Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Chapter 7: Arguing Affirmative Action Is it unjust to consider race and…

- - - - The principle objection is not reliable as affirmative action depends simply on weighing educational and civic benefits towards the conflicts that it weighs on white applicants.
      - For affirmative actions most do not end up being utilitarian rather the Kantian and Rawlsian liberals are the ones who believe that desirable outcomes should not override individual rights
    - - The use of race in affirmative action policies doesn't violate anyone's rights
      - The only possible right at stake is the right to be considered on academic criteria alone and not taking into account the other extra-curricular activities of the academic life. The only problem is that this right does not exist
      - As universities are defined by their missions, there is no one mission that is designed to have the requirements of being accepted to university. The qualification is all up to the universities themselves as there is no criteria to be created, only vague outlines of GPA and other tests
    - - Neither students with high academic achievements or students who come from a disadvantaged minority group or disadvantaged communities deserve to be admitted. An admission is solely justified on the potential contribution towards the university and only after the university contributes a mission to their view, then can there be a fair way of allocating seats to admission
- - - - Occupancy controls by balancing the racial composition, aka limiting the hispanic and African American population to 4 0 percent.
        
        done to avoid "white flight" and ultimately worked
        
        white families had to wait 3-4 months to get an apartment, meanwhile black families
        
        NAACP represented these black Americans in a discrimination lawsuit
  - - - basically one deserves to be considered for an apartment according to his or her merits , and these merits can only be determined when the housing authority defines their mission.
- - - - private institutions can have as much injustice i.e the sit-ins at private lunch counters in the south
  - - - Harvards logic: the number of increasing jews on campus means higher rates for antisemitism
  - - - the exclusionary rules are different from affirmative action because affirmative action aims to promote diversity where are exclusionary laws imply one group of people is superior.
- - - - Because when Hopwood applied the Uni had an affirmative action policy and wanted to have 15% of the class to be minorities.
      - The university had lowered its admissions standards for minority applicants than for non-minority appliants.
      - Hopwood is white, therefore not a minority and had her spot taken by minority students with grades comparable or lower than hers.
- - - - Many believe the standards are too weak, it doesn't feel right that someone can buy their way into an Ivy League.
      - The purpose or telos of the university!
        
        Balancing both civic goods and education is difficult. However, maximizing revenue is for sure not a college's primary purpose. When the goal of money-making overshadows all other reasoning, the university has strayed away from any of the previously mentioned telos.
        
        It is difficult to separate ethical issues related to justice and rights from questions about honor and virtue
      - Fulfilling affirmative action brings into debate what is the primary purpose of the colleges.
        
        Is it to pursue scholarly excellence?
        
        Or is it for the civic goods?