Carol Gilligan's Quote Analysis

A Philosopher and a Psychologist

“The decisions used to be so much easier, the course of action so much clearer. There was obviously the right thing to do. When did the right decision become so clouded? How did it become so blurred, and why for that matter? What should I do, and how do I want to play this”? (Jeff Davis: The Thinking Man’s Quote) I think we all have had that question dance through our mind at times when we had to make a decision that may impact our lives. I wished I had a dime for the countless times I asked for guidance and prayed and hoped I made the correct moral decisions. I think Carol Gilligan a renowned Psychologist and feminist Philosopher had asked that question once or twice herself. I even would venture to say that the

brainy philosopher Plato scratched his head a time or two wondering “Hmmm how do I handle this”?

I believe that is what prompted Carol Gilligan to drove in to the studies that set her apart from so many others in her field of study. In her ventures as a psychologist she set out to disprove the theories that Lawrence Kolberg tried to establish with his justice theory. Was she just in her decisions when she set out to prove her justice and care perspective? If Plato was alive and he asked Gilligan the same question he asked his fellow philosophers in “The Republic” “Is it better to be just or unjust” What would her response be to his question? Would she agree with Thrasymachus and his statement where he stated “the just suffer while the unjust prosper”. I wonder if Plato would be on the side of the feminist philosopher, or would he disagree with her studies. In this paper I will discuss the studies of Carol Gilligan, and how she proved that women make moral decisions based on care perspective. She also established that men tend to make moral decisions based on the justice perspective. I will also discuss how Socrates and Thrasymachus engage in a conversation where they try to

establish if it is better to be on the side of the unjust and prosper, or be just and suffer.
Carol Gilligan began her studies on care and justice perspective and documented her work in “Moral Orientation and Moral Development” to establish the difference between care and justice perspective. She wanted to show how women base their moral decisions on care perspective. This study shows that women tend to focus their concerns on maintaining relationships with little focus on feeling the need for justice. She gathered a group of educated women and asked a series of questions that allowed the subjects to present their ideas on various moral dilemmas. What Gilligan realized was that Kohlberg had gathered a group of women who lacked the knowledge of interpersonal skills. Gilligan took Kohlberg’s theories and dissected them to a point that showed he only used male subjects to prove that men had a greater understanding of moral dilemmas. She understood his justice theory but was dissatisfied with the results. She knew that women had a greater understanding of moral dilemmas; she only needed an accurate way to prove it. How does Plato fit in to the grand scheme of things? I feel as though the two philosophers had a common interest. They both were trying to find a way to understand justice and moral dilemmas. Socrates was a character that Plato uses to act out a scenario in his famous writings “The Republic”. He asks “what is the definition for justice”. By asking that question he gets an abnormal response from fellow philosopher Thrasymachus the two get in a debate over who has a greater advantage the just or the unjust. Thrasymachus felt that the unjust have a happier and more profitable life, whereas the just seem to be more dissatisfied. When Socrates heard this claim he was quite perplexed and asked Thrasymachus to please enlighten him with an explanation. Thrasymachus makes three assertions about justice. 1.” Justice is nothing but the advantage of the stronger” (The Republic 338c) 2. “Justice is obedience to laws” (The Republic 339b) 3. “Justice is nothing but the advantage of another” (The Republic 343c). Several scholars have looked into his explanation of what justice is and have given different replies to Thrasymachus’s answer. He felt justice was a way for the strong to control the weak, thus causing the weak to work for the strong hence making the strong prosper. If that is the case then it shows how Gilligan’s studies point out that men tend to make decisions based on the justice perspective. During her studies that I previously mentioned regarding the care perspective. She also conducted the same study for men to see how they would answer questions that portrayed certain moral dilemmas and all the men chose the justice perspective. That’s what the whole debate in “The Republic” was about, was whether it is better to be just or unjust. Men feel the need to have, or feel justified in their decisions. What exactly is the justice perspective? The justice perspective deals with moral choices men and few women choose that do not affect the rights of the people implicated. They select the solution that seems to affect the least amount of people.
How do we know which is the right and wrong decision? I would say the right choice would be to do what is morally right. If we are given a scenario and told to make a choice on what to do. We as just human beings have to examine the fact of, is anyone going to be hurt? We must also figure out what could be lost. I like to ask the questions who, what, when, where, why. By asking those questions I allow myself to gather all the details on the dilemma at hand.
I think that Gilligan had a great theory that she proved to be beneficial to society. She helped open the door to new thoughts and aided in tearing down walls that had been built around men for so many years. For the longest time men were looked upon to come up with decisions that required moral reasoning. With women now sharing their opinion it has brought new and interesting point of views to fruition. Furthermore the ideas expressed by women have a caring perspective that was lacking and there for unseen and even unheard of. I feel that in exposing the flaws in Kohlbergs studies Gilligan has helped women and men around the world. I think it makes life a lot easier when making moral decisions. The burden is somewhat lifted and has made life that much easier. When times get tough I enjoy sharing the load of difficult decisions. I also feel that Thrasymachus is right to a point in his discussion about the unjust are better off than the just. Let us examine some of the shady politicians (the unjust) on Capitol Hill. I will not go into naming any names because the list is far too long. I get perturbed by the fact that these people make and pass laws that help fill their pockets, while making six figures a year and filling the American people with false statements. Meanwhile the citizens (the just) are working several hours more and getting paid a lot less only to be taxed more and more each year. I am not sure I agree with “justice is obedience to the laws” for the mere fact that there are so many laws that there is no way possible to obey them all. For instance I have found one of many laws that are completely absurd and the list here as well is too long to note. This law was found in St. Mary’s, Georgia: No spitting on the sidewalk is permitted after dark. I can only imagine how many times that law has been broke. That is got to be the one of the craziest laws ever. You can spit on the side walk during the day but not at night. That is an example of an unjust law that could never be followed.
I think if Plato and Gilligan were to sit down today and have a conversation it would go something like this. Hey Plato what’s up? Hey Carol how are you? Oh you would not believe my day. I have been working on this study group of men and women. Do you believe that Kohlberg conducted the same study on justice perspective some years ago? He did not even include women for his study. I swear, if you want something done right you have to do it yourself. I just do not see how you men can be so narrow minded sometimes. What about you Plato? What dilemmas did you encounter today? Well I will tell you Carol. I was out walking and hanging out with my friend Thrasymachus and you know he is a sophist right? He thinks he knows everything. Well any way all I did was ask one question, and I will be darned if he did not go on a rant. I just have to ask you Plato, what did you ask? What is your definition of justice? Ok Plato you have me enthralled, do tell. What did he say? He went on about how the government is getting rich and sticking it to the little man. He said and I quote.” Justice is nothing but the advantage of the stronger” (The Republic 338c). Tell me Carol what the hell does that mean. I am not exactly sure Plato. If you do not know, how can we. I will figure it out. I just have to think about it some more. Enough about me. Tell me Carol, this study you are conducting. You are really going to include women. You bet I am. I am even going to get really educated women from good schools. I will show that Kohlberg a thing or two. Before you know it, female opinions will be involved in all moral decisions. That is a splendid idea Carol. Well thank you Plato I have been contemplating doing it for a while and finally I just did it. I got so tired of these men thinking they have all the right answers. With exception to you Plato, I will say you are a brilliant philosopher. What do you have planned for tonight Carol? I am headed home to shower and go to bed. I am exhausted these heels are killing me. What about you Plato. I am going to grab a cold brew and think about writing a book. I think I want to address this whole justice thing. Well good night, See you tomorrow. Back at you.
I think Plato and Gilligan have given a great contribution to moral ethics, and how human beings address moral dilemmas. Without their studies who knows where we would be as humans. We may be a bit more unethical and the verdicts we make may affect people is harmful ways. I hope in reading and comparing the two ideas that I am able to draw a better conclusion.