MORALS AND ETHICS - Pojmans Criticisms of Strong AA I LP...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Pojman’s Criticisms of Strong AA I. LP presents four arguments in favor of Strong AA, criticizing each in turn. The four arguments are of two kinds: #2, #3. Compensation arguments based on past wrongs #1, #4. Consequentialist arguments based on social benefits Objections: The compensation arguments Are arguments by analogy with identifiable wrongs done consciously and in the past, such as stealing someone’s car Don’t consider wrongs done unconsciously, much harder to identify, and continuing in the present Might be regarded as straw man arguments
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
The consequentialist arguments. LP replies: Role Models of one’s own race, sex, etc. 1. Are neither necessary nor sufficient for one’s own success 2. Are insufficient reason to justify preferential hiring or reverse discrimination Diversity [upheld in Grutter v. Bollinger as a legitimate concern of universities] 1. Has positive value only in some situations, such as hiring police in a racially diverse community 2. Is insufficient to override the requirement that we treat individuals as (a) unique individuals, different from all others, and (b) ends in themselves, not
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 09/28/2011 for the course PHILOSOPHY 100 taught by Professor None during the Fall '11 term at UC Irvine.

Page1 / 6

MORALS AND ETHICS - Pojmans Criticisms of Strong AA I LP...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online