Affirmative action policies have been the topic of debate amongst universities for quite some time now. Many question whether or not using race as a factor in the admissions process is legitimate, and some people like Ronald Dworkin attempt to back up the claim that it is. Throughout this paper, I will analyze Dworkin’s argument by first stating it, then evaluating it, and finally responding to it. Ultimately, I will show that Dworkin may be right, but I still believe using race as a factor does violate rights in some cases.
Ronald Dworkin, a rights-oriented legal philosopher, argues that the use of race in affirmative action policies does not violate anybody’s rights. He makes a valid claim by asking his opponents, “What rights are being …show more content…
I too believe that no one has the right to be considered according to a particular set of criteria. For example, if you were an incoming college student it would be ridiculous to tell the admissions board that you only want to be evaluated solely on your athletic skills, your academic skills, or any other skill for that matter. You have no right to define what criteria you are to be evaluated by. Likewise, the merits of an applicant do not define the criteria for admission. It is only the mission statement that is defined by the university that defines the relevant criteria for admission. Additionally, I agree with Dworkin that the admission of an applicant is just if that applicant is able to contribute to the university’s overall goal. I feel that once a university defines its mission, it is then obligated to achieve that mission to the best of its abilities. To do this, the university must set specific standards that require the students to contribute to the goal of the university. If the university truly believes, and can provide evidence that a person’s race is tied to the magnitude of contribution that person can make to the goal, then Dworkin actually does have a sound argument. In this case, using race as a factor in admissions policy might actually be
Ronald Dworkin, a rights-oriented legal philosopher, argues that the use of race in affirmative action policies does not violate anybody’s rights. He makes a valid claim by asking his opponents, “What rights are being …show more content…
I too believe that no one has the right to be considered according to a particular set of criteria. For example, if you were an incoming college student it would be ridiculous to tell the admissions board that you only want to be evaluated solely on your athletic skills, your academic skills, or any other skill for that matter. You have no right to define what criteria you are to be evaluated by. Likewise, the merits of an applicant do not define the criteria for admission. It is only the mission statement that is defined by the university that defines the relevant criteria for admission. Additionally, I agree with Dworkin that the admission of an applicant is just if that applicant is able to contribute to the university’s overall goal. I feel that once a university defines its mission, it is then obligated to achieve that mission to the best of its abilities. To do this, the university must set specific standards that require the students to contribute to the goal of the university. If the university truly believes, and can provide evidence that a person’s race is tied to the magnitude of contribution that person can make to the goal, then Dworkin actually does have a sound argument. In this case, using race as a factor in admissions policy might actually be