Equality Discrimination and Preferential Treatment

Equality, Discrimination, and Preferential Treatment

In this argument essay entitled equality, discrimination, and preferential treatment Boxill takes an in depth look at the ethics behind preferential treatment and equal opportunity. After reading and analyzing the essay it is pretty clear that the equal opportunity principle and preferential treatment have some conflicting grey area of when it is or is not acceptable to use preferential treatment. The two main arguments Boxill uses to justify preferential treatment are the forward looking argument and the backward looking argument. In my opinion the forward looking argument is a much more solid and reasonable justification for preferential treatment than the backward looking argument. Although both arguments may be flawed to an extent when the equal opportunity principle is taken into account. There are some scenarios in which the equal opportunity principle must be relaxed using the forward looking argument as an ethical justification for preferential treatment .

First I will look at the relation between the equal opportunity principle and preferential treatment. The equal opportunity principle has two main parts; the person who is most qualified for the position is the one who should receive that position, and that all people are able to acquire the qualifications for a desirable position equally. Boxill argues that preferential treatment violates the first part of the equal opportunity principle which I tend to agree with, because it makes it so minorities have more of an opportunity based on race or sex not qualifications. Boxill also states that if someone is given a position based on qualifications alone it also may violate the equal opportunity principle, because others wanting that position may not have had the opportunity to gain the qualifications necessary for that position. Boxill attempts to argue that preferential treatment is ethical in some cases even though preferential treatment contradicts the equal opportunity principle. Here is Boxill’s argument broken down:

Affirmative action programs are ethically unacceptable only if they violate the Equal opportunity principle

The Equal Opportunity says hiring or admissions decisions should be based solely on the applications qualifications.

What counts as a qualification for a position depends on the principle of Equal Consideration Interest.

According to the principle of Equal Consideration Interest, in some cases a person's color or sex may count as qualification for a position.

Therefore, in such cases, affirmative action programs which consider a person’s color or sex do not violate the Equal Opportunity(2-4)

Therefore, in such cases, affirmative action programs are not ethically unacceptable(1,5)

Boxill first attempts to justify preferential treatment with the forward looking argument by showing that it can help break stereotypes. By breaking stereotypes it creates more of an equal opportunity for everyone. The example that he uses shows that men dominate the engineering field. Since it is predominantly men, women may not get a fair chance at obtaining an engineering position. Preferential treatment would help break these stereotypes and close the gap between male versus female positions. This preferential treatment is justified by the equal opportunities of interest principle by equalizing opportunities for women in the engineering field.

The forward looking argument shows justification for preferential treatment by attempting to break stereotypes and