(A) Rachels holds a moderate view for reverse discrimination. While conceding that if the system is to be implemented, there may be some cases of injustice involved against white people (1. Rachels, cc. 331); overall, reverse discrimination is the way to help reduce bias against people of minority groups and women by introducing them to the fields they were previously excluded from. Rachels claims that reverse discrimination is a part of distributive justice, namely for jobs, education opportunities, and so on. But the notion of “distributive” can be a little misleading, as some goods like jobs cannot be “distributed” equally, instead, in a free society, people should have the freedom to hire whoever they want (2. Rachels, cc. 320). He
…show more content…
He stresses, throughout his arguments, that what one deserves solely depends on their own past actions (4. Rachels, cc. 319). So in the case of reverse discrimination, if minorities are actually more deserving given that their past activities render so, reverse discrimination is justified. He serves an example of one black and one white students who are both well qualified to be admitted to law school, while the white students has a marginally better standardized credential. Shall the situation that black students be admitted while the white students be rejected constitutes anything unjustified (5. Rachels, cc. …show more content…
However, the importance of an inspiring role model is deemed crucial to ending disproportionate amount of minority people and women in so-called “high-end” professions by Rachels. He may respond with the fact that the lack of role models is the cause of a dead cycle of less and less minorities being in the fields that are dominated by white people (18. Rachels, cc. 329). Also, the existence of distinguished minority or woman figure in prestigious jobs would help eliminate prejudices. So asking these institutions be somewhat representative is not unjustified. And yet, Rachels can further argue that having role models does not equal being “representative”. Van den Haag’s claim implies for institutions to be representative, it is expected to have a large influx of incompetent minority students which can make institutions dysfunctional (19. Van den Haag, cc. 305). But role models do not need to come in large quantity, a few distinguished examples is enough to inspire
He stresses, throughout his arguments, that what one deserves solely depends on their own past actions (4. Rachels, cc. 319). So in the case of reverse discrimination, if minorities are actually more deserving given that their past activities render so, reverse discrimination is justified. He serves an example of one black and one white students who are both well qualified to be admitted to law school, while the white students has a marginally better standardized credential. Shall the situation that black students be admitted while the white students be rejected constitutes anything unjustified (5. Rachels, cc. …show more content…
However, the importance of an inspiring role model is deemed crucial to ending disproportionate amount of minority people and women in so-called “high-end” professions by Rachels. He may respond with the fact that the lack of role models is the cause of a dead cycle of less and less minorities being in the fields that are dominated by white people (18. Rachels, cc. 329). Also, the existence of distinguished minority or woman figure in prestigious jobs would help eliminate prejudices. So asking these institutions be somewhat representative is not unjustified. And yet, Rachels can further argue that having role models does not equal being “representative”. Van den Haag’s claim implies for institutions to be representative, it is expected to have a large influx of incompetent minority students which can make institutions dysfunctional (19. Van den Haag, cc. 305). But role models do not need to come in large quantity, a few distinguished examples is enough to inspire