Final answer:
The key distinction between Kohlberg and Gilligan's theories lies in their perspectives on gender and moral development. Kohlberg's model suggests a potential gender bias, with a justice perspective, while Gilligan's theory introduces a care and responsibility perspective, suggesting that women reason about morality differently.
Step-by-step explanation:
The distinction between the moral development theories of Lawrence Kohlberg and Carol Gilligan is rooted in their views on gender differences in morality. Kohlberg's theory, which follows a justice perspective that emphasizes laws and rules, was argued to potentially indicate gender bias, as it was derived principally from research on male subjects.
Kohlberg proposed a framework of moral development stages: preconventional, where children's sense of morality is based on external consequences; conventional, focusing on social approval; and postconventional, concerning abstract principles like justice and rights. He noted that men more frequently advanced beyond the fourth stage of this model compared to women, suggesting a potential deficiency in women's moral reasoning.
Gilligan countered this view in her work "In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development", proposing that women employ a care and responsibility perspective, valuing interpersonal relationships and considering the reasons behind actions. Her theory underscored that women are not deficient in moral reasoning, but rather, that they reason differently, focusing on connections and ethical care.