ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that the view that morality is gendered reinforces a number of existing moral boundaries and militates against change in our conceptions of politics, of morality, and of gender roles. It suggests that outsiders are disadvantaged whenever they challenge the views of the predominant groups in society, because the dominant groups’s views are taken as definitive. The chapter explores Lawrence Kohlberg’s psychology of moral development. It demonstrates that within this theory rigid boundaries shape morality so that, despite its claim to be a theory of moral universalism, Kohlberg’s theory actually functions to produce, and to justify, a morally adept elite. A number of critics have dismissed Kohlberg’s theory as elitist, hierarchical, and nothing more than an ideological apology for liberal society. Anthony J. Cortese’s recognition of Kohlberg’s false universalism has lead him to advocate “a pluralistic theory of moral development.” One more element of Kohlberg’s theory of the moral development of justice reasoning deserves mention.
