Carol Gilligan and Joan Tronto - Essay Example

Comparison of two Care Philosophers: Carol Gilligan and Joan Tronto Care ethics is a group of normative ethical theories developed by feminist that measure the morality of actions depending on the response. This is unlike the deontological and consequentiality theory whose main emphasis is on impartiality and universal standards. Care ethics respond to the moral question “how to responds” and not “what is just”. This theory is based on the interdependency of human beings where one’s decisions affect several others. The forms in which other people are affected by one’s decision depend on their vulnerability. It is thus prudent to take the level of affectedness and vulnerability of other interest before responding to a situation. Carol Gilligan and Joan Tronto are among the notable feminists who have contributed to the development of this theory. Joan Tronto borrows a lot from Carol Gilligan theory who he says is mentor. This paper discusses and compares the contribution of these two philosophers (Jagger et al, 42). The first part of the essay will discuss Carol Gilligan theory of different voices and the second portion will look at Joan Tronto rewriting of the ethic care theory into a postmodern theory. Carol Gilligan was a student of Kohlberg. However, she did not agree with the Kohlberg theories on moral development in humans. He saw Kohlberg theory as being gender biased since it showed that girls’ moral development was lower compared to that of boys and this was reflected in adult men and women. She asserted that this theory was biased in the sense that it only presented a male oriented perspective. This could also be contributed by the fact that Kohlberg subject were dominated by boys. She developed a theory that incorporated a female perspective on the subject. She said that men and women respond to moral dilemma differently (Held, 26). Women have to prioritize compassion and empathy over the moral scale that is provided by Kohlberg theory. This does not mean that they have weaker developed. She developed a new perspective of looking at the moral development called “The different voice” which was developed through unbiased empirical observation of the reaction of both men and women to ethical dilemma. Gilligan vies are contained in her book a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development written in 1982. This book has been seen to influence feminist not only in the field of psychology but also in other disciplines such as gender studies, political psychoanalysis and political studies. Being a feminist philosopher Gilligan aimed to deconstruct the classical masculine biased moral psychology by investigate the previously unheard female voice on the issues of ethics. She blamed the psychological theorist such as Kohlberg and Piaget for only using boys and the male perspective to construct the various moral theories in psychology. It is important to note that by asserting that gender differences results in differences in moral sensibility does not mean that Gilligan attacked Piaget and Kohlberg gender neutral theories. She claimed that it was wrong to conclude from Kantian theory that women are not fully developed morally since they are not able to be completely autonomous. She said that women actually do have a different voice than that of men which she now termed as the theory o f women moral sensibility popularly known as the care ethics. In order to understand Gilligan care ethics, it is important to look at Kohlberg theory of moral development. According to Kohlberg, moral development can be divided into six stages which are divided into three main stages, convention, preconvention and post convention morality. The final stage which is the post convention morality is the point where a person is believed to have arrived at full moral development and has been labeled as the universal ethical principle orientation. He later realized not all human beings get to reach this stage with Mahatma Gandhi being an exceptional character. He then modified the original model to have four stages with the last two being the most important stage. Stage three was the point where people began to think in a mature moral way at the same time ensuring that they maintain relationship bonds and trust. The last stage which is the ultimate measure of moral maturity is the stage where people make moral decision based on the universal standards which could be the legal system or other universally accepted standards without taking into account how this affects relationship bonds (Held, 35). Such standards have to be maintained as a way of ensuring that the good of the whole society is upheld. Women have seen to never move from stage three and thus do not develop to be morally mature. This is displayed in Kohlberg Heinz experiment. This is the concept that Gilligan challenges. In the Heinz theory, Kohlberg asks two children Amy (a girl) and Jake whether a man whose wife is dying should steal drugs form a pharmacist since he cannot afford them. Amy answer is that he should not steal this might lead him to jail leaving the wife in greater danger. Jake on the other hand gives the answer that Kohlberg expect and impartial logical justice. As such, Amy gets a lower score on moral maturity. Gilligan argues that the fact that Amy gives a response that shows compassion and is not impartial does not mean that she is not morally mature. Amy’s world is different from that of Kohlberg and Jake because people from different genders view the world differently (Held, 31). Amy’s world is build upon taking responsibility and showing care to those around her. Gilligan rewrites Kohlberg concepts on moral development by incorporating responsibility to others and need for communication. She develops three main stages of development. The first stage is the where the woman cares about themselves and is the unconventional stage; the second stage is the conventional stage where women start to have concern for relationship and communication with people around them. The last stage which is the post conventional stage is where women learn how to find a right balance between the relationship with others and care for themselves. Despite the fact the Gilligan has made some invaluable contribution to psychology, her theory has several ambiguity which makes the theory questionable. For instant, Gilligan essentialism is contrary to Freud biological determinism which naturalizes the biological distinction between men and women which cannot be changed. She claims that women are obviously inclined to be caretakers and this can be utilized by conservationist antifeminist as a way of propagating their oppression by perceiving them as caring mother figures that need to stay in the private domains of the society. Gilligan’s theory also aims to consider the existence of diversity of women experiences which would definitely cause them to react differently to moral dilemma (Jagger et al, 43). As such, she is silencing the vices of women who may not react in accordance with the model she develops. Joan Tronto asserts that Gilligan theory of moral ethics is clever and that the discussion of ethic care is important. However, she says that the discussion should not be based on gender differences but on ethics adequacy as a theory related to morals. According to her, basing the theory of ethics on gender difference is dangerous for feminist as it appears to be a stunt to continue the controversy that exist about superiority of the male gender over the female gender. Social differences do exist but overemphasizing them makes the validity of ethic care theory questionable despite the fact that it is based on sound evidence. In rewriting care ethics theory into a post modern theory, Tronto uses moral psychology eradicating Gilligan ambiguity created by her claim of dangerous essentialism and gender difference. She further refines this theory by including a political perspective. She first focuses on the cause of the gender difference which is that women have often suffered from the oppression of men (Held, 34). Their manner of moral thinking has thus developed as an adaptation to this phenomenon. She focuses on the relationship between oppression and care ethics and not gender differences. She asserts that this theory should not be seen as weak theory but it is unique in the fact that it connects women and men as it viewed as ethics of resistance. Tronto criticizes Gilligan theory in that by labeling care ethics as the voices of women she is creating a dichotomy favoring a single gender instead of creating a theory that is applicable to all people. Tronto says that care ethics should not be seen as an alternative moral theory but a development of the existing moral theories. He develops a model in such a way that cares: which is an essential aspect for survival of the universe is seen as purely a feministic political project and not a proof of women inadequacy in moral sensibility (Jagger et al, 45). Tronto has been successful in avoiding essentialism and binary thinking. She calls to both men and women to take up care ethics not only in private but also in the public. In conclusion, we can observe that Gilligan did make great contribution in development of the care ethics. However her utilization of essentialism and bipolarity makes this theory ambiguous and subject to creation of Norton that may make affirm the inferiority of women in moral sensibility. Tronto straightens out these ambiguities by creating another perspective of starting care ethics theory. She explains this theory in by taking a political perspective and thus makes this theory applicable to both genders as a way of promoting care which is needed as it is the fiber that keeps the society in harmony. She also unites the public and private domains of the society in a non-polarized manner making the post modern theory more practical for the contemporary society and more acceptable to all whether antifeminist or feminists. Work Cited Held, Virginia. Justice and Care: Essential Readings in Feminist Ethics. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995. Print. Jaggar, Alison M, and Susan Bordo. Gender/body/knowledge: Feminist Reconstructions of Being and Knowing. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press, 1989. Print. Read More