Most moral psychologists have come to accept two types of moral reasoning: Kohlberg's "justice" and Gilligan's "care", but there still seem to be some unresolved issues. By analysing and comparing Kohlberg's statement on some theoretical issues with some of Gilligan's statements in an interview in April 2003, I will look at some key issues in the so-called "Kohlberg-Gilligan conflict". Some of the questions raised in this paper are: (1) Does Gilligan reject the idea of developmental morality? (2) Does Gilligan support Kohlberg's stage theory and his claim of universality? (3) Did Kohlberg reject Gilligan's proposal to expand his understanding of moral reasoning? (4) Was Gilligan's theory a critique of or an expansion to Kohlberg's theory? The findings of this analysis suggest that the first question be answered negatively, the second positively, the third negatively and the fourth that Gilligan's theory is an expansion rather than a critique. (Contains 1 note.)