Final answer:
Carol Gilligan argued that men and women have different approaches to moral reasoning, not that one was superior to the other. Women's moral reasoning, centered around interpersonal relationships and care, is different from men's justice-oriented reasoning, contradicting the notion of male superiority in ethical thought.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that Carol Gilligan attributes the differences between the moral reasoning of men and women to the superiority of male reasoning in ethics is False. Gilligan's studies led her to the development of what is known as care ethics.
She found that men and women often approach ethical dilemmas differently, with men typically valuing justice, autonomy, and the application of abstract principles, while women value caring for others, relationships, and responsibility. Rather than viewing women's ethical perspective as inferior, Gilligan emphasized that it is simply different, focusing on the perspective of care compared to the traditional male perspective of justice.
She critiqued her mentor Kohlberg's theory for only including male participants and for presenting a biased view of moral development. Gilligan's insights have been essential in understanding how gender socialization can influence moral reasoning and have challenged the traditional view that feminine ethical considerations are of less import in moral assessment.