Affirmative Action Essay

Society, unfortunately, sees many cases of discrimination. We enact laws in order to fight these matters of discrimination. It is all in an effort to keep things fair. However, what does philosophy have to say about these laws? For example, society has established Affirmative Action, known as a positive discrimination policy, in an effort to see that no members of minority groups are discriminated against, primarily when it comes to employment. While society generally accepts the idea, philosophical concepts, such as ethical relativism and normative ethical relativism suggest it is not correct for every culture, suggesting they are not sound.
Ethical relativism, according to, “Moral Issues in Business,” states the norms for one’s culture dictate what is morally permissive and what is not, whether concerning business or personal issues . Therefore, what is morally just in American society may not be correct in South African or Japanese Society, as it is dictated by their specific cultural. Based on that, affirmative action is morally just in American culture because we are aware minorities deserve the same chances as anybody else, but are often denied these chances based on skin color, religion, cultural background, etc., as stated in, “The Affirmative Action Debate .” It is not permissible for minorities to be denied the right to fair consideration simply because they live differently; a philosophical concept that suggests otherwise appears to be supporting prejudice.
A similar theory, normative ethical relativism, considers there are no universal moral principles to live by . Again, the argument is raised that morally correct and incorrect actions are judged based on the society in which they are committed. On this basis, denying a minority a job based on their minority status may be morally unjust in America, but not in another country which does not consider it morally impermissible. Much like ethical relativism, normative ethical relativism suggests each culture makes their own rules. However, this demands failure from the world, as many of us attempt to assimilate into other cultures. If only a handful consider it morally impermissible to deny minorities a fair chance at jobs, only a handful of cultures will be welcoming to minorities at all .
There are, of course, objections to the argument. One might argue minorities are minorities because they do not often leave their home countries. If they did, they would not need specific laws to help them find work. While this is true to an extent, it does not mean the concepts of ethical relativism are just. Cultures cannot decide which people are worthy of being accepted based on who they are or where they are from unless they expect the same treatment in return. One may also argue, rather prejudiced, that cultures should stay separated to avoid such arguments in the first place. While it would avoid tumultuous chaos such as this, it is not the way of humans to be anti-social. We could stick to our own kind, but we would learn nothing. Moreover, there are more philosophical concepts about learning the differences within us, rather than segregating each culture.
In sum, affirmative action appears to be a necessary and morally just tool in today’s world. Philosophical concepts such as moral relativism and normative moral relativism do not justify themselves. They explain each culture polices itself, exacting moral justification without answering to other cultures. This does not allow humans to interact cross-culturally, nor does it account for anything resembling world safety. While it is true, many disagree with laws like affirmative action, believing minorities should stay within the bounds of their own culture, that is a personal belief, rather than a universally moral law.

Works Cited

Cahn, Steven M. The Affirmative Action Debate. London: Routledge, 2013. Book.
Shaw, William and Vincent Barry. Moral Issues in Business. Boston: Cengage Learning, 2015. Book.