BLOG V: Moral Decisions

 

Jean-Jacque Rousseau’s notable work on the philosophy of education, suggests that women hold a dependency on men for moral and rational guidance. Rousseau proposed that the differences between men and women are natural differences as opposed to socialized differences, and that one cannot be judged based on the other’s traits ( DEA, 150). His work led him to suggest that the well-being of society depends on  “... the woman’s function of persuading the man to marry her, and to remain with her to support his children” ( DEA, 152). This means that a woman’s education is meant to teach her to acquire morals that will aid her in attracting a husband, therefore, not only benefiting society and the family, but the woman herself. Rousseau’s works suggest that men are capable of surviving on their own, but women lack this ability and must find it in men. Women must also rely on men for rational guidance in morality, similar to how children turn to their parents for guidance ( DEA, 154). 

In response to Rousseau, Mary Wollstonecraft argues that if Rousseau’s ideas in regard to women are true, then it is because men have systematically infantilized women (DEA, 155). Wollstonecraft finds this unphilosophical and offers a theological response; men and women should turn to the “ Supreme Being” for the finest education. She also suggests that morality is based on the ability to make rational decisions. Wollstonecraft argues that writers on women’s education have contributed to making women weak and less rational.  She believed that the capacity for rationality was separate and nobler than the capacity for emotions and sense of perception ( DEA, 156). That being said, Wollstonecraft regarded Rousseau’s education for women as problematic because it encouraged senses and emotions, unlike the education for men that encouraged rational thought. Therefore, making it harder for women to make moral judgements and “godlike virtue”. 

A lot of us like to think that we make moral decisions based on rationality, but in reality we cannot escape our emotions. Living in a society that is governed by rationality seems cold and distant. Feelings are unreliable and individualistic so there is a need for rationality. But that volatility of emotions is what makes us human and gives us warmth. I do not think that moral decisions are solely rational decisions, they are a combination of both rationality and emotional aspects. Morals are subjective, and vary among cultures and societies. The idea of having the derivation of morals solely based on rationality does not completely make sense. I understand Wollstonecraft when she argues that women’s education based on cultivating emotions is what makes us “weak”, however, I do not necessarily believe that emotional intelligence is weak. I think that because society has structured  “ rationality” as a male trait and “emotions” as a female trait, the latter is deemed weak in a male dominated society. I argue that rationality and emotional intelligence do not belong to any specific gender. Anyone has the ability to possess rational and emotional traits. Like many other aspects of society, rationality is deemed superior because of its correlation to men.

Photo Source: Hanna Perlberger