1 answer this question? from your experience in living life, is there any truthfulness to john...

1

Answer this question?Answer this question?

From your experience From your experience in living life, is there in living life, is there any truthfulness to any truthfulness to John Gray’s thesisJohn Gray’s thesis

Men are from Mars, Men are from Mars, Women from Venus?Women from Venus?

2

Consider…Consider…

Are their significant differences in how you and Are their significant differences in how you and your spouse perceive opportunities and problems?your spouse perceive opportunities and problems?

Are their significant emotional and intimacy needs Are their significant emotional and intimacy needs that distinguish you from your spouse? that distinguish you from your spouse?

Are their different modes of behavior between you Are their different modes of behavior between you and your spouse? For example, are men really and your spouse? For example, are men really ““wild at heart?”: do they really need adventure, wild at heart?”: do they really need adventure, the opportunity to save a damsel in distress, and the opportunity to save a damsel in distress, and be a hero to someone?be a hero to someone?

3

Ethics of Justice vs. Ethics of CareEthics of Justice vs. Ethics of Care

An look into Carol An look into Carol Gilligan’s, Gilligan’s,

In a In a Different Voice: Different Voice: Psychological Theory Psychological Theory

and Women’s and Women’s Development Development

(Cambridge: Harvard (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, University Press,

1982, 1993), 1982, 1993),

Chapter 2.Chapter 2.

4

Images of Relationships: Chapter 2Images of Relationships: Chapter 2

Harvard Professor Carol Gilligan (1936-) begins Harvard Professor Carol Gilligan (1936-) begins Chapter 2 with the following introduction:Chapter 2 with the following introduction:

““in 1914 with his essay, “on Narcissism,” Freud in 1914 with his essay, “on Narcissism,” Freud swallows his distaste at the thought of a ‘abandoning swallows his distaste at the thought of a ‘abandoning observation for barren theoretical controversy’ and observation for barren theoretical controversy’ and extends his map of the psychological domain. extends his map of the psychological domain. Tracing the development of the capacity to love, Tracing the development of the capacity to love, which he equates with maturity and psychic health, which he equates with maturity and psychic health, he locates its origins in the contrast between love for he locates its origins in the contrast between love for the mother and love for the self. But in thus dividing the mother and love for the self. But in thus dividing the world of love into narcissism [self-absorption] the world of love into narcissism [self-absorption] and ‘object’ relationships, he find that while men’s and ‘object’ relationships, he find that while men’s development becomes clearer, women’s becomes development becomes clearer, women’s becomes increasingly opaque. increasingly opaque.

5


Professor Gilligan continues:Professor Gilligan continues:

The problem arises because the contrast between The problem arises because the contrast between mother and self yields two different relationships. mother and self yields two different relationships. Relying on the imagery of men’s lives n charting Relying on the imagery of men’s lives n charting the course of human growth, Freud is unable to the course of human growth, Freud is unable to trace in women the development of relationships, trace in women the development of relationships, morality, or a clear sense of self. This difficulty in morality, or a clear sense of self. This difficulty in fitting the logic of his theory to women’s experience fitting the logic of his theory to women’s experience leads him in the end to set women apart, marking leads him in the end to set women apart, marking their relationships, like their sexual life, as a ‘dark their relationships, like their sexual life, as a ‘dark continent’ for psychology.’” [Freud, “On Narcissism: continent’ for psychology.’” [Freud, “On Narcissism: An Introduction” (1914) XIV: 212] (pg. 24). An Introduction” (1914) XIV: 212] (pg. 24).

6


Professor Gilligan interprets Freud as stating:Professor Gilligan interprets Freud as stating:

““To Freud, though living surrounded by women and To Freud, though living surrounded by women and otherwise seeing so much and so well, women’s otherwise seeing so much and so well, women’s relationships seemed increasingly mysterious, relationships seemed increasingly mysterious, difficult to discern, and hard to describe. While this difficult to discern, and hard to describe. While this mystery indicates how theory can blind mystery indicates how theory can blind observation, it also suggests that development in observation, it also suggests that development in women is masked by a particular conception of women is masked by a particular conception of human relationships. Since the imagery of human relationships. Since the imagery of relationships shapes the narrative of human relationships shapes the narrative of human development, the inclusion of women, by changing development, the inclusion of women, by changing that imagery, implies a change in the entire that imagery, implies a change in the entire account” (pp. 24-5). account” (pp. 24-5).

7

The Shift in Imagery: A Case Study:The Shift in Imagery: A Case Study:Amy and Jake, two eleven year old students.Amy and Jake, two eleven year old students.

Amy and Jake were participants in a “Amy and Jake were participants in a “rights and rights and responsibilities studyresponsibilities study” which was designed to explore ” which was designed to explore

different conceptions of morality and self (pg. 25).different conceptions of morality and self (pg. 25).

Both students were bright and articulate.Both students were bright and articulate. Amy desires to become a scientist.Amy desires to become a scientist. Jake prefers English to math.Jake prefers English to math. Their moral judgments seem initially to confirm Their moral judgments seem initially to confirm

familiar ideas about the differences between the familiar ideas about the differences between the sexes (i.e., girls having an edge in terms of moral sexes (i.e., girls having an edge in terms of moral development during the early school years which will development during the early school years which will give way at puberty with the rise of formal logical give way at puberty with the rise of formal logical thought in boys (pg. 25).thought in boys (pg. 25).

8


In the following moral dilemma we In the following moral dilemma we will see that Jake and Amy see will see that Jake and Amy see

two different problems:two different problems:

9


The Moral Dilemma to Resolve:The Moral Dilemma to Resolve:

““A man named Heinz considers whether or not to steal a drug A man named Heinz considers whether or not to steal a drug which he cannot afford to buy in order to save the life of his which he cannot afford to buy in order to save the life of his wife.”wife.”

Heinz predicament.Heinz predicament.

The wife’s disease.The wife’s disease.

The druggist’s refusal to lower his priceThe druggist’s refusal to lower his price

Should Heinz steal the drug? The reason for and against Should Heinz steal the drug? The reason for and against stealing are then explored through a series of questions that stealing are then explored through a series of questions that vary and extend the parameters of the dilemma in a way vary and extend the parameters of the dilemma in a way design to reveal the underlying structure of moral thought:design to reveal the underlying structure of moral thought:

10


Jake sees the moral conflict between values of Jake sees the moral conflict between values of property and life. He discerns the logical priority property and life. He discerns the logical priority of life, and uses that logic to justify his choice. of life, and uses that logic to justify his choice.

““For one thing, a human life is worth more than For one thing, a human life is worth more than money, and if the druggist only makes 1,000, he money, and if the druggist only makes 1,000, he is still going to live, but if Heinz doesn’t steal the is still going to live, but if Heinz doesn’t steal the drug, his wife is going to die (Why is life worth drug, his wife is going to die (Why is life worth more than money?). Because the druggist can more than money?). Because the druggist can get a thousand dollars later from rich people with get a thousand dollars later from rich people with cancer, but Heinz can’t get his wife again (why cancer, but Heinz can’t get his wife again (why not?) Because people are all different and so you not?) Because people are all different and so you couldn’t get Heinz’s wife again.”couldn’t get Heinz’s wife again.”

11


Jake was also asked if Heinz should steal the drug Jake was also asked if Heinz should steal the drug if he doesn’t love his spouse?if he doesn’t love his spouse?

““Jake replies that he should, saying that not only Jake replies that he should, saying that not only is there a ‘a difference between hating and is there a ‘a difference between hating and killing,’ but also if Heinz where caught, ‘the judge killing,’ but also if Heinz where caught, ‘the judge would probably think it was the right thing to do.’ would probably think it was the right thing to do.’ Asked about the fact that, in stealing, Heinz Asked about the fact that, in stealing, Heinz would breaking the law, he says that ‘the laws would breaking the law, he says that ‘the laws have mistakes, and you can’t go writing up a law have mistakes, and you can’t go writing up a law for everything that you can imagine.’” (pg. 26).for everything that you can imagine.’” (pg. 26).

12


Considering the law and recognizing its function Considering the law and recognizing its function in maintaining social order, the judge, Jake in maintaining social order, the judge, Jake asserts, “should give Heinz the lightest possible asserts, “should give Heinz the lightest possible sentence.” Jake considers the law to be man-sentence.” Jake considers the law to be man-made, subject to error and change (pg. 26).made, subject to error and change (pg. 26).

13

Jake’s Ethics of Justice:Jake’s Ethics of Justice: Stages 5 & 6

Understanding of fairness

that rests on free-standing

logic of equality & reciprocity

Stages 3 & 4:Conception of Fairness

Anchored in the Shared Conventions of Societal Agreement.

Stages 1 & 2:Egocentric understanding of fairness based on

Individual Need

Kohlberg Analysis Moral Maturity (6 steps):Kohlberg Analysis Moral Maturity (6 steps):

14

What are Jake’s Assumptions/Methodology? What are Jake’s Assumptions/Methodology? The Ethics of JusticeThe Ethics of Justice

Ethics of justice might be described as follows:Ethics of justice might be described as follows:

1. 1. Locates truth in math which is “the only thing Locates truth in math which is “the only thing that that is totally logical” pg. 26 (deductive logic); is totally logical” pg. 26 (deductive logic); certainty certainty is found in logic (pg. 45).is found in logic (pg. 45).

- He establishes the problem between life & - He establishes the problem between life & property as an equation & proceeds to workout the property as an equation & proceeds to workout the solution; it is a contest of rights.solution; it is a contest of rights.

2.2. Rational conclusion: He assumes anyone Rational conclusion: He assumes anyone following following “reason” would arrive a same conclusion.“reason” would arrive a same conclusion.

15

What are Jake’s Assumptions/Methodology? What are Jake’s Assumptions/Methodology? The Ethics of JusticeThe Ethics of Justice

Ethics of justice might be described as follows:Ethics of justice might be described as follows:

3.3. Differentiates morality from laws and examines how laws Differentiates morality from laws and examines how laws can be corrected/changed in order to have a principled can be corrected/changed in order to have a principled conception of justice.conception of justice.

4.4. Self is defined via autonomy & personal confidence.Self is defined via autonomy & personal confidence.

5.5. Restraint from certain actions because of the needs of Restraint from certain actions because of the needs of others others (p 38).(p 38).

6.6. Transposes a hierarchy of power into a hierarchy of Transposes a hierarchy of power into a hierarchy of values values (pg.32).(pg.32).

7.7. Places the problem into an impersonal conflict of claims Places the problem into an impersonal conflict of claims (pg. (pg. 32).32).

16


Amy offers a different view regarding Heinz’s Amy offers a different view regarding Heinz’s moral dilemma to the question whether the moral dilemma to the question whether the husband should steal the drug?:husband should steal the drug?:

““Well, I don’t think so. I think there might be Well, I don’t think so. I think there might be other ways besides stealing it, like if he could other ways besides stealing it, like if he could borrow the money or make a loan or borrow the money or make a loan or something, but he really shouldn’t steal the something, but he really shouldn’t steal the drug-but his wife shouldn’t die either” (pg. drug-but his wife shouldn’t die either” (pg. 28).28).

17


When Amy is asked why she should not steal the drug, her When Amy is asked why she should not steal the drug, her response is:response is:

“ “ If he stole the drug, he might save his wife, then, but if he If he stole the drug, he might save his wife, then, but if he did, he might have to go to jail, and then his wife might get did, he might have to go to jail, and then his wife might get sicker again, and he couldn’t get more of the drug, and it sicker again, and he couldn’t get more of the drug, and it might not be good. So, they should really just talk it out and might not be good. So, they should really just talk it out and find some other way to make the money” (pg. 28).find some other way to make the money” (pg. 28).

Asked whether or not Heinz loves his wife she maintained that Asked whether or not Heinz loves his wife she maintained that he shouldn’t steal or let her die. And even if it was a stranger he shouldn’t steal or let her die. And even if it was a stranger dying, Heinz should still try to save her life, but not steal the dying, Heinz should still try to save her life, but not steal the drug (pg. 28).drug (pg. 28).

18


When asked again why Heinz shouldn’t steal she simply restates her When asked again why Heinz shouldn’t steal she simply restates her position, “Because it’s not right”. When asked to explain why, she states, position, “Because it’s not right”. When asked to explain why, she states, “if he took it, he might not know how to give it to his wife, and so his wife “if he took it, he might not know how to give it to his wife, and so his wife might still die.”might still die.”

She assumes that if the druggist were to see the deathly situation, he would She assumes that if the druggist were to see the deathly situation, he would surely want to help him save her. If they would just talk about it, surely surely want to help him save her. If they would just talk about it, surely they could come to an understanding (e.g., The druggist could give it to they could come to an understanding (e.g., The druggist could give it to them and have the husband pay for the drug later).them and have the husband pay for the drug later).

Lastly, she sees the problem being a failure of the druggist: “it is not right Lastly, she sees the problem being a failure of the druggist: “it is not right for someone to die when their life could be saved” (pg. 29).for someone to die when their life could be saved” (pg. 29).

19

Test Results for Amy:Test Results for Amy:

When the test is considered in view of When the test is considered in view of Kohlberg’s definition of stages and sequence Kohlberg’s definition of stages and sequence of moral development, her moral judgment are of moral development, her moral judgment are a full stage lower than those of Jake (pg. 30).a full stage lower than those of Jake (pg. 30).

Scored as a mixture of stages 2 & 3 (shared Scored as a mixture of stages 2 & 3 (shared conventions of societal agreement), she is as conventions of societal agreement), she is as follows:follows:

20


1.1. Stunted by a failure of logic;Stunted by a failure of logic;

2.2. Inability to think for herself;Inability to think for herself;

3.3. Her replies are evasive, unsure, & lacks confidence; Her replies are evasive, unsure, & lacks confidence; powerlessness.powerlessness.

4.4. Does not consider property and law but rather the effect that Does not consider property and law but rather the effect that theft could have on the relationship between Heinz and wife.theft could have on the relationship between Heinz and wife.

5.5. Sees the dilemma as being the druggist’s failure to respond to Sees the dilemma as being the druggist’s failure to respond to wife.wife.

6.6. The answer to the moral problem is “communication” rather The answer to the moral problem is “communication” rather than than the systematic application of logic.the systematic application of logic.

21


In sum, following the Kohlberg test:In sum, following the Kohlberg test:

Jake sees a conflict between life and property that be resolved Jake sees a conflict between life and property that be resolved by logical deduction and categorical thinking.by logical deduction and categorical thinking.

Amy see a conflict between life and a lack of communication: Amy see a conflict between life and a lack of communication: the problem that can resolved by honesty and open the problem that can resolved by honesty and open communication; she appeals to contextual relationships.communication; she appeals to contextual relationships.

Kohlberg summarizes the test by stating that the children Kohlberg summarizes the test by stating that the children arrive at answers that fundamentally diverge because Jake arrive at answers that fundamentally diverge because Jake demonstrates moral maturity through the application of logic.demonstrates moral maturity through the application of logic.

22

A Network of Relationships:A Network of Relationships:

Honesty; open communication;Heinz should fear a potential lack of care/loneliness/separation from his wife.

Druggist needs to respond to the need

Interpersonal relationships

Heinz’s dying wife

The DruggistHeinz

23

What’s Carol Gilligan’s Interpretation? What’s Carol Gilligan’s Interpretation?

An Ethics of Care. Rather than being displayed as a An Ethics of Care. Rather than being displayed as a hierarchy of maturity through the application of logic, hierarchy of maturity through the application of logic, females are fundamentally different than males (pg. 31):females are fundamentally different than males (pg. 31):

We need to ask the question:We need to ask the question:

What does Amy see that Jake doesn’t?What does Amy see that Jake doesn’t?

An ethics of care according to Carol Gilligan.An ethics of care according to Carol Gilligan.

In other words, like Amy, women have a different perspective; In other words, like Amy, women have a different perspective; they are able to achieve the highest level of moral development. they are able to achieve the highest level of moral development.

24

Descriptive Elements of An Ethic of Care:Descriptive Elements of An Ethic of Care:

1.1. The world is comprised of a web of relationships sustained by The world is comprised of a web of relationships sustained by communication (pg. 38).communication (pg. 38).

-Actors in dilemmas are “members of a network of relationships -Actors in dilemmas are “members of a network of relationships on whose communication they all depend” (30). on whose communication they all depend” (30).

2.2. Self is defined through interpersonal connection. Self is defined through interpersonal connection.

25

Descriptive Elements of An Ethic of Care:Descriptive Elements of An Ethic of Care:

3.3. Amy speaks of morality and responsibility as a way of restoring Amy speaks of morality and responsibility as a way of restoring community.community.

4.4. Focuses on the need for a response.Focuses on the need for a response.

5.5. Wherever it is broken, thus the problem of “loneliness” constitutes Wherever it is broken, thus the problem of “loneliness” constitutes a major moral problem. a major moral problem.

6.6. One is responsible to care for others, to alleviate their loneliness. One is responsible to care for others, to alleviate their loneliness.

26

A Working Definition of an “Ethic of Care”A Working Definition of an “Ethic of Care”A working definition of Ethic of Care:A working definition of Ethic of Care:

1.1. It is at least an ethical perspective that seeks It is at least an ethical perspective that seeks to to preserve and nurture the concrete relations in preserve and nurture the concrete relations in a a web of relationships, attending and positively web of relationships, attending and positively

responding to the needs of others.responding to the needs of others.

27

Other Observations: Violence:Other Observations: Violence: In a series of studies on how danger is In a series of studies on how danger is

perceived between the sexes (pg. 42), perceived between the sexes (pg. 42), men see danger:men see danger:

1.1. Often in close personal affiliation Often in close personal affiliation than in than in achievement and constructing achievement and constructing danger danger from intimacy:from intimacy:

entrapment/betrayal;entrapment/betrayal;smothering relationship;smothering relationship;humiliated by rejection/deceit.humiliated by rejection/deceit.

28

Other Observations:Other Observations:Consider this fictional story:Consider this fictional story:

““Nick saw his life pass before his eyes. He could feel Nick saw his life pass before his eyes. He could feel the cold penetrating even deeper into his body. How the cold penetrating even deeper into his body. How long had it been since he had fallen through the ice-long had it been since he had fallen through the ice-thirty-seconds, a minute? It wouldn’t take long for him thirty-seconds, a minute? It wouldn’t take long for him to succumb to the chilling grip of the mid-February to succumb to the chilling grip of the mid-February Charles River. What a fool he had been to accept the Charles River. What a fool he had been to accept the challenge of his roommate Sam to cross the frozen challenge of his roommate Sam to cross the frozen river. He knew all along that Sam hated him. Hated river. He knew all along that Sam hated him. Hated him for being rich and especially hated him for being him for being rich and especially hated him for being engaged to Mary, Sam’s childhood sweetheart. But engaged to Mary, Sam’s childhood sweetheart. But Nick never realized until now that Mary also hated him Nick never realized until now that Mary also hated him and really loved Sam. Yet there they were, the two of and really loved Sam. Yet there they were, the two of them, calmly sitting on a beach in the riverbend, them, calmly sitting on a beach in the riverbend, watching Nick drown. They’d probably soon by watching Nick drown. They’d probably soon by married, and they’d probably finance it with the life married, and they’d probably finance it with the life insurance policy for which Mary was the beneficiary” insurance policy for which Mary was the beneficiary” (pg. 40).(pg. 40).

29

Other Observations:Other Observations:Women see danger:Women see danger:

1.1. Danger of isolation, Danger of isolation, 2.2. A fear in standing out or being set apart by success, A fear in standing out or being set apart by success, left left alone (pg. 42),alone (pg. 42),3.3. A relational failure (pg 43).A relational failure (pg 43).

Thus, women see violence as a “fracture of human Thus, women see violence as a “fracture of human connection” with the activities of care being those connection” with the activities of care being those activities that make the social world safe, avoids isolation, activities that make the social world safe, avoids isolation, and prevents aggression.and prevents aggression.

Conclusion by Gilligan: “Men and women may experience Conclusion by Gilligan: “Men and women may experience attachment and separation in different ways and that attachment and separation in different ways and that each sex perceives a danger which the other does not see each sex perceives a danger which the other does not see men in connection, women in separation (pg. 42).”men in connection, women in separation (pg. 42).”

30

Other Observations: Other Observations:

““When the interconnections of the web are When the interconnections of the web are dissolved by the hierarchical ordering of dissolved by the hierarchical ordering of relationships, when nets are portrayed as relationships, when nets are portrayed as dangerous entrapments impeding flight rather than dangerous entrapments impeding flight rather than protecting against the fall, women come to question protecting against the fall, women come to question whether what they have seen exists and whether whether what they have seen exists and whether what they know from their experience is true. what they know from their experience is true. These questions are raised not as abstract These questions are raised not as abstract philosophical speculations about the nature of philosophical speculations about the nature of reality and truth but as personal doubts that invade reality and truth but as personal doubts that invade women’s sense of themselves, compromising their women’s sense of themselves, compromising their ability to act on their own perceptions and thus ability to act on their own perceptions and thus their willingness to take responsibility for what they their willingness to take responsibility for what they do. This issue becomes central in women’s do. This issue becomes central in women’s development during the adolescent years, when development during the adolescent years, when thought becomes reflective and the problem of thought becomes reflective and the problem of interpretation thus enters the stream of interpretation thus enters the stream of development itself” (pg. 49).development itself” (pg. 49).

31

Other Observations: Other Observations: The struggle to be understood; The struggle to be understood;

the struggle for uniqueness in a context of relationships.the struggle for uniqueness in a context of relationships.

In view of this hierarchical relationship of In view of this hierarchical relationship of ethics of justice, both psychologists and ethics of justice, both psychologists and women themselves find it difficulty to women themselves find it difficulty to account for their identity and moral belief; account for their identity and moral belief; they are in crisis:they are in crisis:

““A crisis that centers on her struggle to A crisis that centers on her struggle to disentangle her voice from the voices of disentangle her voice from the voices of others and to find a language that others and to find a language that represents her experience of relationships represents her experience of relationships and her sense of herself” (pg. 51).and her sense of herself” (pg. 51).

32


In her concluding remarks, Professor Gilligan offers In her concluding remarks, Professor Gilligan offers the following statements (pp. 62-3).the following statements (pp. 62-3).

““While the truths of psychological theory have While the truths of psychological theory have blinded psychologists to the truth of women’s blinded psychologists to the truth of women’s experience, that experience illuminates a world experience, that experience illuminates a world where psychologists have found hard to trace, a where psychologists have found hard to trace, a territory where violence is rare and relationships territory where violence is rare and relationships appear safe. The reason women’s experience has appear safe. The reason women’s experience has been so difficult to decipher or even discern is that been so difficult to decipher or even discern is that a shift in the imagery of relationships gives rise to a a shift in the imagery of relationships gives rise to a problem of interpretation. The images of hierarchy problem of interpretation. The images of hierarchy and web, drawn from the texts of men’s and and web, drawn from the texts of men’s and women’s fantasies and thoughts, convey different women’s fantasies and thoughts, convey different ways of structuring relationships and are associated ways of structuring relationships and are associated with different views of morality and self. But these with different views of morality and self. But these images create a problem in understanding because images create a problem in understanding because each distorts the other’s representation. each distorts the other’s representation.

33


As the top of the hierarchy becomes the edge of As the top of the hierarchy becomes the edge of the web and as the center of a network of the web and as the center of a network of connection becomes the middle of a hierarchical connection becomes the middle of a hierarchical progression, each image marks as dangerous the progression, each image marks as dangerous the place which the other defines as safe. Thus the place which the other defines as safe. Thus the images of hierarchy and web inform different images of hierarchy and web inform different modes of assertion and response: the wish to be modes of assertion and response: the wish to be alone at the top and the consequent fear that alone at the top and the consequent fear that others will get too close; the wish to be at the others will get too close; the wish to be at the center of connection and the consequent fear of center of connection and the consequent fear of being too far out on the edge. These disparate being too far out on the edge. These disparate fears of being stranded and being caught give fears of being stranded and being caught give rise to different portrayals of achievement and rise to different portrayals of achievement and affiliation, leading to different modes of action affiliation, leading to different modes of action and different ways of assessing the consequence and different ways of assessing the consequence of choice.”of choice.”

34


She goes on to say in the last paragraph:She goes on to say in the last paragraph:

““The reinterpretation of women’s experience The reinterpretation of women’s experience in terms of their own imagery of in terms of their own imagery of relationships thus clarifies the experience relationships thus clarifies the experience and also provides a nonhierarchical vision of and also provides a nonhierarchical vision of human connection. Since relationships, human connection. Since relationships, when case in the imagery of hierarchy, when case in the imagery of hierarchy, appear inherently unstable and morally appear inherently unstable and morally problematic, their transposition into the problematic, their transposition into the image of web changes an order of inequality image of web changes an order of inequality into a structure of interconnection. into a structure of interconnection.

35


She continues…She continues…

But the power of the images of hierarchy and web, their But the power of the images of hierarchy and web, their evocation of feelings and their recurrence in thought, evocation of feelings and their recurrence in thought, signifies the embeddedness of both of these images in signifies the embeddedness of both of these images in the cycle of human life. The experiences of inequality the cycle of human life. The experiences of inequality and interconnection, inherent in the relation of parent and interconnection, inherent in the relation of parent and child, then give rise to the ethics of justice and care, and child, then give rise to the ethics of justice and care, the ideals of human relationship,-the vision that self and the ideals of human relationship,-the vision that self and other will be treated as of equal worth, that despite other will be treated as of equal worth, that despite difference in power, things will be fair; the vision that difference in power, things will be fair; the vision that everyone will be responded to and included, that no one everyone will be responded to and included, that no one will be left alone or hurt. These disparate visions in their will be left alone or hurt. These disparate visions in their tension reflect the paradoxical truths of human tension reflect the paradoxical truths of human experience-that we know ourselves as separate only experience-that we know ourselves as separate only insofar as we live in connection with others, and that we insofar as we live in connection with others, and that we experience relationship only insofar as we differentiate experience relationship only insofar as we differentiate other from self” (pg. 62-3).other from self” (pg. 62-3).

36

Is this Distinction Philosophically Sound?Is this Distinction Philosophically Sound?

B. Is it philosophically sound? If it is sound as an B. Is it philosophically sound? If it is sound as an alternative approach in ethical theory, a “feminine alternative approach in ethical theory, a “feminine approach” (in contrast to utilitarian or deontological approach” (in contrast to utilitarian or deontological ethics) one might answer with a resounding “no.” If ethics) one might answer with a resounding “no.” If it is sound in bringing to the forefront how masculine it is sound in bringing to the forefront how masculine structures dominated Western thought and culture structures dominated Western thought and culture (from authority structures to linguistics), oppressing, (from authority structures to linguistics), oppressing, discriminating, and nullifying feminine discriminating, and nullifying feminine development/identity in a modernistic worldview, development/identity in a modernistic worldview, then same people might argue “yes.” then same people might argue “yes.”

37


4 reasons that may be used to argue that Gilligan’s 4 reasons that may be used to argue that Gilligan’s view is not “philosophically sound”:view is not “philosophically sound”:

1. Do boys inherently use formal logical thought, relying 1. Do boys inherently use formal logical thought, relying on the conventions of logic with no regard for on the conventions of logic with no regard for interpersonal relationships? interpersonal relationships?

2. If the world is constituted primarily by a network of 2. If the world is constituted primarily by a network of relationships, then we would take “justice” into account relationships, then we would take “justice” into account that would involve rules, maxims, or principles. that would involve rules, maxims, or principles.

38


3. If ethics of care is interpreted as an 3. If ethics of care is interpreted as an “ethical approach” rather than merely a “ethical approach” rather than merely a [complementary] perspective, advocating [complementary] perspective, advocating the the displacement of normative ethics such displacement of normative ethics such as as utilitarianism (for its emphasis on utilitarianism (for its emphasis on calculations, horrific injustices, future calculations, horrific injustices, future consequences, etc) or deontological ethics consequences, etc) or deontological ethics (for its focus on rules, rationality, or (for its focus on rules, rationality, or absolutes absolutes to the neglect of a person’s to the neglect of a person’s welfare, etc), welfare, etc), one might argue that this one might argue that this model is not model is not philosophically sound for the philosophically sound for the following 5 following 5 reasons:reasons:

39


A.A. Care ethics lacks clarity in resolving moral Care ethics lacks clarity in resolving moral conflicts.conflicts.

B.B. Vast differences on what constitutes “care” Vast differences on what constitutes “care” “nurture” “nurture” or even “relations.” Different people, or even “relations.” Different people, cultures, and sub-cultures, and sub-groups have vast opinions on groups have vast opinions on what constitutes “care.” what constitutes “care.” (Some people eat their (Some people eat their neighbors for food whereas others neighbors for food whereas others love their love their neighbors neighbors ). Aristotle’s Republic; Spartan ). Aristotle’s Republic; Spartan Rule, Rule, to Marxism, postmillennialism, etc.to Marxism, postmillennialism, etc.

C.C. Is “care” a feminine morality, a master-value and Is “care” a feminine morality, a master-value and all all other things are valuable only to the extent other things are valuable only to the extent that they can that they can contribute to it? contribute to it?

40


D.D. It fails to gives us significant help in the practicalities It fails to gives us significant help in the practicalities on on how we should behave; it is too nebulous (unlike how we should behave; it is too nebulous (unlike utilitarianism with its calculations or deontological ethics utilitarianism with its calculations or deontological ethics with it’s universal and necessary with it’s universal and necessary a prioria priori rules). rules).

E.E. There is no distinctly feminine morality (cf. Mary There is no distinctly feminine morality (cf. Mary Wollstonecraft in Wollstonecraft in Vindication of the Rights of Woman).Vindication of the Rights of Woman).

- If there is a feminine morality does that mean that - If there is a feminine morality does that mean that utilitarianism and deontological ethics is a masculine utilitarianism and deontological ethics is a masculine morality because it is not as “caring”? morality because it is not as “caring”?

41

Is this distinction philosophically sound?Is this distinction philosophically sound?

4.4. Jean Grimshaw’s criticisms:Jean Grimshaw’s criticisms:A.A. There is little agreement among women on what There is little agreement among women on what

accounts accounts as “female values.”as “female values.”

B.B. Dependent on the polarization of “masculine” and Dependent on the polarization of “masculine” and “feminine” which has itself been so closely related “feminine” which has itself been so closely related

to the to the “subordination of women.” “subordination of women.”

C.C. There is no autonomous realm of female virtues There is no autonomous realm of female virtues

~ ~ A Companion to EthicsA Companion to Ethics, “The Idea of a Female Ethic” edited by , “The Idea of a Female Ethic” edited by Peter Singer (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), pg. 498.Peter Singer (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), pg. 498.

42


On the other hand, one could argue that On the other hand, one could argue that this distinction is ultimately true but the this distinction is ultimately true but the way it has been handled is confusing and way it has been handled is confusing and unclear. If the following is true, then the unclear. If the following is true, then the ethics of care has not been ignored in ethics of care has not been ignored in philosophy:philosophy:

43


Philosophically, (1) the ethics of justice is better interpreted as Philosophically, (1) the ethics of justice is better interpreted as a theory of individualism and ethics of care as a theory of a theory of individualism and ethics of care as a theory of community. To be sure, both views have been taught in community. To be sure, both views have been taught in philosophy, though one could argue, analogous to the critique philosophy, though one could argue, analogous to the critique of modernism by critical continental thinkers, that (2) of modernism by critical continental thinkers, that (2) modernism at is apex (with all its authority structures and modernism at is apex (with all its authority structures and conceptions) ignored discriminated, oppressed, and even conceptions) ignored discriminated, oppressed, and even nullified female identity, development, and voice (e.g., Freud) nullified female identity, development, and voice (e.g., Freud) in contemporary thought and culture.in contemporary thought and culture.

Lets’ take a closer look at these two issues.Lets’ take a closer look at these two issues. Consider the following quotes:Consider the following quotes:

44

Consider the following:Consider the following:

Community:Community:

Aristotle—In the Aristotle—In the Ethics Ethics we are told that we are told that “Man is “Man is born for citizenship,” born for citizenship,” and in the and in the PoliticsPolitics we are we are told, told, “Man is by nature a political animal“Man is by nature a political animal..” ” More explicitly, Aristotle tells us, More explicitly, Aristotle tells us, “The state is “The state is by nature clearly prior to the family and to by nature clearly prior to the family and to the individual, since the whole is of necessity the individual, since the whole is of necessity prior to the part.” prior to the part.”

For Aristotle, then, the individual presupposes community. For Aristotle, then, the individual presupposes community. The sustenance of community is the moral The sustenance of community is the moral goalgoal, not the moral , not the moral problem. problem.

45



Hegel— Patriotism does not simply mean the Hegel— Patriotism does not simply mean the willingness to make exceptional sacrifices. Rather, it willingness to make exceptional sacrifices. Rather, it is the recognition is the recognition “that the community is one’s “that the community is one’s substantive groundwork and end” substantive groundwork and end” (#268). (#268).

Here again, in an Aristotelian vein, we see in very plain Here again, in an Aristotelian vein, we see in very plain language that the community is presupposed by the individual language that the community is presupposed by the individual for Hegel. The moral self cannot define itself in separation for Hegel. The moral self cannot define itself in separation from others, but rather must understand itself as constituted by from others, but rather must understand itself as constituted by its connection with others in the community.its connection with others in the community.

46



Marx—Living with others does not constitute for Marx (as it Marx—Living with others does not constitute for Marx (as it seemed to do for Jake) a limitation on personal freedom. seemed to do for Jake) a limitation on personal freedom. Rather, Rather, “only in the community is personal freedom “only in the community is personal freedom possible” possible” (197). (197).

Here again we see a clear priority being established: the Here again we see a clear priority being established: the individual can only be defined through relationship with other individual can only be defined through relationship with other members of community.members of community.

47

Need for Contracts:Need for Contracts:

Individualism:Individualism:

Hobbes—In the state of nature, men are in the Hobbes—In the state of nature, men are in the “condition “condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man which is called war, and such a war as is of every man

against every man. against every man.

The natural state of man is The natural state of man is “solitary.” “solitary.” And it becomes clear And it becomes clear that this picture of humanity, though perhaps softened a bit, that this picture of humanity, though perhaps softened a bit, is essentially that of all contract theorists. For the whole is essentially that of all contract theorists. For the whole premise behind contract theory is that human beings are premise behind contract theory is that human beings are essentially individuals, wildly scrambling to pursue their essentially individuals, wildly scrambling to pursue their own interests.own interests.

48

According to Mill:According to Mill:


““The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he The liberty of the individual must be thus far limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people.” must not make himself a nuisance to other people.” This is This is in Mill’s chapter praising individualism as “one of the in Mill’s chapter praising individualism as “one of the elements of well-being.”elements of well-being.”

This, for Mill, is the pinnacle of moral responsibility: not This, for Mill, is the pinnacle of moral responsibility: not being a nuisance. And this is the sentiment expressed by Jake being a nuisance. And this is the sentiment expressed by Jake when he explained that, if he wanted to kill himself, he should when he explained that, if he wanted to kill himself, he should do it with a gun rather than a stick of dynamite, since the do it with a gun rather than a stick of dynamite, since the dynamite might kill others, i.e., be a nuisance to them.dynamite might kill others, i.e., be a nuisance to them.

49

Individualism according Individualism according to Rawls and Nozickto Rawls and Nozick


John Rawls and Robert Nozick, for example, although John Rawls and Robert Nozick, for example, although differing from one another in substantial ways, are differing from one another in substantial ways, are unanimous in their individualism. The community unanimous in their individualism. The community presupposes the individual and, for both of them, having to presupposes the individual and, for both of them, having to live in community with others constitutes the problem that live in community with others constitutes the problem that philosophy must solve. philosophy must solve.

50

Individualism according to Rawls and Individualism according to Rawls and Nozick:Nozick:


In fact, the community is seen as nothing but the sum In fact, the community is seen as nothing but the sum of individual preferences, therefore necessitating a of individual preferences, therefore necessitating a morality of restraint. Even what appears to be a morality of restraint. Even what appears to be a morality of care, for Rawls, is best characterized in morality of care, for Rawls, is best characterized in terms of a limitation of the individual’s limitless terms of a limitation of the individual’s limitless pursuit of gain and pleasure. So, although pursuit of gain and pleasure. So, although historically the ethic of care has not been omitted, it historically the ethic of care has not been omitted, it has certainly been overlooked in much modern and has certainly been overlooked in much modern and contemporary moral thought.contemporary moral thought.

51

In Summary:In Summary:

What Gilligan calls an “What Gilligan calls an “ethic of careethic of care” has not ” has not been ignored in the history of philosophy. been ignored in the history of philosophy. Indeed, an “Indeed, an “ethic of careethic of care” has been the ” has been the predominant model for moral thinking until the predominant model for moral thinking until the last few centuries. Still, one can understand why last few centuries. Still, one can understand why it might seem as though the ethic of care has it might seem as though the ethic of care has been omitted. The major thinkers in modern and been omitted. The major thinkers in modern and even contemporary moral and social-political even contemporary moral and social-political philosophy have been largely concerned with philosophy have been largely concerned with what Gilligan calls an “what Gilligan calls an “ethic of justiceethic of justice.” This is in .” This is in view of the rise of modernism and its view of the rise of modernism and its ramifications in thought and culture, and the two ramifications in thought and culture, and the two dominant ethical views prior to 1958 (Anscombe’s dominant ethical views prior to 1958 (Anscombe’s article): Utilitarianism vs. Deontological ethics.article): Utilitarianism vs. Deontological ethics.

52

Oppression of a Female Identity:Oppression of a Female Identity:

To be sure, some say that care ethicists and even more forceful To be sure, some say that care ethicists and even more forceful feminist philosophers do bring a warranted claim that needs to feminist philosophers do bring a warranted claim that needs to be considered in contemporary society: wherever gender be considered in contemporary society: wherever gender oppression exists, critical evaluation and reform is needed. In oppression exists, critical evaluation and reform is needed. In fact, they argue that we need to end oppression wherever it fact, they argue that we need to end oppression wherever it exists, whereby certain types of people are not inherently seen exists, whereby certain types of people are not inherently seen as inherently valuable, where voices are neglected, rejected, as inherently valuable, where voices are neglected, rejected, discriminated, and persecuted. discriminated, and persecuted.

Do you agree or disagree? Why?Do you agree or disagree? Why?WHAT IS YOUR JUSTIFICATION?WHAT IS YOUR JUSTIFICATION?

53

Alienation of a female identity in a Alienation of a female identity in a Modernistic Worldview:Modernistic Worldview:

However, like continental theorists, in contemporary However, like continental theorists, in contemporary thought some blame modernism with its emphasis thought some blame modernism with its emphasis upon rationality, individualism, and categorical-upon rationality, individualism, and categorical-systematic thinking whereby females are defined, systematic thinking whereby females are defined, categorized related, and interpreted in view of their categorized related, and interpreted in view of their ““synchronicsynchronic” relationship to maleness, whether ” relationship to maleness, whether culturally, linguistically, etc. (hence, even the word culturally, linguistically, etc. (hence, even the word “fe-male” or wo-man”) to the extent that the “fe-male” or wo-man”) to the extent that the psychological theory of and study of women have psychological theory of and study of women have been alienated (e.g., Freud).been alienated (e.g., Freud).

54

Alienation of a female identity in a Alienation of a female identity in a Modernistic Worldview:Modernistic Worldview:

WWhether there is really is a distinctly hether there is really is a distinctly feminine “feminine “carecare ethicsethics” perspective, it is ” perspective, it is difficult to deny that females have been difficult to deny that females have been ignored or undervalued, and even ignored or undervalued, and even alienated in certain segments of Western alienated in certain segments of Western thought and culture (e.g., Taliban; thought and culture (e.g., Taliban; Marxism).Marxism).

55

Let’s consider the following?Let’s consider the following? If women and men are significantly different in how they If women and men are significantly different in how they

perceive and respond to others (relationships, opportunities, perceive and respond to others (relationships, opportunities, problems, etc), then when it comes moral conflicts, how would problems, etc), then when it comes moral conflicts, how would these two groups perceive and interpret moral conflicts? What these two groups perceive and interpret moral conflicts? What is the probability that men and women would come to the is the probability that men and women would come to the same conclusion (consider Jake and Amy’s case)?same conclusion (consider Jake and Amy’s case)?

All women jury vs. All men jury?All women jury vs. All men jury? 50% men vs.50% women on a jury?50% men vs.50% women on a jury? Moral conflicts at home?Moral conflicts at home? Moral conflicts at work?Moral conflicts at work? Moral conflicts at school?Moral conflicts at school?

56

Considerations from a Biblical Worldview:Considerations from a Biblical Worldview:“A Harmony of Differences”“A Harmony of Differences”

1.1. “Radical feminism has blurred the distinctions between the “Radical feminism has blurred the distinctions between the sexes, leaving men and women stranded in regard to sexes, leaving men and women stranded in regard to forming their sex roles.” ~ Elizabeth Eliot.forming their sex roles.” ~ Elizabeth Eliot.

2.2. Archetypes: (First Stamp): Man and Woman were Archetypes: (First Stamp): Man and Woman were historical Adam and Eve. They were both made by God, in historical Adam and Eve. They were both made by God, in the image of God, and placed in moral responsibility (Gen. the image of God, and placed in moral responsibility (Gen. 1-2).1-2).

3.3. God created women gloriously different than man, from the God created women gloriously different than man, from the man, for the man (fulfillment), and named by the man. It man, for the man (fulfillment), and named by the man. It was not out of dust, but out of Adam’s rib.was not out of dust, but out of Adam’s rib.

57

Considerations from a Biblical Worldview:Considerations from a Biblical Worldview:

4.4. Each were given a responsibility expressed in Each were given a responsibility expressed in different modality; each expresses His image: different modality; each expresses His image: It is a “glorious harmony of differences.” It is a “glorious harmony of differences.”

5.5. It was God’s idea of an operator and It was God’s idea of an operator and responder. Just as there is an ebb and flow, responder. Just as there is an ebb and flow, moon and sun, and lesser and greater. moon and sun, and lesser and greater. Likewise, Operator (leader, Adam) and co-Likewise, Operator (leader, Adam) and co-operator (responder, Eve) (e.g., Waltz). operator (responder, Eve) (e.g., Waltz).

58


6.6. The harmony was defaced by sin (Gen. 3). The The harmony was defaced by sin (Gen. 3). The original archetype was historical Adam and Eve original archetype was historical Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:26-27; Gen. 9). The serpent came and (Gen. 1:26-27; Gen. 9). The serpent came and tempted her to “upgrade” her lifestyle. But, we have tempted her to “upgrade” her lifestyle. But, we have to remember that humanity was not created to bear to remember that humanity was not created to bear the weight of responsibility from the Tree of Good the weight of responsibility from the Tree of Good and Evil. She was too proud be a human being, she and Evil. She was too proud be a human being, she wanted to be “like God”, appealing to the lust of the wanted to be “like God”, appealing to the lust of the eyes, flesh, and pride of life. In Adam’s presence, eyes, flesh, and pride of life. In Adam’s presence, she usurped Adam’s authority and he abdicated his she usurped Adam’s authority and he abdicated his leadership. Thus, he came to be responder and she leadership. Thus, he came to be responder and she became the operator. Believed she would be became the operator. Believed she would be deprived of fulfillment from God, she yielded to that deprived of fulfillment from God, she yielded to that temptation.temptation.

59


7.7. In view of yielding to the temptation, Adam ceased In view of yielding to the temptation, Adam ceased to husband Eve, failed to protect her, failed to be to husband Eve, failed to protect her, failed to be the leader, and capitulated to Eve’s whim. She took the leader, and capitulated to Eve’s whim. She took the initiative and usurped his authority, reversing the initiative and usurped his authority, reversing the roles.the roles.

8.8. Where is fulfillment found? Is it in vocation or Where is fulfillment found? Is it in vocation or obedience? Fulfillment is located in obedience by obedience? Fulfillment is located in obedience by saying “yes” Lord: God, what do you want me to saying “yes” Lord: God, what do you want me to do? (involves obedience and “being the appropriate do? (involves obedience and “being the appropriate godly person; virtue).godly person; virtue).

60


9.9. What is a biblical view of subordination (e.g., What is a biblical view of subordination (e.g., consider the doctrine of the Trinity)? Many consider the doctrine of the Trinity)? Many problems or reactions to a biblical view of the problems or reactions to a biblical view of the ““harmony of differencesharmony of differences” is confusing “” is confusing “essenceessence” ” and “and “functionfunction.” But just as the Only and only .” But just as the Only and only Triune God is one “essence” (Triunity), each Triune God is one “essence” (Triunity), each member of the Trinity, fully and equally God, they member of the Trinity, fully and equally God, they also show an order or function of subordination also show an order or function of subordination (The Holy Spirit submits to the Son; the Son (The Holy Spirit submits to the Son; the Son submits to the Father). “Made according to our submits to the Father). “Made according to our likeness” Genesis 1:26-27.likeness” Genesis 1:26-27.

10.10. Philippians 1:9-10: relationships cannot be Philippians 1:9-10: relationships cannot be divorced from discernment.divorced from discernment.

61

Consider her perspective from a Consider her perspective from a Biblical worldview:Biblical worldview:

We are made in the image of God:We are made in the image of God:

1.1. Image = content (intellect, will, emotion).Image = content (intellect, will, emotion).

2.2. Image = dominion (authority; rule)Image = dominion (authority; rule)

3.3. Image = interpersonal relationships (in our Image = interpersonal relationships (in our image)image)

4.4. Representation (we are his Representatives)Representation (we are his Representatives)

5.5. Holistic (all the above; seen like a diamond).Holistic (all the above; seen like a diamond).

1 answer this question? from your experience in living life, is there any truthfulness to john...

Documents

development of relationships

imagery of relationships

different relationships

images of relationships

terms of moral development

object relationships

human life

moral judgments