Social Philosophy and Policy 8 (2):108-129 (1991)
AbstractAffirmative action programs remain controversial, I suspect, partly because the familiar arguments for and against them start from significantly different moral perspectives. Thus I want to step back for a while from the details of debate about particular programs and give attention to the moral viewpoints presupposed in different types of argument. My aim, more specifically, is to compare the “messages” expressed when affirmative action is defended from different moral perspectives. Exclusively forward-looking arguments, I suggest, tend to express the wrong message, but this is also true of exclusively backward-looking arguments. However, a moral outlook that focuses on cross-temporal narrative values suggests a more appropriate account of what affirmative action should try to express. Assessment of the message, admittedly, is only one aspect of a complex issue, but it is a relatively neglected one. My discussion takes for granted some common-sense ideas about the communicative function of action, and so I begin with these. Actions, as the saying goes, often speak louder than words. There are times, too, when only actions can effectively communicate the message we want to convey and times when giving a message is a central part of the purpose of action. What our actions say to others depends largely, though not entirely, upon our avowed reasons for acting; and this is a matter for reflective decision, not something we discover later by looking back at what we did and its effects. The decision is important because “the same act” can have very different consequences, depending upon how we choose to justify it.
Similar books and articles
The Case Against Affirmative Action.Louis P. Pojman - 1998 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):97-115.
Sterba on Affirmative Action, or, It Never Was the Bus, It Was Us!Bill E. Lawson - 2011 - The Journal of Ethics 15 (3):281-290.
Affirmative Action as a Form of Restitution.Leo Groarke - 1990 - Journal of Business Ethics 9 (3):207 - 213.
The Ethical Case for Affirmative Action.Prue Burns & Jan Schapper - 2008 - Journal of Business Ethics 83 (3):369-379.
American and Canadian Perspectives on Affirmative Action: A Response to the Fraser Institute. [REVIEW]Paula Chegwidden & Wendy R. Katz - 1983 - Journal of Business Ethics 2 (3):191 - 202.
Fair Equality of Opportunity: Reconceiving Affirmative Action Through a Rawlsian Lens.Janelle Garcelon - unknown
Affirmative Inaction? The Aftermath of Grutter and Gratz.Richard A. Jones - 2004 - Radical Philosophy Review 7 (2):179-193.
Affirmative Action and the Demands of Justice.N. Scott Arnold - 1998 - Social Philosophy and Policy 15 (2):133.
Procedural Justice and Affirmative Action.Kristina Meshelski - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):425-443.
A Dialogue Concerning Claim Jumping and Compensatory Justice or Introducing Affirmative Action By Stealth.Todd Michael Furman - 1998 - Teaching Philosophy 21 (2):131-151.
Affirmative Action: An Ethical Evaluation. [REVIEW]Bill Shaw - 1988 - Journal of Business Ethics 7 (10):763 - 770.
Affirmative Action, Non-Consequentialism, and Responsibility for the Effects of Past Discrimination.Mark Van Roojen - 1997 - Public Affairs Quarterly 11 (3):281-301.
Was I Entitled or Should I Apologize? Affirmative Action Going Forward.Anita L. Allen - 2011 - The Journal of Ethics 15 (3):253-263.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Rawls, Self-Respect, and Assurance: How Past Injustice Changes What Publicly Counts as Justice.Timothy Waligore - 2016 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 15 (1):42-66.
Reparations and Symbolic Restitution.Lukas H. Meyer - 2006 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (3):406–422.
References found in this work
The Right and the Good.Some Problems in Ethics.W. D. Ross & H. W. B. Joseph - 1933 - Journal of Philosophy 30 (19):517-527.
In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development.Carol Gilligan - 1982 - The Personalist Forum 2 (2):150-152.