|
|
Carol Gilligan's basic definition for male morality is that we have basic rights, and you must value those rights of others. In her accounts, males believe morality forms restrictions on what to do. To illustrate this point in one instance, she brings to light the "Druggist" experiment, conducted by Kohlberg. This is one in which a scenario is brought forth to an eleven-year- old child named Jake. This situation is about a loving husband by the name of Heinz married to a sickly woman. The wife is in need of a medicine that only the town color can provide. The price of the drug exceeds the funds of the loving and he attempts to convey the severity of the situation to the doctor. He attempted to get the price of the medicine lowered and was refused. The question of whether stealing the drug was morally right was asked. Young Jake believed Heinz should in fact steal the medicine because in his eyes "a human life is worth more than money". Furthermore even with the varied theoretical element of love not being present in the relationship, the answer was the same. Under the cirsumstances, though an unlawful action was taken, it was justified in his eyes. As a male internally the perception is that he is capable of logical decisions. In saying that, he adapts a self-goverened mentality in which he believes that as long as the action is taken preserved a basic right, it is justified. There is a clear difference in his mind between law and what is morally right, the goal to be attained.
|
