Feminist Ethics
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Ottawa *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
2396
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
6
Uploaded by CountWallabyMaster598
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
Feminist Ethics
Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development
Piaget’s Stages of Moral Development
Suggests developmental progression in moral thinking, with younger children emphasizing fixed rules and consequences, while older children adopt a more relativist approach, considering intentions and societal agreement in moral judgements. Stage 1 (Younger than 10-11 years):
Moral Dilemma Perspective:
o
Younger children approach moral dilemmas with fixed and absolute rules.
o
Rules are perceived as handed down by adults or God, unalterable by individuals.
Stage 2 (Around 10-11 years and Older):
Relativistic View:
o
Older children exhibit a more relativistic view of moral dilemmas.
o
They understand that rules can be changed if everyone agrees; rules are not sacred but tools for cooperative living.
Shifts in Moral Thinking (Around 10-11 years):
Change in Moral Basis:
o
Around 10-11 years, children's moral thinking undergoes shifts.
o
Younger children base moral judgments more on consequences.
o
Older children shift to basing judgments on intentions rather than consequences.
Example of Moral Judgment Shift:
Consequences vs. Intentions
:
o
Younger children, when presented with an example of a boy breaking cups:
Focus on the amount of damage (consequences).
May judge the boy who broke 15 cups while trying to help as having done worse.
o
Older children:
Primarily consider the motives underlying the act.
May judge wrongness in terms of intentions rather than consequences.
Kohlberg’s sample and method
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
Kohlberg’s method involves presenting moral dilemmas, focusing on the subject’s reasoning rather than a binary response
Through subsequent questions, the interviewer delves into the subject’s moral perspective, aiming to uncover the underlying principles guiding their ethical judgements.
Sample: o
Core sample of 72 boys from middle- and lower-class families in Chicago
o
Ages 10,13 and 16 initially
Later expanded to include younger children, delinquents, boys and girls from various American cities and countries
Method: Basic Interview with Dilemmas
o
Dilemma example:
A scenario involving a dying woman, a costly drug, and a druggist charging ten times its production cost
Heinz, the husband unable to afford the drug, contemplates stealing it for his wife.
o
Interviewers approach:
Focus on the reasoning behind the subject’s answer, not a simple “yes” or “no”
Questions aim to understand why the subject believes Heinz should or should not have stolen the drug
Additional questions explore rights. Violations and potential legal consequences.
o
Purpose:
Investigate the subject’s moral reasoning
Understand the rationale behind the ethical judgment
Gain insight into how the subject thinks about moral dilemmas.
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development:
Level I (Preconventional Morality):
Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation:
o
Child sees rules as fixed and unquestionable, handed down by authorities.
o
Moral judgments are based on fear of punishment.
o
Example: Heinz was wrong to steal because it's against the law.
Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange:
o
Recognition of diverse viewpoints; morality seen as relative.
o
Focus on pursuing individual interests.
o
Example: Different people may have different views on Heinz's actions.
Level II (Conventional Morality):
Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships:
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
o
Morality involves living up to family and community expectations.
o
Good behavior is tied to positive motives and interpersonal feelings.
o
Example: Heinz was right to steal as his intentions were good, saving a loved one.
Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order:
o
Broader concern for society; emphasis on obeying laws and performing duties.
o
Social order is maintained through respecting authority.
o
Example:
Understanding Heinz's motives but cannot condone theft for the greater good.
Level III (Postconventional Morality):
Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights:
o
Society as a social contract for mutual benefit.
o
Recognition of different values, emphasis on basic rights protection.
o
Example: People would agree on protecting basic rights and democratic procedures
.
Stage 6: Universal Principles:
o
Working toward a conception of a good society.
o
protecting individual rights, settling disputes through democratic processes.
o
Recognizing the need for higher principles to achieve justice.
o
Example: Beyond democratic processes, defining principles for achieving justice.
How Development Occurs (according to Kohlberg):
His stages do not result from maturation or a genetic blueprint
Socialization doesn’t involve direct teaching or new thinking patterns by socializing agents such as parents or teachers.
Stages emerge from individual thinking about moral problems and are stimulated by social experiences.
Discussions and debates with others challenge and question one’s views, motivating the development of new, more comprehensive positions.
Change occurs through role-taking oppurtunities, encouraging the consideration of other’s viewpoints. Problems for Kohlberg:
Culturally biased:
o
Critics argue that Kohlberg’s stages are culturally biased.
o
Developped on western philosophical traditions and then applied to non-western cultures without considering their diverse moral outlooks.
o
In many isolated villages and tribal communities,
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
Adults beyond stage 3 are rare, challenging the universality of Kohlberg's stage sequences.
Sex-Biased:
o
Kohlberg's theory is criticized for being sex-biased, as it was derived exclusively from interviews with males.
o
Carol Gilligan
points out that the stages reflect a predominantly male orientation, focusing on rules, rights, and abstract principles, which may not capture the distinct female voice on moral matters.
Carol Gilligan: In a Different Voice:
In a different voice: psychological theory and women's development (1982)
Also, a psychologist with great influence on moral philosophers
Gilligan argues:
o
That Kohlberg wrongly prioritizes a “
morality of rights
” and independence
from others as better than, rather than merely different from, a “
morality of
responsibilit
y
” and intimate relationships with others
o
“For women, Gilligan says, morality centers not on rights and rules but on i
nterpersonal relationships
and the ethics of compassion and care.
The ideal is not impersonal justice but more affiliative ways of living. Women's morality, in addition, is more contextualized, it is tied to real, ongoing relationships rather than abstract solutions to hypothetical dilemmas.” (p. 16-17)
Moral Development in Children: A Case Study
Method: Sample
Two children, Amy and Jake, aged eleven.
Both bright, articulate, and resistant to easy gender stereotypes.
Presented with a moral dilemma devised by Kohlberg to measure moral development in adolescents.
Male Moral Thinking: Logical and Autonomous (Jake)
Jake argues that Heinz should steal the drug, prioritizing the logical importance of life over property.
Displays self-confidence, logical reasoning, and an emergent autonomy.
Reflects a progression from egocentric understanding to a principled conception of justice.
Female Moral Thinking: Relationships, Care, Compassion (Amy)
Amy's response focuses on relationships, suggesting alternative solutions rather than endorsing theft.
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
Views the dilemma as a narrative of relationships, emphasizing the impact on the connection between Heinz and his wife.
Grounds her moral judgment in the belief that preserving life is paramount and emphasizes communication and shared responsibility.
Critical Analysis:
Jake's approach aligns with Kohlberg's stages, showcasing logical reasoning and a transition towards principled justice.
Amy's perspective challenges traditional moral frameworks, emphasizing relationships, and questioning the need for theft.
The study highlights gender differences in moral reasoning, raising questions about the universality of Kohlberg's theory.
Gender Disparities in Moral Development: A Critical View
Female Moral Development Assessment:
Considering Kohlberg's stages, o
the female participant's moral judgments are perceived as a full stage lower in maturity than the male participant.
Judged as a mixture of stages two and three, indicating potential feelings of powerlessness, inability for systematic thinking, reluctance to challenge authority, and a failure to act directly to
save a life. o
The female participant's reliance on relationships is seen as indicative of continuing dependence and vulnerability.
The belief in communication as the primary mode for resolving moral dilemmas is characterized as naive and cognitively immature.
Urges a reevaluation of Kohlberg's model to account for diverse moral reasoning patterns,
challenging the notion that females inherently lag in moral development.
Highlights the importance of considering alternative frameworks that encompass a broader range of moral perspectives.
Divergent Moral Perspectives: Amy and Jake
Amy’s Moral Framework:
Worldview:
o
Amy’s world is one defined by relationships and psychological truths, emphasizing the interdependence of individuals.
Ethical Insight:
o
Her judgment aligns with an ethic of care
Highlighting
a sense of responsibility
and a need for reciprocal responses in relationships.
PHI2396 LEC 2024
Meaghan Emilie Jakobi
300382615
Feminist Ethics
Conflict resolution:
o
Advocates for communication and believes in resolving conflicts by strengthening connections
Reflecting an approach rooted in the “method of truth”
And non-violent conflict resolution.
Perceived Naivety:
o
Contrary to perceived naivety, her understanding reveals an advanced grasp of relational ethics and a holistic perspective on moral dilemmas. Jame’s Moral Framework:
Worldview:
o
Jake perceives the moral dilemma as a conflict between life and property. Applying logical deduction and adherence to justice-oriented principls.
Ethical Insights: o
Reflects a justice approach, where moral reasoning is based on abstract principles, rules and fairbess.
Conflict Resolution: o
Advocates for deductive logic and relies on legal systems to mediate disputes,
Emphasizing objective decision-making
Critical Evaluation of Kohlberg's Model:
Different Moral Problems:
Amy and Jake approach Heinz's dilemma with fundamentally different moral questions and conceptions of the moral domain.
Scoring System Limitation:
Kohlberg's scoring system, while highlighting Jake's responses as more mature, fails to capture the nuanced moral understanding within Amy's judgments.
Unexplored Perspectives:
Kohlberg's theory lacks an exploration of what Amy sees that Jake does not, neglecting alternative modes of moral reasoning.
Criticism of Gilligan
Not everyone agrees with Gilligan's critique.
Rest (1983) argues that Gilligan has exaggerated the extent of the sex differences found on Kohlberg's scale
An evaluation of this question, however, must await closer
reviews of the literature.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help