- Information
- AI Chat
Essay Plan - Affirmative Action
Contemporary Political Philosophy (POL2090)
Newcastle University
Recommended for you
Related Studylists
TeoriPreview text
Affirmative Action Essay Plan
Introduction
- Understood as attempts to equalize opportunity for groups of people who confront ongoing forms of institutional discrimination and lack of opportunity - Purpose – partially counter the ways in which arbitrary factors function in our society to impede equal access and opportunity thereby promoting greater inclusion of diverse people in a range of institutions and occupations - Meritocracy main objection - as underlying theme to all arguments in favour
Paragraph 1 – Compensation
IN FAVOUR - Compensate for historical injustices – for the injustices that group has
suffered in the past CRITICISM - has not the same individuals who suffered the injustices that are being compensated - RESPONSE - look at compensation in different light as compensate these individuals for the injustices they have suffered and continue to suffer – not as severe as past but still warrant compensation – - BUT current generation of these groups continue to suffer wrongful discrimination through discriminatory hiring procedures, sexists and racist slurs and wrongful stereotyping – - AND current generation also suffer consequences of past injustices – children grown up in poor neighbourhoods with high crime rates and inadequate schools partly as a result of the discrimination their parents suffered in the job market
MERITOCRACY OBJECTION - classifying applicants according to their membership of
socially important groups is objectionable MERITOCRACY RESPONSE - AA attempts to make up for the fact that applicants who have been victims of wrongful discrimination face additional hurdles in becoming the best qualified candidate
Paragraph 2 – Diversity
IN FAVOUR - Advancing other socially desirable goals
Educational experience that enables kids to live well-rounded lives and not ignorant of issues that people from different walks of life have to deal with – more difficult if teaching cohort is not diverse
Diversity increases likelihood of otherwise neglected areas of research – great diversity to increase greater range of methods and perspectives that are brought to bear on topics
Diversity to provide role models to students from under-represented groups – need to see members of their race or sex who are accepted, successful professionals
Diversity and integration in society improves the functioning democratic institutions – enhance trust and social harmony and improves the provision of public goods CRITICISM - classifying applicants according to their membership of socially important groups is objectionable because it violates the demands of meritocracy RESPONSE - students with equal results and one is black then he is more qualified as he is also contributing equally to the academic environment
Unfair to penalise students on account of something they are not responsible for – however students not responsible for a host of other factors that determine whether they are the best qualified candidate for a job such as genetic and social factors – even test scores penalise students on account of something for which they aren’t fully responsible
Paragraph 3 – Prevention
IN FAVOUR – Direct non-cognitive discrimination – occurred as a direct result of the discriminator’s beliefs or judgements – product of implicit biases – relatively unconscious and automatic features of prejudiced judgments and behaviour - Indirect discrimination – selection criteria inadvertently but disproportionately disadvantage members of socially important groups – institutional bias – 1971 Duke Power case when high school diploma in order to apply for promotion - Counter-balances the effects of these ongoing forms of discrimination – direct cognitive discrimination laws don’t effectively protect minorities from other forms of wrongful discrimination - AA to offset implicit and institutional biases - Indirect discrimination – hiring decisions through personal recommendation – employees and people tend to associate with others in their own racial group – policy indirectly discriminates in favour of white men CRITICSIM - AA is problematic because it itself a kind of discrimination – policies also assign and deprive people of jobs by categorising them according to race and sex - fails to recognise the intrinsic equality of these individuals regardless of their race, sex etc. RESPONSE - not all discrimination is wrongful – it is bad when it is motivated to express moral inferiority – AA policies do not carry this message MERITOCRACY OBJECTION - classifying applicants according to their membership of socially important groups is objectionable MERITOCRACY RESPONSE - corrects for implicit biases and institutional biases against minorities which reduce employers’ abilities to accurately judge applicants – current hiring and admissions procedures violate meritocracy so AA corrects this
Conclusion
Improvements - AA advantages those who are already privileged and fails to assist those who are under-privileged – women/minorities that are already from privileged backgrounds and take away positions from men from less privileged backgrounds - Shouldn’t abandon AA – need to supports its more extensive use – also have places reserved for students from low income families – cases like Newcastle Partners Scheme for UK university places
Essay Plan - Affirmative Action
Module: Contemporary Political Philosophy (POL2090)
University: Newcastle University
