The Blues fail to practice family planning and have 15 children. the user should include Is it increased welfare? The Two Wrongs Make a Right Thesis goes like this: Because some Whites once enslaved some Blacks, the decedents of those slaves, some of whom may now enjoy high incomes and social status, have a right to opportunities and offices over better qualified Whites who had nothing to do with either slavery or the oppression of Blacks, and who may even have suffered against affirmative action essay comparable to that of poor Blacks. The elimination of the unfair advantage can be determined by showing that the percentage of blacks hired and admitted at least roughly equaled the percentage of blacks in the population, against affirmative action essay. Adults over 60 9.
Analysis of the paragraphs
The Case Against Affirmative Action Louis P. In this essay I set forth nine arguments against Strong Affirmative Action, which I define as preferential treatment, discriminating in favor of members of under-represented groups, which have been treated unjustly in the past, against affirmative action essay, against innocent people. I distinguish this from Weak Affirmative Action, which simply seeks to promote equal opportunity to the goods and offices of a society. I do not argue against this policy. This form of Affirmative Action, as it is applied against White males, is both racist and sexist. Hardly a week goes by but that the subject of Affirmative Action does not come up.
Whether in the form of preferential hiring, non-traditional casting, quotas, "goals and time tables," minority scholarships, race-norming, reverse discrimination, or employment of members of underutilized groups, the issue confronts us as a terribly perplexing problem. The Supreme Court recently refused to rule on the appeal, thus leaving it to the individual states to decide how they will deal with this issue. Both sides have reorganized for a renewed battle. Let us agree that despite the evidences of a booming economy, against affirmative action essay, the poor are suffering grievously, with children being born into desperate material and psychological poverty, for whom the ideal of "equal opportunity for all" is a cruel joke.
Many feel that the federal government has abandoned its guarantee to provide the minimum necessities for each American, against affirmative action essay that the pace of this tragedy that seems to be worsening daily. Add to this, the fact that in our country African-Americans have a legacy of slavery and unjust discrimination to contend with, and we have the makings of an inferno, and, perhaps, in the worse case scenario, the downfall of a nation. What is the answer to our national problem?
Is it increased welfare? more job training? more support for education? required licencing of parents to have children? negative income tax? more support for families or for mothers with small children? All of these have merit and should be part of the national debate. But, my thesis is, however tragic the situation may be and we may disagree on just how tragic it isone policy is not a legitimate part of the solution and that is reverse, unjust discrimination against young white males. Strong Affirmative Action, which implicitly advocates reverse discrimination, while, no doubt, well intentioned, is against affirmative action essay heinous, asserting, by implication, that two wrongs make a right.
The Two Wrongs Make a Right Thesis goes like this: Because some Whites once enslaved some Blacks, the decedents of those slaves, some of whom may now enjoy high incomes and social status, have a right to opportunities and offices over better qualified Whites who had nothing to do with either slavery or the oppression of Blacks, and who may even have suffered hardship comparable to that of poor Blacks, against affirmative action essay. In addition, Strong Affirmative Action creates a new Hierarchy of the Oppressed: Blacks get primary preferential treatment, women second, Native Americans third, against affirmative action essay, Hispanics fourth, Handicapped fifth, and Asians sixth and so on until White males, no matter how needy or well qualified, must accept the left-overs.
Naturally, combinations of oppressed classes e. The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment becomes reinterpreted as "Equal protection for all equals, but some equals are more equal than others. By Weak Affirmative Action I mean policies that will increase the opportunities of disadvantaged people to attain social goods and offices. It includes the dismantling of segregated institutions, widespread advertisement to groups not previously represented in certain privileged positions, special scholarships for the disadvantaged classes e. The goal of Weak Affirmative Action is equal opportunity to compete, not equal results.
We seek to provide each citizen regardless of race or gender a fair chance against affirmative action essay the most favored positions in society. By Strong Affirmative Action I mean preferential treatment on the basis of race, ethnicity or gender or some other morally irrelevant criteriondiscriminating in favor of under-represented groups against over-represented groups, aiming at roughly equal results. Strong Affirmative Action is reverse discrimination. It says it is right to do wrong to correct a wrong. It is the policy that is currently being promoted under the name of Affirmative Against affirmative action essay, so it I will use that term or "AA" for short throughout this essay to stand for this version of affirmative action.
I will not argue for or against the principle of Weak Affirmative Action. Indeed, I think it has some moral weight. Strong Affirmative Action has none, or so I will argue. In what follows I will mainly concentrate on Affirmative Action policies with regard to race, but the arguments can be extended to cover ethnicity and gender. I think that if a case for Affirmative Action can be made it will be as a corrective to racial oppression. I will examine nine arguments regarding Affirmative Action. The first six will be negative, attempting to show that the best arguments for Affirmative Action fail, against affirmative action essay.
The last three will be positive arguments for policies opposing Affirmative Action:. A Critique of Arguments For Affirmative Action. This argument is straightforward. We all have need of role models, and it helps to know that others like us can be successful. We learn and are encouraged to strive for excellence by emulating our heroes and "our kind of people" who have succeeded. One of my heroes was Gandhi, an Indian Hindu, another was my grade school science teacher, Miss DeVoe, and another Martin Luther King, behind whom I marched in Civil Rights demonstrations. Our common humanity should be a sufficient basis for us to see the possibility of success in people of virtue and merit.
To yield to the demand, however tempting it may be to do so, for "role-models-just-like-us" is to treat people like means not ends. It is to elevate morally irrelevant particularity over relevant traits, against affirmative action essay, such as ability and integrity. As Steve Allen once quipped, "If I had to follow a role model exactly, I would have become a nun. Furthermore, even if it is of some help to people with low self-esteem to gain encouragement from seeing others of their particular kind in successful positions, it is doubtful whether this need is a sufficient reason to justify preferential hiring or reverse discrimination. What good is a role model who is inferior to other professors or physicians or business personnel?
The best way to create role models is not to promote people because of race or gender but because they are the best qualified for the job. It is the violation of this fact that is largely responsible for the widespread whisper in the medical field at least in New York "Never go to a Black physician under 40" referring to the fact that AA has affected the medical system during the past twenty years. Fight the feeling how I will, I cannot help against affirmative action essay on seeing a Black or woman against affirmative action essay a position or honor, "Is she in this position because she merits it or because of Affirmative Action? Finally, entertain this thought experiment.
Suppose we discovered that tall handsome white males somehow made the best role models for the most people, especially poor people. Suppose even large numbers of minority people somehow found inspiration in their sight. Would we be justified in hiring tall handsome white males over better against affirmative action essay short Hispanic women, who were deemed less role-model worthy? The argument goes like this: blacks have been wronged and severely harmed by whites. Therefore white society should compensate blacks for the injury caused them. Reverse discrimination in terms of preferential hiring, contracts, and scholarships is a fitting way to compensate for the past wrongs.
This argument actually involves a distorted notion of compensation. Normally, we think of compensation as owed by a specific person A to another person B whom A has wronged in a specific way C. For example, if I have stolen your car and used it for a period of time to make business profits that would have gone to you, against affirmative action essay, it is not enough that I return your car. I must pay you an amount reflecting your loss and my ability to pay. Sometimes compensation is extended to groups of people who have been unjustly harmed by the greater society. For example, the United States government has compensated the Japanese-Americans who were interred during the Second World War, and the West German government has paid reparations to the survivors of Nazi concentration camps.
But here a specific people have been identified who were wronged in an identifiable way by the government of the nation in question. On the face of it, demands by blacks for compensation does not fit the usual pattern, against affirmative action essay. Perhaps Southern States with Jim Crow laws could be accused of unjustly harming blacks, but it is hard to see that the United States government was involved in against affirmative action essay so. Much of the harm done to blacks was the result of private discrimination, not state action. Furthermore, against affirmative action essay, it is not clear that all blacks were harmed in the same way or whether some were unjustly harmed or harmed more than poor whites and others e.
short people. Finally, even if identifiable blacks were harmed by identifiable social practices, it is not clear that most forms of Affirmative Action are appropriate to restore the situation. The usual practice of a financial payment seems more appropriate than giving a high level job to someone unqualified or only minimally qualified, who, speculatively, against affirmative action essay, might have been better qualified had he not been subject to racial discrimination. If John is the star tailback of our college team with a promising professional future, and I accidentally but culpably drive my pick-up truck over his legs, and so cripple him, John against affirmative action essay be due compensation, but he is not due the tailback spot on the football team.
Still, there may be something intuitively compelling about compensating members of an oppressed group who are minimally qualified. Suppose that the Hatfields and the McCoys are enemy clans and some youths from the Hatfields go over and steal diamonds and gold from the McCoys, distributing it within the Hatfield economy. Even though we do not know which Hatfield youths did the stealing, we would want to restore the wealth, as far as possible, to the McCoys. One way might be to tax the Hatfields, but another might be to give preferential treatment in terms of scholarships and training programs and hiring to the McCoys. This is perhaps the strongest argument for Affirmative Action, and it may well justify some weaker versions of AA, but it is doubtful whether it is sufficient to justify strong versions with quotas and goals and time tables in skilled positions.
There are at least two reasons for this. First, we have no way of knowing how many people of any given group would have achieved some given level of competence had the world been different. This is especially relevant if my objections to the Equal Results Argument 3 above are correct. Secondly, the normal criterion of competence is a strong prima facie consideration when the most important positions are at stake. There are three reasons for this: 1 treating people according to their merits respects them as persons, as ends in themselves, rather than as means to social ends if we believe that against affirmative action essay possess a dignity which deserves to be respected, then we ought to treat that individual on the basis of his or her merits, not as a mere instrument for social policy ; against affirmative action essay society has against affirmative action essay people expectations that if they attain certain levels of excellence they will be awarded appropriately and 3 filling the most important positions with the best qualified is the best way to insure efficiency in job-related areas and in society in general.
These reasons are not absolutes. They can be overridden. At this point we get into the problem of whether innocent non-blacks should have to pay a penalty in terms of preferential hiring of blacks. We turn to that argument. The Argument for Compensation from Those who Innocently Benefitted from Past Injustice Young White males as innocent beneficiaries of unjust discrimination of blacks and women have no grounds for complaint when society seeks to level the tilted field. They may be innocent of oppressing blacks, other minorities, and women, but they have unjustly benefitted from that oppression or discrimination.
So it is perfectly proper that less qualified women and blacks be hired before them. The operative principle is: He who knowingly and willingly benefits from a wrong must help pay for the wrong. Judith Jarvis Thomson puts it this way. and even those who did not directly benefit had, at any rate, the advantage in the competition which comes of the confidence in one's full membership [in the community], and of one's right being recognized as a matter of course.
eleven essay
With regard to cognitive skills we must consult the best evidence we have on average group differences. We need to compare average IQ scores, SAT scores, standard personality testing, success in academic and professional areas and the like. If the evidence shows that group differences are nonexistent, the AA proponent may win, but if the evidence turns out to be against the Equal Abilities Thesis, the AA proponent loses. Consider for a start that the average white and Asian scores points higher on the SAT tests and that on virtually all IQ tests for the past seven or eight decades the average Black IQ is 85 as opposed to the average White and Asian IQ at over , or that males and females differ significantly on cognitive ability tests. Females out perform males in reading comprehension, perceptual speed, and associative memory ratios of 1.
There are brilliant and retarded people in each group. When such statistics are discussed many people feel uncomfortable and want to drop the subject. Perhaps these statistics are misleading, but then we need to look carefully at the total evidence. The proponent of equal opportunity would urges us to get beyond racial and gender criteria in assignment of offices and opportunities and treat each person, not as an average white or Black or female or male, but as a person judge on his or her own merits.
Furthermore, on the logic of Mosley and company, we should take aggressive AA against Asians and Jews since they are over-represented in science, technology, and medicine, and we should presume that Asians and Jews are no more talented than average. But why does society have to enter into this results game in the first place? Why do we have to decide whether all difference is environmental or genetic? Perhaps we should simply admit that we lack sufficient evidence to pronounce on these issues with any certainty - but if so, should we not be more modest in insisting on equal results? Here's a thought experiment. Take two families of different racial groups, Green and Blue. The Greens decide to have only two children, to spend all their resources on them, and to give them the best education.
The two Green kids respond well and end up with achievement test scores in the 99th percentile. The Blues fail to practice family planning and have 15 children. They can only afford 2 children, but lack of ability or whatever prevents them from keeping their family size down. Now they need help for their large family. Why does society have to step in and help them? Society did not force them to have 15 children. Suppose that the achievement test scores of the 15 children fall below the 25th percentile. They cannot compete with the Greens. But now enters AA. It says that it is society's fault that the Blue children are not as able as the Greens and that the Greens must pay extra taxes to enable the Blues to compete.
No restraints are put on the Blues regarding family size. This seems unfair to the Greens. Should the Green children be made to bear responsibility for the consequences of the Blues' voluntary behavior? My point is simply that philosophers like Arthur, Harwood, and Mosley need to cast their net wider and recognize that demographics and childbearing and -rearing practices are crucial factors in achievement. People have to take some responsibility for their actions. The equal results argument or axiom misses a greater part of the picture. According to this argument, the competent do not deserve their intelligence, their superior character, their industriousness, or their discipline; therefore they have no right to the best positions in society; therefore it is not unjust to give these positions to less but still minimally qualified blacks and women.
In one form this argument holds that since no one deserves anything, society may use any criteria it pleases to distribute goods. The criterion most often designated is social utility. Versions of this argument are found in the writings of John Arthur, John Rawls, Bernard Boxill, Michael Kinsley, Ronald Dworkin, and Richard Wasserstrom. Rawls writes, "No one deserves his place in the distribution of native endowments, any more than one deserves one's initial starting place in society. The assertion that a man deserves the superior character that enables him to make the effort to cultivate his abilities is equally problematic; for his character depends in large part upon fortunate family and social circumstances for which he can claim no credit.
The notion of desert seems not to apply to these cases. Opponents of affirmative action are hung up on a distinction that seems more profoundly irrelevant: treating individuals versus treating groups. What is the moral difference between dispensing favors to people on their "merits" as individuals and passing out society's benefits on the basis of group identification? Group identifications like race and sex are, of course, immutable. They have nothing to do with a person's moral worth. But the same is true of most of what comes under the label "merit. They are fate. The notion that people somehow "deserve" the advantages of these characteristics in a way they don't "deserve" the advantage of their race is powerful, but illogical.
It will help to put the argument in outline form. Society may award jobs and positions as it sees fit as long as individuals have no claim to these positions. To have a claim to something means that one has earned it or deserves it. But no one has earned or deserves his intelligence, talent, education or cultural values which produce superior qualifications. If a person does not deserve what produces something, he does not deserve its products. Therefore, society may override their qualifications in awarding jobs and positions as it sees fit for social utility or to compensate for previous wrongs.
So it is permissible if a minimally qualified black or woman is admitted to law or medical school ahead of a white male with excellent credentials or if a less qualified person from an "underutilized" group gets a professorship ahead of an eminently better qualified white male. Sufficiency and underutilization together outweigh excellence. My response: Premise 4 is false. To see this, reflect that just because I do not deserve the money that I have been given as a gift for instance does not mean that I am not entitled to what I get with that money. If we accept the notion of responsibility at all, we must hold that persons deserve the fruits of their labor and conscious choices.
Of course, we might want to distinguish moral from legal desert and argue that, morally speaking, effort is more important than outcome, whereas, legally speaking, outcome may be more important. Nevertheless, there are good reasons in terms of efficiency, motivation, and rough justice for holding a strong prima facie principle of giving scarce high positions to those most competent. The attack on moral desert is perhaps the most radical move that egalitarians like Rawls and company have made against meritocracy, and the ramifications of their attack are far reaching. Here are some implications: Since I do not deserve my two good eyes or two good kidneys, the social engineers may take one of each from me to give to those needing an eye or a kidney - even if they have damaged their organs by their own voluntary actions; Since no one deserves anything, we do not deserve pay for our labors or praise for a job well done or first prize in the race we win.
The notion of moral responsibility vanishes in a system of levelling. But there is no good reason to accept the argument against desert. We do act freely and, as such, we are responsible for our actions. We deserve the fruits of our labor, reward for our noble feats and punishment for our misbehavior. We have considered seven arguments for Affirmative Action and have found no compelling case for Strong AA and only one plausible argument a version of the compensation argument for Weak AA. We must now turn to the arguments against Affirmative Action to see whether they fare any better.
Arguments Against Affirmative Action. Weak Affirmative Action weakly discriminates against new minorities, mostly innocent young white males, and Strong Affirmative Action strongly discriminates against these new minorities. As I argued in I. Recently I had this experience. I knew a brilliant philosopher, with outstanding publications in first level journals, who was having difficulty getting a tenure-track position. For the first time in my life I offered to make a phone call on his behalf to a university to which he had applied. When I got the Chair of the Search Committee, he offered that the committee was under instructions from the Administration to hire a woman or a Black. In fact, it is poor white youth who become the new pariahs on the job market.
The children of the wealthy have no trouble getting into the best private grammar schools and, on the basis of superior early education, into the best universities, graduate schools, managerial and professional positions. Affirmative Action simply shifts injustice, setting Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, Asians and women against young white males, especially ethnic and poor white males. It makes no more sense to discriminate in favor of a rich Black or female who had the opportunity of the best family and education available against a poor White, than it does to discriminate in favor of White males against Blacks or women. It does little to rectify the goal of providing equal opportunity to all.
At the end of his essay supporting Affirmative Action, Albert Mosley points out that other groups besides Blacks have been benefitted by Affirmative Action, "women, the disabled, the elderly. Might this not be a reason to reconsider Affirmative Action? Consider the sheer rough percentages of those who qualify for Affirmative Action programs. Adults over 60 9. The elderly can sue on the grounds of Agism, receive entitlements in terms of Social Security and Medicare, and have the AARP lobbying on their behalf.
Recently, it has been proposed that homosexuals be included in oppressed groups deserving Affirmative Action. How many more percentage points would this add? Several authors have advocated putting all poor people on the list. The only group not the list is that of White males. Are they, especially healthy, middle class young White males, becoming the new "oppressed class"? Should we add them to our list? Respect for persons entails that we treat each person as an end in him or herself, not simply as a means to be used for social purposes. What is wrong about discrimination against Blacks is that it fails to treat Black people as individuals, judging them instead by their skin color not their merit. What is wrong about discrimination against women is that it fails to treat them as individuals, judging them by their gender, not their merit.
What is equally wrong about Affirmative Action is that it fails to treat White males with dignity as individuals, judging them by both their race and gender, instead of their merit. Present Affirmative Action is both racist and sexist. Affirmative Action Encourages Mediocrity and Incompetence A few years ago Jesse Jackson joined protesters at Harvard Law School in demanding that the Law School faculty hire black women. Jackson dismissed Dean of the Law School, Robert C. Clark's standard of choosing the best qualified person for the job as "Cultural anemia. At several universities, the administration has forced departments to hire members of minorities even when far superior candidates were available.
Shortly after obtaining my Ph D in the late 70's I was mistakenly identified as a black philosopher I had a civil rights record and was once a black studies major and was flown to a major university, only to be rejected for a more qualified candidate when it discovered that I was white. Stories of the bad effects of Affirmative Action abound. The philosopher Sidney Hook writes that "At one Ivy League university, representatives of the Regional HEW demanded an explanation of why there were no women or minority students in the Graduate Department of Religious Studies. They were told that a reading of knowledge of Hebrew and Greek was presupposed. Whereupon the representatives of HEW advised orally: 'Then end those old fashioned programs that require irrelevant languages.
And start up programs on relevant things which minority group students can study without learning languages. Nicholas Capaldi notes that the staff of HEW itself was one-half women, three-fifths members of minorities, and one-half black - a clear case of racial over representation. In officials at Stanford University discovered a proposal for the government to monitor curriculum in higher education: the "Summary Statement Sex Discrimination Proposed HEW Regulation to Effectuate Title IX of the Education Amendment of " to "establish and use internal procedure for reviewing curricula, designed both to ensure that they do not reflect discrimination on the basis of sex and to resolve complaints concerning allegations of such discrimination, pursuant to procedural standards to be prescribed by the Director of the office of Civil Rights.
Government programs of enforced preferential treatment tend to appeal to the lowest possible common denominator. Witness the HEW Revised Order No. Furthermore, no test may be given to candidates unless it is proved to be relevant to the job. No standard or criteria which have, by intent or effect, worked to exclude women or minorities as a class can be utilized, unless the institution can demonstrate the necessity of such standard to the performance of the job in question. Whenever a validity study is called for the user should include an investigation of suitable alternative selection procedures and suitable alternative methods of using the selection procedure which have as little adverse impact as possible Whenever the user is shown an alternative selection procedure with evidence of less adverse impact and substantial evidence of validity for the same job in similar circumstances, the user should investigate it to determine the appropriateness of using or validating it in accord with these guidelines.
Affirmative Action with its twin idols, Sufficiency and Diversity, is the enemy of excellence. I will develop this thought in the next section. An Argument from the Principle of Merit Traditionally, we have believed that the highest positions in society should be awarded to those who are best qualified. The Koran states that "A ruler who appoints any man to an office, when there is in his dominion another man better qualified for it, sins against God and against the State". Rewarding excellence both seems just to the individuals in the competition and makes for efficiency. If Robinson had been brought into the major league as a mediocre player or had batted. As I mentioned earlier, merit is not an absolute value, but there is are strong prima facie reasons for awarding positions on its basis, and it should enjoy a weighty presumption in our social practices.
The goal for affirmative action should be to de-racialinize the society. This could be achieved through improving the economic status of every race and also including them in top occupations. This would assist in getting rid of the idea on discrimination based on skin color, because an increase in the number of blacks in top prestigious positions of power, would lead to decline in the cases of racial identification. It becomes a reality since the gap between color and social class would have been narrowed down Martindale Attempts to reach the goal of diminishing cases on racial discrimination could be hindered by the occurrences of some negative side-effects brought by different ways in which people view the policy.
The issue may at times result in additional stigmatization imposed on those who are considered beneficiaries of affirmative action programs. The affirmative action at the universities has been found of benefit to blacks unlike other minority races like Asian Americans who happen to be minority in population though quite a number in the Universities and colleges Martindale Martindale, Gayla. Arguments For and Against Affirmative Action. University Directory Need a custom Essay sample written from scratch by professional specifically for you? certified writers online. Arguments for and against Affirmative action. We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. If you continue, we will assume that you agree to our Cookies Policy.
Table of Contents. Introduction Analysis of the paragraphs Conclusion Works Cited. Learn More. We will write a custom Essay on Arguments for and against Affirmative action specifically for you! This essay on Arguments for and against Affirmative action was written and submitted by your fellow student. Affirmative action is an unfair policy and should be ruled unconstitutional. Affirmative action is believed to create diversity in the many institution which it is applied to, especially institutions of higher education. Diversity is important in an institution. It creates better people due to the fact that the miss beliefs of other cultures can be fixed through interaction between the cultures.
It also helps in classrooms because the range of beliefs will be broader giving the student a broader mind. It is also believed that students in a diverse institution have the most engagement in college civic activities and also have stronger racial interactions years after attending such an institution. Diversity creates better people because of the broad spectrum to which they learn from and interact. An example of this would be a student who comes from an all white community. This student has no idea of the Black culture or any people with in it. When he goes to college and is put in a classroom with several Black students he has time to learn and better understand what he has not known before.
For this reason and many other situations like Not a Member? Create Your FREE Account ». Already a Member? This essay and THOUSANDS of other essays are FREE at eCheat. Uploaded by: sls Category: Affirmative Action. Length: 5 pages 1, words. Views: suggesting that never before has a democratic governments policy so completely contradicted the core values of its citizenry. Yet, while affirmative action makes sense in theory, it has not fared well in practice. Also, if one takes race into account, one the recent Supreme Court of the United States ruling that "upheld the right of universities to consider race in admissions procedu
No comments:
Post a Comment