当前位置: X-MOL 学术Journal of Philosophy of Education › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
An Aristotelian Defence of Affirmative Action: Alasdair MacIntyre, Sandra Day O'Connor and Grutter v. Bollinger
Journal of Philosophy of Education ( IF 0.949 ) Pub Date : 2020-09-04 , DOI: 10.1111/1467-9752.12487
NEIL DHINGRA 1 , CAMPBELL SCRIBNER 1
Affiliation  

We argue that Alasdair MacIntyre's description of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as an exemplar of practical reasoning, who envisions the contextual and consensual balancing of different goods according to the further good of the American social order, enables a reinterpretation of O'Connor's majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, the landmark affirmative action decision. Grutter has been criticised for arbitrarily claiming that diversity is a compelling governmental interest, giving excessive deference to university admissions offices, and including a sunset provision. These criticisms, we argue, are weakened if the decision and the meaning of ‘diversity’ are reinterpreted through a neo‐Aristotelian lens. Further, looking at Grutter, we defend O'Connor from MacIntyre's criticism that she cannot radically critique the American social order.

中文翻译:

亚里士多德对平权行动的辩护:阿拉斯泰尔·麦金太尔,桑德拉·戴·奥康纳和格鲁特诉博林格

我们认为,Alasdair MacIntyre将Sandra Day O'Connor大法官描述为实践推理的典范,他根据美国社会秩序的进一步发展,设想了不同商品的语境和共识平衡,这使得对O'Connor多数意见的重新诠释成为可能。在Grutter诉Bollinger案中,具有里程碑意义的平权行动决定。格鲁特(Grutter)因任意宣称多样性是政府的一项迫切利益而受到批评,过度尊重大学招生办公室,并提供日落条款。我们认为,如果通过新亚里士多德的视角重新解释“多样性”的决定和含义,这些批评就会减弱。进一步,看Grutter,我们为奥康纳(O'Connor)免受麦金太尔(MacIntyre)的批评,即麦金太尔不能从根本上批评美国的社会秩序。
更新日期:2020-09-04
down
wechat
bug