Questions submitted by 17 NOVEMBER 561.1 SEMINAR PRESENTERS:
1. In his publication, `From Affirmative Action to Affirming Diversity', R. Roosevelt Thomas, Jr. begins by stating, "Sooner or later, affirmative action will die a natural death."
What are the underlying implications in this statement?2. Define discrimination. Define prejudice. Define affirmative action.
If affirmative action programs do disappear completely, what will replace them?
Should there be formal replacement programs?
Have affirmative action programs fulfilled their original mission?In what ways (if any) are they similar?3. One could certainly contend that affirmative action was not the solution to the problems that faced the American business realm in the 1960's. Could it not be argued however, that affirmative action at least forced the business world to face race and gender issues that would have eventually needed to be resolved, and thereby began paving the road for strengthened global competitiveness through diversity?
In what ways are they different?
Have the boundaries that divide these ever been crossed?
If yes, how so?Next consider a Critique of Affirmative Action:
1. You will recall that ethics is concerned with questions of good vs bad, right vs wrong, and fair vs unfair. The implication of this characterization is that good, right, and fair are rough synonyms. You will further recall that the working definition of utilitarianism is:
An ethical theory that holds that actions are right if they produce...the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of person.From a logical point of view, what is wrong with this definition?2. It has been claimed that it is not always clear on which side of the utilitarian 'ledger'--the benefit side or the cost side--certain factors are to be placed. Is, e.g., the loss of a human life a benefit or a cost? One might respond that this depends upon whether the life under consideration is producing more benefits than costs--but then we are left to consider, e.g., whether generating personal income is itself a benefit or a cost. And so it goes.
Ultimately, the establishment of value has to occur outside the Utilitarian framework. Utilitarianism itself is merely a model for determining 'good'. This model uses as its input factors (e.g., human life) to which values (e.g., $200,000) have been previously attached.
How is value to be determined under such a model?
3. It seems apparent that individual preferences, amalgomated to the market level, and coupled with considerations of supply, establish value. However, it has been claimed that not only are preferences arbitrary; additionally, they are subject to manipulation.
Are preferences an adequate and reliable mechanism for establishing value? What are our alternatives?
4. Are you willing to rely exclusively on the Utilitarian model to determine good vs bad? Why or why not? If not, what place ought Utilitarian thinking to have in the determination of good vs bad?
Return to Professor Dunn's home page.