In The Need for More Than Justice (1987), philosopher Annette Baier advocates for a feminist ethics of care that incorporates interdependency and emotional intelligence, challenging the orthodox liberal tradition emphasizing autonomy, rules, and strict rationality. Baier’s writing served as a feminist beachhead in a Western ethical landscape historically dominated by white male thinkers of the liberal tradition, particularly Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. Baier was especially influenced by Harvard educational psychologist Carol Gilligan’s In A Different Voice, a groundbreaking book that criticized Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, which favored a male moral perspective and claimed that boys had a higher average level of moral development. More broadly, Baier critiques the Kantian liberal tradition for, what she describes as, its overemphasis on the more masculine values of rules and autonomy and its lack of inclusion on the more feminine values of care and community. Specifically, Baier critiques John Rawls for elevating justice as the first virtue of social institutions. In the end, Baier advocates for a moral theory that includes the perspective of both women and men, both care and justice.
To better understand Baier, it helps to understand the context Baier was operating in and the historical legacy she was responding to. Baier was writing in the depths of “second wave” feminism, a period of Western feminist activity from the 1960’s through the 1980’s where feminists were pushing for equality beyond the basic political equality advances of first wave feminism. This meant challenging patriarchal forces not just in politics but also in education, the workplace, the home, reproductive rights, and so on.
Until this point, Western ethics was dominated by male perspectives, particularly in the ideology of Western liberalism. Kant (1724–1804) was a cornerstone for contemporary liberal philosophy with his moral framework based on rationality, universal rules, and the moral duty to respect others as autonomous agents. Baier calls out the egregious sexism of Kant, “What did Kant, the great prophet of autonomy, say in his moral theory about women? He said they were incapable of legislation, not fit to vote, that they needed the guidance of more ‘rational’ males.” In a philosophical continuation of Kant, Rawls (1921– 2002) outlined his landmark theory of justice as fairness in A Theory of Justice (1971). Finally, we end up with American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927– 1987) and his theory of stages of moral development inspired by both Rawls and Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget, both of whom were inspired by Kant. This brief overview illustrates the male-dominated, Kantian liberal tradition that both Baier and Gilligan were responding to.
Carol Gilligan’s In A Different Voice (1982), was a feminist challenge to Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, which found that, on average, girls and women scored less morally advanced than boys and men on questionnaires to moral dilemmas. These tests were of a Utilitarian or Kantian sort, which meant a focus on autonomy and rational, contractual rules. In reaction, Gilligan conducted her own interviews and found that women tended to speak in a different voice about morality. Quoting Gilligan, she found, “Since the reality of interconnexion is experienced by women as given rather than freely contracted, they arrive at an understanding of life that reflects the limits of autonomy and control. As a result, women’s development delineates the path not only to a less violent life but also a maturity realized by interdependence and care” Gilligan proposed a model of progressive care from merely pleasing others, to helping and nurturing, and contrasted this with Kohlberg’s progressive stages of mutual respect. Gilligan noted that a Kantian society may devoutly follow the virtues of justice and respect for individual rights and yet still be devoid of a meaningful civil society full of care and community, “Their rights, and respect for rights, are quite compatible with very great misery, and misery whose causes are not just individual misfortunes and psychic sickness, but social and moral impoverishment.”
Baier goes on to give her own interpretations of the significance of Gilligan’s challenges to liberal orthodoxy, starting with the challenge to Western individualism. Gilligan formulates individualism as an identity expanding through relationships of interconnectedness as opposed to the Kantian individualism of autonomous individuals interacting by a set of rules, potentially alienating, devoid of care and connection. To illustrate, a “Kantian doctor” might see their role strictly as treating individual patients and emphasize the patients individual autonomy in their health. While a doctor practicing Gilligan’s individualism might see their role as serving a community, forming meaningful connections with patients, and advocating for public health.
Baier points out that Kantian liberal morality falsely assumes a society of equals entering into social contracts with one another. However, many relationships are unequal: child-parent, patient-doctor, citizen-state. Kantian liberal morality creates a pretense of equality which masks the reality of the social and moral complexity and may lead to neglect. Kantian liberal morality also falsely exaggerates the preponderance of freely chosen relationships and pays insufficient attention to unchosen relationships such as that of child and parent, or that of coworkers or of fellow citizens. To illustrate, imagine again the Kantian doctor, they may instruct the patient to take a complicated medication regimen. The doctor has fulfilled their minimal Kantian duties to prescribe medicine and give instructions to their patient, whom they respect as an autonomous agent. However, the doctor may not have cared for and got to know his patient enough to learn that the patient is incapable of following such a strict medication regimen, perhaps the patient has issues with memory or an unstable living situation.
Lastly, Baier highlights Gilligan’s challenge to liberal orthodoxy’s rationalism, or intellectualism. Kantian theories emphasize rational control of emotions, rather than on cultivating desirable emotions. However, emotional awareness is particularly important in child-rearing to ensure healthy emotional and cognitive development. Baier states, “[Parents] need to love their children, not just control their irritation.”
Baier closes by proposing a union of both male and female moral wisdom, “It is clear, I think, that the best moral theory has to be a cooperative product of women and men, has to harmonize justice and care. The morality it theorizes about is after all for all persons, for men and for women, and will need their combined insights.”