Equality and Discrimination

According to the principle of equality:

"It is unjust to treat people differently in ways that deny to some significant social benefits unless we can show that there is a difference between them that is relevant to the different treatment."

Most people would probably agree with this, BUT

I. How could you show that there is a relevant difference between people of different races or sexes?

II. If you could, how could you know that the test was not biased, or that the differences were not the result of social factors rather than inevitable natural/biological differences?

III. Even if one group is naturally worse or better than another at something, what about individuals who are exceptions to this rule?

It looks, then, as though treating people differently just because of their race or sex is unjust. BUT is this really true? If it is, what should we do about existing discrimination? This raises the issue of affirmative action for groups of people that are often discriminated against.

 There are several different types of affirmative action:

a) enlarging the pool of applicants for a job, college place, etc. by advertising in non-traditional areas, but then hiring/enrolling the most qualified applicants

b) giving preferences to minority candidates or women when two or more applicants are equally qualified

c) giving such preferences even when the minority/women applicants are less qualified than others

d) setting specific goals for the number of minority/women you want to have in your organization

                    e) setting actual quotas that you insist on meeting no matter what

In other words, affirmative action does not necessarily mean quotas, at least not in theory. There are several things to consider in deciding where to stand on the question of affirmative action. For instance, is affirmative action owed to certain groups as compensation for past injustices? Or is affirmative action itself inherently unfair or unjust? The arguments most commonly heard on either side, though, are utilitarian ones.

Utilitarian reasons for supporting affirmative action:

1. we live in a society where helping one group helps all

2. different groups have different skills, so diversity is useful

3. affirmative action can break cycles of discrimination and poverty

4. role models are useful

Utilitarian reasons for opposing affirmative action:

1. it does not help the people most in need

2. it increases racial tension

3. it stigmatizes successful minority members and women

Philosophers’ arguments about affirmative action:

Lisa Newton

Affirmative action is reverse discrimination, which is every bit as unjust as regular discrimination. We are all members of some minority or other, and helping one group inevitably disadvantages others. Yes, some groups are worse off than others, but they cannot be helped without hurting other innocent people, and how much help would be enough? It is impossible to say. Affirmative action is an unworkable ideal that could only ever do at least as much harm as good.

Robert Fullinwider

It is not enough to just stop obvious discrimination. Discrimination occurs in all kinds of ways, some of which are hard to see even in ourselves, and many of which are virtually impossible to prove in others. Yet we know that prejudice is out there. The only way to combat its effects on minorities and women is by affirmative action, and perhaps even quotas. Yes, this might involve some discrimination against some white males, but the alternative is that the underdogs in society will continue to be discriminated against, which is even less fair.