions—for example, that the
moral ideal is attained through an abstract, impersonal, individualistic “prior-to-society”
perspective—that do not respect the experiences of women, who prioritize interpersonal
relationships. Kohlberg’s theory thus estranges women from the process of moral
development.
Gilligan argued that women’s moral judgments necessarily include feelings of
compassion and empathy for others, as well as concern for commitments that arise out
of relationships; Women engage in “care reasoning,” not “justice reasoning,”
And thus consider their own and other’s responsibilities to be grounded in social context
and interpersonal commitments.
Women were NOT inferior in their personal or moral development, but that they were
different.
Gilligan identified (2) two moral voices that arise from two distinct developmental
pathways.
1. According to Gilligan, the male voice emphasizes independence (“separation”) and
responsibility for oneself,
Whereas the female voice emphasizes interdependence (“connection”) and
responsibility to others. (Males are encouraged to be active agents, females to be
passive recipients. When faced with moral problems, males seek solutions that are
just and fair; females seek solutions that are caring and benevolent)
2. For males, moral wrongness is linked to the violation of rights and justice;
For females, moral wrongness is linked to a failure to communicate and to
respond.
(For males, moral interactions take place primarily at the political and legal level, in
the realm of abstract laws and social contracts; for females, moral interactions take
place primarily at the level of personal relationships, in the family and the social
network of the community in which they live)
