Comments

Review these ideas and then use the BACK key in your browser to go back to the page you were on.

None of the speakers tries to defend Alan Goldman's claim that for many jobs individuals have a right to be chosen on the basis of competence. Goldman's argument is useful in that it provides a basis for saying that racial discrimination by private employers is and was unjust. If we reject Goldman's argument, and we wish to defend the widespread belief that discrimination is unjust, what sort of argument can we use? Ann argues that discrimination is and was unjust because it treated equal cases unequally without pointing to a relevant difference. What do you think of her argument?

Someone might argue that the requirement to treat equal cases equally tells us nothing at all about whether racial discrimination in hiring is unjust. We all treat our friends and families in special ways. We give them gifts, for example. The only difference is in our attitude toward these people, but this seems to be enough to justify special treatment when distributing our own property. Should this approach be applied to race and sex? Most Americans believe that it would be unjust for an employer to discriminate in favor of whites or males simply because he liked them. Is this different from what seems like fully justified discrimination in favor of our friends and families? How would you develop or criticize this analogy?