![]() Connerly maintains that affirmative action violates political principles demanding that people be treated equally. ![]() Can you think of any circumstances in which you would be prepared to say that a student who is less qualified academically deserves to be admitted to a university more than a student who is better qualified academically? Does a concern for desert rule out preferential treatment?ĥ. How does Wasserstrom argue that programs of preferential treatment will. Why do those students who are most qualified academically deserve to be admitted before students who are less qualified academically? What does academic qualification have to do with desert?Ĥ. What is the argument for strong affirmative action from the need for role models. What are these reasons and how do they differ?ģ. In this essay, Professor Richard Wasserstrom responds to these two criticisms of preferential treatment programs, arguing that such programs are not unjust or objectionable in the way that the discrimination they seek to remedy is. The case for programs of preferential treatment can plausibly rest both on the view that such programs are not unfair to white males and on the view that it is unfair to continue the present set of unjust-often racist and sexist-institutions that comprise the social reality. Richard Wasserstrom, A Defense of Programs of Preferential Treatment, Phi Kappa. ![]() Wasserstrom distinguishes between two different reasons for insisting that qualifications alone should govern admissions and hiring. The contagion argument, in Tunicks view, implies that obeying the law is the right thing to do in order to prevent the spread of disobedience, possibly resulting in widespread lawlessness. Pojman defines strong affirmative action as preferential treatment to someone based on race, ethnicity, or gender in favor of the under represented groups to get equal rights. Phi Kappa Phi Journal, 58, 1, 15-8, Win 78. What is Wasserstrom's response? Is it plausible? How does he propose to distinguish between discrimination against Blacks (which he believes to be wrong) and discrimination against Whites (which he thinks may be defensible)?Ģ. The first of the two arguments against preferential treatment that Wasserstrom discusses maintains that if racial discrimination against one race is wrong, then racial discrimination against another race must be wrong, too. Lecture notes in Affirmative Action and Quotas affirmative action and quotas richard wasserstrom someone might say something like this affirmative it is.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |