CAROL GILLIGAN’S “DIFFERENT VOICE” AND THE MORALITY OF CARING

 Carol Gilligan’s 1982 book “In a Different Voice” is now a classic in psychological literature. In it Gilligan challenged psychology for its narrow sexism in studying (in most cases) men and then generalising their results to both genders. The implicit assumption psychologists (who were, in the early history of field, mainly men themselves) made was that men were the “prototype” species. 

This assumption was also reflected in what is now considered the sexist language of the early literature; Thus Gilligan assumed that Kohlberg’s scale systematically discriminated against women by generally placing them lower on his morality scale. Here are some of her anecdotal accounts of the differences between a girl (Amy) and a boy (Jake), both aged 11, in their approaches to the Heinz dilemma:

Criticism of Kohlberg’s theory on Moral Development.

The contributions of Kohlberg towards the study of moral development cannot be over emphasised. He demonstrated in studies shown what takes place from childhood through to adulthood in terms of reasoning. In addition to his own personal influence, Kohlberg’s work has also inspired a number of scholars.

Furthermore, his theory has not gone without criticisms. According to Arnett (2001) in Munsaka and Matafwali (2013) criticism towards this theory fall within three categories, these are: The structural versus content critique, the gender critique, and the cultural critique’ (p.119).

The Structural versus Content Critique.

As Arnett (2001) indicates, Kohlberg was more concerned about the structure of people’s moral reasoning, than he was about the content of their moral judgment. Some scholars have not agreed with Kohlberg’s view that structure and not content, determine moral development. Furthermore, Kohlberg is criticised on the grounds that moral reasoning is not distinctly separate and sequenced. Thus often than not, people’s reasoning exhibits attributes of several stages simultaneously, (Munsaka and Matafwali, 2013).

The Gender Critique.

Scholars have argued that Kohlberg’s theory was lopsided in favour of males. As results of this other gaps were noted in Kohlberg’s theory. Furthermore, she argues that people’s moral reasoning is governed by desire to fulfil self-interests, and interests of immediate relationships. With time the focus on self-interests and immediate relationships gives way to morality that is based on a sense of responsibility and care for all people. Finally, it is important also to note that most research conducted on males and females confirm that the focus for males and females in terms of aspects of morality differs.