Equality And Preferential Treatment

These essays, with one exception originally published in Philosophy & Public Affairs, consider the moral problems associated with improving the social and economic position of disadvantaged groups. If the situation of women and minorities improves so that their opportunities are equal to those of more favored groups, will they then be in a competitive position conducive to equal achievement? If not, can preferential hiring or preferential admission to educational institutions be justified? The contributors explore the complexities of this problem from several points of view. The discussions in Part I are more theoretical and concentrate on the application to this case of general considerations from ethical theory. The discussions in Part II also take up theoretical questions, but they start from specific problems about the constitutionality and the effectiveness of certain methods of achieving equality and counteracting discrimination. The two groups of essays demonstrate admirably the close connection between moral philosophy and questions of law and policy. The issues discussed include compensation, liability, victimization, the significance of group membership, the intrinsic importance of racial, sexual, or meritocratic criteria, and the overall effects of preferential policies.

These essays, with one exception originally published in Philosophy & Public Affairs, consider the moral problems associated with improving the social and economic position of disadvantaged groups. If the situation of women and minorities improves so that their opportunities are equal to those of more favored groups, will they then be in a competitive position conducive to equal achievement? If not, can preferential hiring or preferential admission to educational institutions be justified? The contributors explore the complexities of this problem from several points of view. The discussions in Part I are more theoretical and concentrate on the application to this case of general considerations from ethical theory. The discussions in Part II also take up theoretical questions, but they start from specific problems about the constitutionality and the effectiveness of certain methods of achieving equality and counteracting discrimination. The two groups of essays demonstrate admirably the close connection between moral philosophy and questions of law and policy. The issues discussed include compensation, liability, victimization, the significance of group membership, the intrinsic importance of racial, sexual, or meritocratic criteria, and the overall effects of preferential policies.

These essays, with one exception originally published in Philosophy & Public Affairs, consider the moral problems associated with improving the social and economic position of disadvantaged groups. If the situation of women and minorities improves so that their opportunities are equal to those of more favored groups, will they then be in a competitive position conducive to equal achievement? If not, can preferential hiring or preferential admission to educational institutions be justified? The contributors explore the complexities of this problem from several points of view. The discussions in Part I are more theoretical and concentrate on the application to this case of general considerations from ethical theory. The discussions in Part II also take up theoretical questions, but they start from specific problems about the constitutionality and the effectiveness of certain methods of achieving equality and counteracting discrimination. The two groups of essays demonstrate admirably the close connection between moral philosophy and questions of law and policy. The issues discussed include compensation, liability, victimization, the significance of group membership, the intrinsic importance of racial, sexual, or meritocratic criteria, and the overall effects of preferential policies.

Doctor Hyder's meticulous and comprehensive study throws much needed light on the often invoked but little understood concept of "discrimination" in international law. It is also of great practical value to those who are concerned with the law of international trade. "Discrimination" is a word with bad connotations. It suggests un fairness, prejudice and favouritism. It seems to point to adeparture from the ideal of equal opportunities, equal rewards and even-handed legal protection of all human beings without regard to differences of race, religion, ethnic origin or sex. Similarly, in public international law "discrimination" suggests violation of the principle of equality of states. Yet there are vast areas of international relations in whieh states are regarded as being legally free, except as specially provided in treaties, to make distinctions between other states or their nationals. The principle of equality of states merely means that the many rules constituting what is often called "general (or universal) international law" apply equally to all independent states. Hence, by definition, such states have equal rights and duties under general international law. But the latter leaves vast areas of transnational activity to be regulated by states at their discretion either unilaterally or by special agreement with other states. No state has, in fact, exactly the same totality of rights and duties as other states, since no two states are parties to exactly the same treaties. By treaty, astate often grants to another state a right which it may withhold from third states.

Three common assumptions of both liberal theory and political debate are the autonomy of the family, the principle of merit, and equality of life chances. Fishkin argues that even under the best conditions, commitment to any two of these principles precludes the third. "A brief survey and brilliant critique of contemporary liberal political theory.... A must for all political theory or public policy collections." -Choice "The strong points of Fishkin's book are many. He raises provocative issues, locates them within a broader theoretical framework, and demonstrates an urgent need for liberals to set certain priorities. His main message--that liberalism has radical implications for ordinary life--needs to be heard by many." --Virginia L. Warren, Michigan Law Review "A highly original and powerfully argued book.... Fishkin is undoubtedly right, and his warning needs to be taken seriously.... This is not a book that catechizes us about what we should believe concerning the practicalities of distributive justice. It is a book that advises us about how we need to think about beliefs that are already popular dogmas, in the interest of making sense." -James Gaffney, America James S. Fishkin is associate professor of political science at Yale University. He is also the author of The Limits of Obligation and Beyond Subjective Morality.

Papers presented at a conference held at the University of Georgia, February 13-15, 1975, and sponsored by that university's Dept. of Philosophy and Religion and Dept. of History and Philosophy of Education, together with the Georgia State Committee for the Humanities.