24th June 2003, 10:01 AM
Wetall, a much as you continue to disrespect me, I'm calm enough to write something level-headed.
There is a bit of confusion over this whole subject,and it boils down to the difference between equal and fair. The first thing that I realized was:
(Equal) != (Fair)
or
Equal is not fair, and fair is not equal.
Let us think of the case of a 2-man race to the top of the Philadelpphia steps. The task is the same, it is equal. The distance is the same. The steps, the day, the time, and the temperature are all the same. Yet one man has been born without legs. Sure, the system is equal, but is the outcome fair?
I think Weltall assumes that fair and equal are the same thing. This simple example illustrates that they are not.
So what is the goal of society? To make it equal, or to make it fair? Equal would mean that the legless man would be given no help. Each runner would be given the same treatment Fair would mean that the legless man would be given prosthetic legs. Each man would have a fair chance to make it to the top of the steps first. In this case, as in society, I prefer fair over equal.
As I stated before, some people have inherent advantages that they didn't earn: race, upbringing, wealth/reputation of parents, genes, etc. I understand that as a caucasian, I have an advantage in society simply because of the color of my skin. That is not fair. If it was fair, and societal standing depended solely on merit and character, the demographics of poor people would be about the same as the demographics of the entire country: 75.1% Caucasian, 12.5% Latino, 12.3% African American, 3.6% Asian, .9% American Indian. In addition, the demographics of the top 5% of Americans in terms of wealth would be the same. As we all know, the percentage of richest of Americans is disproportionately Caucasian. There are two possible conclusions: The system is not equal or caucasians are superior. For the sake of humanity, let's say it's the first. The most obvious flaw in this purportedly equal system is the parent's wealth. Your parents earned their money, not you. Therefore, in an equal system, children would not benefit from the societal standing of their parents. You would earn everything you have. But it is idealistic to think that we could make a perfectly equal system, just as it is idealistic to think that we could make a perfectly fair system. The problem is that we have so entangled equal and fair that we can't even define each without tripping over the other.
That said, I am not in total agreement with Affirmative Action. I agree with the goal, but I disagree with the means. The way it is done now, the institutions are trying to dissolve the racial barriers by RECOGNIZING them and ENFORCING them. The means are flawed. Yet by getting rid of Affirmative action and enforcing equal means, you ensure unfair ends.
Personally, I would take race out of the equation, and simply go by wealth. Society is much more likely to support a policy that unequally accepts the poor than unequally accepts the African Americans, yet the result may be the same. Granted, wealthy parents are going to complain that they worked hard to give their kids a good life, but nobody will listen to them.
There is a bit of confusion over this whole subject,and it boils down to the difference between equal and fair. The first thing that I realized was:
(Equal) != (Fair)
or
Equal is not fair, and fair is not equal.
Let us think of the case of a 2-man race to the top of the Philadelpphia steps. The task is the same, it is equal. The distance is the same. The steps, the day, the time, and the temperature are all the same. Yet one man has been born without legs. Sure, the system is equal, but is the outcome fair?
I think Weltall assumes that fair and equal are the same thing. This simple example illustrates that they are not.
So what is the goal of society? To make it equal, or to make it fair? Equal would mean that the legless man would be given no help. Each runner would be given the same treatment Fair would mean that the legless man would be given prosthetic legs. Each man would have a fair chance to make it to the top of the steps first. In this case, as in society, I prefer fair over equal.
As I stated before, some people have inherent advantages that they didn't earn: race, upbringing, wealth/reputation of parents, genes, etc. I understand that as a caucasian, I have an advantage in society simply because of the color of my skin. That is not fair. If it was fair, and societal standing depended solely on merit and character, the demographics of poor people would be about the same as the demographics of the entire country: 75.1% Caucasian, 12.5% Latino, 12.3% African American, 3.6% Asian, .9% American Indian. In addition, the demographics of the top 5% of Americans in terms of wealth would be the same. As we all know, the percentage of richest of Americans is disproportionately Caucasian. There are two possible conclusions: The system is not equal or caucasians are superior. For the sake of humanity, let's say it's the first. The most obvious flaw in this purportedly equal system is the parent's wealth. Your parents earned their money, not you. Therefore, in an equal system, children would not benefit from the societal standing of their parents. You would earn everything you have. But it is idealistic to think that we could make a perfectly equal system, just as it is idealistic to think that we could make a perfectly fair system. The problem is that we have so entangled equal and fair that we can't even define each without tripping over the other.
That said, I am not in total agreement with Affirmative Action. I agree with the goal, but I disagree with the means. The way it is done now, the institutions are trying to dissolve the racial barriers by RECOGNIZING them and ENFORCING them. The means are flawed. Yet by getting rid of Affirmative action and enforcing equal means, you ensure unfair ends.
Personally, I would take race out of the equation, and simply go by wealth. Society is much more likely to support a policy that unequally accepts the poor than unequally accepts the African Americans, yet the result may be the same. Granted, wealthy parents are going to complain that they worked hard to give their kids a good life, but nobody will listen to them.