"Moral thinking, then, seems to behave like all other types of thinking. Progress through moral levels and stages is characterized by increasing differentiation and increasing integration , and therefore it is the same kind of progress that scientific theory represents." Quoted by Mr. Kohlberg himself. Kohlberg developed a series of stages on what he thought how man develops morally. Lawrence Kohlberg's reasoning on the stages of moral development derived from the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget; who was one of the first to systematically study moral reasoning in children. Lawrence was also influenced by Socrates, Immanuel Kant, and John Rawls. These were the philosophers who preceded Kohlberg and what led him to create “Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development.” According to Kohlberg, although the specific content of moral codes may vary from culture to culture, what really distinguishes between cultures is what is only on the surface. He believed that human beings, with the exception of sociopathic and severely impaired people, have an innate potential to develop from earlier to later stages of moral development. According to Lawrence, "each stage is distinct and reflects a more complex level of moral judgment than that of the preceding stages." He likens his views on moral development as a kind of "mathematical" solution to conflicts. Kohlberg's stages of moral development consist of three levels and within them six stages of development; each more sufficient to respond to moral difficulties than its predecessor. In his works he mainly dealt with justice. Level one: Pre-Conventional (beginning), which concerns the two initial phases; the first is Punishment and Obedience (how can I evade punishment?) and the second... middle of paper... conventional t-phase. However, Gilligan's "care" perspective and Kohlberg's "justice" perspective are relatively related to each other, there are many differences between the two. I wouldn't necessarily say that Gilligan's "cure" perspective is weaker because what he primarily accomplished was creating equality between the sexes. The problem was that references to gender in moral reasoning were considered insignificant. Men can be just as emotional as women, just as women can be as justice-oriented as men. Morality has no gender. With the perspective of care, I would add some key points such as age differences between men and women, as age plays a key role in how we think morally. Furthermore, just as the justice perspective had a more comprehensive appeal, Gilligan should have focused on broader issues of equality and not focused on people and relationships..