Thank you for this. I added Feminist Ethics of Care to my Ethical Theories course as I thought it was important to provide an alternative to the traditional approaches of utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics. (I also include Existentialism and Postmodern Ethics too). Much appreciated.
How exactly does an Ethics of Care proponent determine whether something is ethical or not? A Utilitarian, for instance, would look at how much pleasure and pain a decision causes and determine whether or not something is ethical based on that. How would an EoC proponent go about doing this?
My understanding is that it isn't based upon a predetermined set of rules or principles that can be used to 'calculate' the right action, but rather is premised on a way of being - that is, of being able to empathise and wanting to understanding another's position. Hence, why the ethics of care promotes active listening and responsiveness. It doesn't necessarily provide solutions but as a friend once said to me 'do you want solutions or sympathy?' - and sometimes as an individual in pain, you just want to know someone is next to you.
Deontology is nonsense, consequences of your actions also determine your morality. For ex:If you let a convict escape, you can gather intel to save 10 people, its technically wrong to set a killer loose but it is the right thing do, being idiotically stubborn about your morality is going to get 10 people most certainly killed. Utilitarianism is also nonsense because "Happiness for all" is Subjective, most people's happiness depends on getting better than the other guy. The only way everyone can be at the same level of "happy" is... Communism lol *Virtue Ethics&Existentialism ,* yeah that's the one of framework of morality i follow! Live by example, constantly try to strive for your ideal moral principles so you're never a moral hypocrite and realize that most humans are individuals with their own perspectives so what is right for them may be wrong for you. BTW, what's Postmodern Ethics? I googled it and nothing came up...
People are also related to matter: our body, oxygen, food, raw materials as input in our economy. What about extending care ethics to our relation with matter? for many problems the world is facing today are related to neglecting one side of our bi-directional relation with matter: CO2, meat consumption, plastic soup, nano plastics, industrial/one way, not circular, farming ...
Incredibly vivid and engrossing work; reminiscent of a book that was vivid and thought-provoking. "The Art of Meaningful Relationships in the 21st Century" by Leo Flint
I admit that I just heard of care ethics for the first time yesterday, so I am definitely ignorant here. I also have only studied this idea for a total of 30 minutes. My first question is this: If you want to spread this idea of care ethics, why alienate half the population with the name "Feminine Ethics?" Care sounds great to me, but adding the world "Feminine" seems antithetical.
It has more to do from the philosophical school that it emerged from and the time it came about. The history of philosophy is very male dominated. The Kohlberg study mentioned in the video is often sited as one of the worst cases of male bias because it attempted to extrapolate results from an all male study to women. It wasn't generalizable because of a biased sample. There's also no reason something being called feminist is inherently alienating. Feminism is just the philosophical perspective that women deserve equality in political and social relations which is a critique of most philosophy up until the early 20th century. A man can be a feminist just as much as a woman can.
I watched the video and I'm also new to this. My issue is that using logic and reason, a rational, unemotional approach to ethics isn't because of men or because it is masculine, it is because everyone can do that as part of being human. The point being that logic and reason are human, not masculine or feminine.
Feminism is not gendered. Men can be Feminists. Feminist philosophy isn't a philosophy that excludes men and only includes women, rather it is a philosophy that comes from a feminine point of view (that doesn't have to be literally from a woman), as opposed to a masculine approach. Like the video describes, Objectivity, rationality, etc., are masculine approaches towards a problem, rather than feminine.
I’d like to add that the idea of referring to care ethics as feminine ethics regards the biological differences in responsibilities. At the beginning of the video it explains that there are psychological differences in men and women in the way that we solve problems. Men start out as separate moral agents who then independently learn moral principles to obey. Women, on the other hand, start out connected to others in our duty and responsibility to care for others. Women are the nurturers of life. The responsibility of pregnancy, birth, nursing, and childcare makes our moral development different from men. Nowadays, more and more men are participating in childcare and the responsibilities of home so care ethics will probably become more universal with time. It already is starting to. We still have a long way to go but there has been great change in the last 60 years. The words “feminism” has become really triggering for a lot of people recently. The truth definition is just supporting the equal rights of women in society and, at its core, isn’t meant to alienate men from the discussion. “Feminine ethics” is an acknowledgment of the fundamental differences in biological and psychological development of moral ethics in men and women.
