This article argues that there exists not one universal morality of
caring contrasting with the morality of justice but, rather, alternative types of interpersonal moralities that reflect the meaning systems emphasized in different cultural groups. Both the superogatory view of interpersonal morality held by Lawrence Kohlberg and
the morality-of-caring framework developed by Carol Gilligan are
shown to be culturally bound. Research conducted among American and Hindu Indian populations supports the claim that an
individually oriented interpersonal moral code develops among
Americans, stressingpersonal freedom of choice, individual responsibility, and a dualistic view of individual motivation. In contrast,
a duty-based interpersonal moral code develops among Hindu
Indians, stressing broad and socially enforceable interpersonal
obligations, the importance of contextual sensitivity, and a monistic
view of individual motivation. Issues for future research are iden
tified, and implications of these alternative interpersonal moral
codes for other domains of interpersonal functioning are suggested.