Final answer:
Philosophers support affirmative action for moral reasons, such as promoting equality and diversity, redressing past exclusion and discrimination, and improving fairness in hiring and admissions. The policy aims to balance competition by giving underrepresented groups opportunities.
Step-by-step explanation:
Philosophers have cited several reasons to support the morality of affirmative action, key among them being that it promotes equality and diversity. For instance, James Rachels justified affirmative action as a redress for historical privileges enjoyed by certain groups, while Judith Jarvis Thomson and Mary Anne Warren endorsed preferences to counter past exclusion and entrenched gender discrimination, enhancing overall fairness. The policy is seen as a means to equalize opportunities and has been shown to benefit society by enabling qualified women and minorities to occupy positions they were historically excluded from. This is believed to improve equity and address efficiency concerns related to past discriminatory practices. Moreover, the increase in minority graduation rates from selective institutions under affirmative action shows potential benefits in educational outcomes.
Nonetheless, affirmative action faces criticism for being potentially discriminatory against non-minority groups, suggesting that it could undermine meritocracy by considering factors such as race or gender in admissions and hiring decisions. Critics argue this may preference less qualified individuals over more qualified candidates to achieve diversity goals, although research indicates that this concern over efficiency may be overstated. Additionally, affirmative action may inadvertently challenge underrepresented groups to be taken seriously on their own merits due to the stigma associated with preferential selection.
Ultimately, affirmative action seeks to address and compensate for past and present discrimination against underrepresented groups, providing opportunities to compete on a more level playing field. Proponents argue that without such measures, minorities and women would continue to face significant obstacles, perpetuating inequality and social injustice.