COLLEGE PREFERENTIAL ADMISSIONS.   Term Paper ID:19446 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Argues that use of racial & ethnic preferences in school admissions is morally defensible.... More...

6 Pages / 1350 Words 2 sources, 7 Citations, APA Format $24.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Argues that use of racial & ethnic preferences in school admissions is morally defensible. Paper Introduction: This study will argue that the use of racial and ethnic preferences in college or professional school admissions are morally defensible. The basis for the argument will be the Bakke case and the Supreme Court decision on that case which clarified some matters on preferential treatment and left others unsettled. The Bakke decision of the Supreme Court upheld the California Supreme Court decision which held that white student Allan Bakke had suffered illegal discrimination as a result of the specific University of California at Davis preferential treatment program which set aside a certain number of spots for "minority" group members. Bakke was admitted to Davis as a result of the Supreme Court decision, but the Court "reversed (the California) court's prohibition against taking race into account in any way" (Dworkin, 1985, p. 304). Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. The institutionalization --- temporarily --- of preferentialtreatment programs in admissions considerations in colleges anduniversities is a moral action which moves the nation toward recognition ofits problems and toward a potential solution for one aspect of racism. This is, of course, the basis for any moral argument in favorof preferential treatment --- the fact that such minorities are the victimsof discrimination and disadvantage on a social and individual basis, andthe fact that such discrimination and disadvantage is immoral in generaland especially so in a society which cherishes the notion and principlethat all individuals deserve an equal opportunity at success. The long-term consequence of preferential treatment programs, from amoral point of view, is that the racial diversity of colleges anduniversities will increase. The same argument certainly must have been made against theending of slavery---that it would be immoral to end slavery because itwould upset people, it would "increase racial antagonism." From the same,"moral" point of view, a doctor could argue that a cancer patient shouldnot be notified of his disease because it would upset him. Dworkin also notes that "At (some) future point the consequences ofnonracial admissions programs, whatever these consequences might be, couldbe accepted with no sense of racial barriers or injustice," (Dworkin, 1985,p. Regents Univ. Thebasis for the argument will be the Bakke case and the Supreme Courtdecision on that case which clarified some matters on preferentialtreatment and left others unsettled. If we see such discrimination and disadvantage as immoral in thecontext of human society and American society particularly, then it isclear that some form of correcting the consequences of such discriminationand disadvantage is a legitimately moral correction. It is reasonable, inthis ethical debate, to agree with Powell that the action loses its moralpunch if one individual or group receives preferential treatment at theexpense o another individual or group. . On a legal basis, then, the Court found that preferential treatmentwas a legitimate way to institute racial diversity in college. The actual effects of preferential programs are increases in equality ofopportunity, and are therefore moral. If the preferential treatment is meant toright social wrongs, then it can be seen as an effort to diminish racialdifferences overall, specifically racism itself. The use of racial and ethnic preferences in college or professionalschool admissions does not violate meritocratic justice --- as long as itfollows the kind of guideline used by Harvard and does not discriminateagainst non-minority members. The merit of the student in educationalterms will continue to be rewarded, with minority status simply beingconsidered a "plus-" If there is one difficulty with the Supreme court decision on Bakke,it is the issue of purpose. 294). The file ofa particular black applicant may be examined for his potential contributionto diversity without the factor of race being decisive when compared . The moral issue then moves to the consequences of such preferentialtreatment on a social level. Cambridge: HarvardUniversity Press. As Dworkin writes, "The constitutionality ofan affirmative action plan therefore depends, according to Powell, on itspurpose as well as its structure. Any preferential treatment program will notintensify that consciousness much. Racism threatens the United States just as cancerthreatens the body. Bakke. As Dworkin writes, with respect to the counter-argument thatpreferential treatment will increase racial consciousness and willtherefore be immoral, "American society is currently a racially conscioussociety; this is the inevitable and evident consequence of a history ofslavery, repression and prejudice" (Dworkin, 1985, p. Will such programs fulfill this moralimperative and diminish tension among the races? Once the discrimination has been eliminated,then the action will no longer be required, and its continuation in factwould become immoral, for it would put non-minorities at a disadvantage. Again, with respect to the latter aspect of thedebate, it is a preposterous argument to say that preferential treatmentprograms are not morally defensible because they will increase racialantagonism. Powell, J. The analogy isnot far-fetched, for the denial of racism in the United States is akin tothe denial of cancer. LawWeek, pp. of Cal. In addition, the overall social consciousnesswith respect to racial differences and the moral need to treat racialproblems will increase. As Powell writes in his effort todifferentiate Harvard from Davis, "In such an admissions program (that is,at Harvard), race or ethnic background may be deemed a 'plus' in aparticular applicant's file, yet it does not insulate the individual fromcomparison with all other candidates for the available seats. If survival can be considered an element of morality,then it is a moral imperative to accept the presence of racism in order tosurvive. (1978, June 27). Dworkin presents a reasonable argument in this regard. .with . If wesee America as a racist society, then it is a moral act to make the peoplemore racially conscious. Will such preferentialtreatment effect such improvements? Specific means aside, then, it is both legal and moral to give somemeasure of preferential treatment to minorities in college entranceconsiderations, as long as non-minorities are not themselves discriminatedagainst. 294). 49 9). an Italian-American if the latter is thought to exhibitqualities more likely to promote beneficial educational pluralism" (Powell,1978, p. (1985). But what of the moral issue underlying the Court's decision? First, henotes that the United States is a nation which is exceedingly raciallyconscious to begin with. To this observer, the purpose, from a moralpoint of view, is not as important as the actual effects. 3 4). Dworkin emphasizes the point that themorality of preferential treatment rest on the belief that discriminationagainst minorities is itself immoral. The Bakke decision of the Supreme Court upheld the California SupremeCourt decision which held that white student Allan Bakke had sufferedillegal discrimination as a result of the specific University of Californiaat Davis preferential treatment program which set aside a certain number ofspots for "minority" group members. . Only by ending denial about American racism canAmericans begin to fight its immoral consequences. One can claim anumber of purposes for an action, but the actual effects are more relevant. Dworkin presents the powerful moral argument with respect topreferential treatment, that "the United States will continue to bepervaded by racial divisions as long as the most lucrative, satisfying andimportant careers remain mainly the prerogative of members of the whiterace, while others feel themselves systematically excluded from aprofessional and social elite" (Dworkin, 1985, p. If we see slavery as immoral, then we will see preferential treatment--- designed to right the long-lasting effects of slavery--as moral. Bakke was admitted to Davis as aresult of the Supreme Court decision, but the Court "reversed (theCalifornia) court's prohibition against taking race into account in anyway" (Dworkin, 1985, p. If we believe that it is immoral to punish a person with educationaldisadvantage because of his color, then we must believe that an actiondesigned to remove or correct that disadvantage is moral---again, as longas that action does not put another individual or group at a disadvantage.Dworkin notes that such preferential treatment is not a permanent means ofrighting discrimination, for it is the purpose of such action to do awaywith such discrimination. v. References Dworkin, Ronald. . Thus, preferential treatment programs can be seen as a temporarymeasure designed to correct immoral and illegal discriminatory practicesand traditions in a society which claims to treasure morality and equalityof opportunity. It is not altogether plain how courtsare to decide what the purpose of a racially conscious admissions programis" (Dworkin, 1985, p. 4896-4911.----------------------- 1 294). He "held that the equalprotection clause forbids explicit quotas or reserved places unless theschool in question can show that these means are necessary to achieve goalsof compelling importance, and he held that Davis had not met that burden ofproof" (Dworkin, 1985, p. This study will argue that the use of racial and ethnic preferencesin college or professional school admissions are morally defensible. 3 5). A Matter of Principle. AlthoughPowell and the Court left the means up in the air, the leaning toward theHarvard approach gives a clear indication of what would be acceptable (areliance on individual-by-individual consideration, as opposed to the Daviseffort which was based on a strict number of minority slots which werefully denied to non-minorities). Theminorities under consideration in such preferential treatment programs, theCourt found, should not receive such treatment at the expense of non-minorities who had no role in discriminating against the minorities in thefirst place. Powell, writing the decision of the court, focused on the issue ofConstitutional (rather than statutory) grounds, specifically the equalprotection provided by the Fourteenth Amendment. 3 8). If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.