Affirmative Action Should Not Be a Part of the College Admissions Process

Affirmative Action programs seek to level the playing field for minority students who may otherwise be overlooked, despite their merit (Waller 57). As college students, we are very familiar with the subtle nuances of University admissions decisions. Looking back on the process, I feel that Affirmative Action programs are unfair. Admissions preference should not be given to students based on skin color or place of birth. Just because the aim is to help minorities does not excuse or mitigate the fact that non-minority students who are qualified are often denied spots in favor of students with a different skin tone (Cohen 45).

Let's draw a comparison to illustrate the inherent unfairness of this institution. Historically, black Americans have been some of our world's most accomplished sprinters. So, taking this fact into consideration: if all college applicants were required to place highly in a footrace to gain admission, (the college admissions process often feels that exhausting for applicants) would it be fair to have the black applicants start 100 yards behind the rest if the aim is to level the playing field for non-blacks? Of course it wouldn't. Spectators and participants would deem this grossly unfair. I argue that the same type of injustice is being done to white students all over the country. It's not as visible as the example I posed, but it is just as unfair.

Affirmative Action was created to level the playing field and give minority students closer consideration in the application process (Waller 57). However, this goal is not being met. Instead, minority applicants are being favored for admission to this University. This does not level the playing field; it just tips the scale in the other direction. In their attempt to right past wrongs for minority applicants, admissions officials are subjecting white applicants to the type of racial discrimination that they ought to be seeking to eradicate in all forms.

As Carl Cohen explains, "Persons of all colors, religions, and origins are equals with respect to their right, equals in the eyes of the law. And equals must be treated equally." (Cohen 42). If all human beings are equal, we ought not give preference to anyone based on statistics that are beyond their control. Applicants should be judged on merit solely. Proponents of Affirmative Action suggest that Affirmative Action is necessary because racial diversity would probably not occur if left to chance (Harris & Narayan 55).

I don't accept that assessment. There's never been a time when individuals were viewed without regard to their race or gender. In the past, women were barred from University admission. In the past, blacks were not seen as desirable institution members. Today, we are so concerned with being politically correct that we are overdoing it. It is clear that it is inherently wrong to judge individuals based on identity (Cohen 46). If it is policy to make special considerations for minorities, why not favor the left-handed applicants as well? Why not make special consideration for blue-eyed individuals? Why not give preference to blond-haired applicants?

When viewed in this way, the answer is obvious. These traits are inherited; they are things we don't get to decide about ourselves. It's clear that favoring left-handed or blue-eyed or blond-haired applicants would be a disservice to those who do not fit the mold we are creating. Race and gender should be no exception.

I am a female, and I want my accomplishments to be judged with the same scrutiny as any male. I don't want to be patronized, and I don't want anyone else to be either. Male or female, black or white, I believe we all have the equal opportunity to succeed if we are determined enough.

Similarly, our colleges have an opportunity to make a difference in the way we view each other and ourselves. If we put aside our traditional notions of the distinction between white and minority identities, as well as female and male identities we can finally measure individuals fairly and objectively. We can do this by omitting the application question that asks applicants to define their race. We can do this by omitting the application question that requires applicants to state their gender. These actions would be steps in the right direction, but it still wouldn't be enough. If we are really committed to a fair admissions process, we would not give preference to "legacies."

If we are going to admit applicants based on merit at all, we ought to admit them solely on merit. Nothing else makes sense. Immanuel Kant would argue that no other method is just because, by admitting applicants in order to achieve greater diversity on campus, the admissions panel is treating the applicant as a means only. He would say-and I would agree-that individuals should be admitted based on how much they deserve the opportunity to attain a superb education, not on how neatly they fit into a particular demographic group. Furthermore, the entire concept of race or gender preference is contradictory because it operates under the maxim "some demographics should be preferred over others." This maxim, based on Kant's discussion of the categorical imperative, is nonsensical because no rational individual would will it to be universal law (Kant 88). There is the obvious implication that eventually the maxim would turn on those to whom it was initially beneficial.

Proponents of Affirmative Action are naive to think that the process is fair. Just because we don't know the names or faces of the victims, does not mean that there aren't any (Cohen 46). If colleges are concerned with admitting the worthiest, hardest-working students, they will make much-needed adjustments to the admissions process. I believe that individuals, regardless of ethnicity or gender, all have a capacity to succeed. Because of this belief, I feel that a "race-blind, gender-blind" system would be sufficient to not only ensure the admission of the most qualified candidates but also to enhance and maintain a diverse university community.

Sources:

Cohen, Carl. "Affirmative Action Programs: Unfair Discrimination." You Decide! Current Debates in Contemporary Moral Problems. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. 42-48

Harris, Luke Charles, and Uma Narayan. "Affirmative Action Programs: Basic Justice." You Decide! Current Debates in Contemporary Moral Problems. New York: Pearson Longman, 2006. 49-58.

Kant, Immanuel. The Metaphysics of Morals. Trans. Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press, 1996.

Waller, Bruce N, ed. You Decide! Current Debates in Contemporary Moral Problems. New York: Pearson Longman, 1997.