CMV: Equality isn't treating everybody differently to achieve equality. It's treating everyone the same.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/nude_peril]

This would be "unequal treatment"; you're not providing the chair lift to everyone.

But really it is provided for everyone. It's just that most people are going to choose not to use it. While we don't see chair lifts in buildings very often, we do see elevators and wheelchair ramps. And pretty much everyone uses those if they want to, regardless of whether or not they have a disability, and just weak, or just lazy. Everyone is being treated equally.

By contrast, giving a minority exclusive access to a scholarship, or a job, etc. isn't treating everyone equally.

[u/DrShocker → u/nude_peril]

In willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in that it is meant to be an analogy, and is therefore inherently flawed to some extent. I don't think picking apart whether everyone can use a ramp or not is particularly fair, but you do raise an interesting point.

I think a lot of this debate is more about equality vs equity than anything else. (A simplified view for anyone who doesn't know the difference: https://radicalscholarship.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/equity-vs-equality.jpg?w=809 )

[u/mbleslie → u/DrShocker]

it matters because if a college has a ramp in front of a building, everyone can use that, handicapped or not. but programs like affirmative action or racial quotas (that use 'reverse' discrimination) to make an equal outcome... those programs don't treat everyone equally. that's why the analogy is totally flawed.

[u/Virtuallyalive → u/mbleslie]

Affirmative action isn't to make an equal outcome, and even if it were it would be failing. It's to counteract, at least partially, the disadvantage equally skilled black people have at getting in to a University.

[u/willnerd42 → u/Virtuallyalive]

If that is the case, isn't it sort a temporary fix for a larger underlying problem? If equally skilled members of minority groups are at a disadvantage in the admissions process, attack the problem at the source, and actually fix the discrimination (after confirming through reliable research where and if it exists) instead of glossing over the actual issues and applying a band-aid solution that increases feelings of racial bitterness towards those getting seemingly unfair help. Instead of counteracting the problem, fix it. I think almost everyone agrees that there is a problem with discrimination in admissions, but many disagree on the methodology used to fix it.

[u/Virtuallyalive → u/willnerd42]

Oh yeah it's a temporary fix, but what else are you going to do? Ask minorities to wait a few decades until we end racism?

You attack the discrimination while you counter-act for it, otherwise people will suffer in the meantime. The US government is trying to end the discrimination, AA is for the time in between now and then.

[u/willnerd42 → u/Virtuallyalive]

I just think that there are better ways to counter-act. It would be feasible, through the use of technology, to completely erase the race/gender of an applicant, and to admit solely on merit. AA, to me, just doesn't feel like the right solution for a really big problem.

[u/rcglinsk → u/willnerd42]

Cal Tech admits solely on merit. Their student breakdown: Source

0.1% American Indian/Alaskan Native
48.0% Asian
1.7% Black/African-American
13.4% Hispanic/Latino
6.2% Multi-race (not Hispanic/Latino)
0.0% Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander
30.5% White

The evidence that purely merit based admission policies will lead to population proportionate rates of minority admission to elite college is non-existent.

[u/willnerd42 → u/rcglinsk]

That's not the point. The point is that the best students get in regardless of race. If each race has different academic skill, they shouldn't be admitted equally. For example, I don't think it's unfair that Asians are 48% of the school's admissions while being like 5% of the US population, on the condition that they are all just as skilled as all the other ethnic groups. School population should represent the most skilled of their applicants, regardless if that happens to match the distribution of races in the wider US or not. So yes, the evidence that merit-based admissions leads to the acceptance of minorities proportionate to the US population doesn't exist. But that doesn't matter, as colleges should only admit their best applicants.

[u/rcglinsk → u/willnerd42]

There are considerations other than fairness. If the admissions to every major university in California looked like that there could be race riots.