University of the People - PHIL 1404PHIL 1404 Discussion Forum Unit 6

Document Content and Description Below

Discussion Forum Unit 6 by Joseph Choi (Instructor) - Tuesday, 12 November 2019, 11:50 PM Number of replies: 79 Hello all, Here are the questions for week 6. Please read the case study entitled G... oogle Celebrates Diversity…and Profit that you find in the reading assignment. Based on what you have learned in this unit, answer the following questions: 1. In a nutshell, the commonly cited arguments in favor of affirmative action include the following: • It creates fairness and equal opportunity within organizations. • It benefits third parties: society as a whole will be more harmonious as discrimination recedes. • It reduces tensions in an organization. • It benefits organizations by helping them reach their goals. • It is compensation for past wrongs. Which of these arguments appear to stand behind affirmative action at Google? Explain. Are any of the other justifications applicable even though they may not be the reason Google seeks diverse talent? 2. In sweeping terms there are two types of arguments in favor of affirmative action. First, it serves a broad social good by integrating society. Second, companies employing affirmative action do better in the marketplace than those that don’t. If you had to choose one of these as a better and more persuasive argument for affirmative action, which would you choose? Why? 3. At some publicly funded universities, scholarships are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Google privately funds scholarships that are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Taxpayers, in other words, fund one affirmative action endeavor and private investors the other. Now, is one endeavor ethically superior to the other? Why or why not? 4. What does the veil of ignorance test for discrimination? Put yourself under the veil of ignorance. Now, do you believe Google’s hiring policies are ethically good or bad? Why? --Dr. Choi 279 words PermalinkReplyIn reply to Joseph Choi (Instructor) Re: Discussion Forum Unit 6 by Cannon Luck - Saturday, 21 December 2019, 8:20 AM 1. In a nutshell, the commonly cited arguments in favor of affirmative action include the following: It creates fairness and equal opportunity within organizations. It benefits third parties: society as a whole will be more harmonious as discrimination recedes. It reduces tensions in an organization. It benefits organizations by helping them reach their goals. It is compensation for past wrongs. Which of these arguments appear to stand behind affirmative action at Google? Explain. Are any of the other justifications applicable even though they may not be the reason Google seeks diverse talent? The statement “It benefits third parties: society as a whole will be more harmonious as discrimination recedes” make Google appear to stand behind affirmative action. I say this because it states that they plan to be more harmonious as the discrimination recedes which to me means that they hope to completely get rid of diversity to create a culture that is harmonious in the work place. 2. In sweeping terms there are two types of arguments in favor of affirmative action. First, it serves a broad social good by integrating society. Second, companies employing affirmative action do better in the marketplace than those that don’t. If you had to choose one of these as a better and more persuasive argument for affirmative action, which would you choose? Why? I would choose the first statement since I believe that a company with high throughput, high quality and low cost is what puts the company in a good spot in the market place. Of course I am not saying that affirmative action in the workplace doesn’t help improve these I am simply stating that the first argument to me is a more persuasive argument since if you get the first argument to happen then you more than likely get the second naturally. What I mean by that is if you can get all of society to back affirmative action then it would become the norm and that would then become the norm in the work place. 3. At some publicly funded universities, scholarships are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Google privately funds scholarships that are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Taxpayers, in other words, fund one affirmative action endeavor and private investors the other. Now, is one endeavor ethically superior to the other? Why or why not?On a basic level of ethics you could state that because the scholarship funds an affirmative action endeavor it is ethically superior to the private investors since it has a larger benefit to the social structure. Privately funded scholarships that are set aside for minorities gives them a chance to do something that they never would have been able to afford to do otherwise and this will allow them to become a contributing part of society. 4. What does the veil of ignorance test for discrimination? Put yourself under the veil of ignorance. Now, do you believe Google’s hiring policies are ethically good or bad? Why? Using the veil of ignorance idea I would say that Google’s hiring policy is ethical. After reviewing googles hiring stats and statements it clear to me that Google has set out to attempt to hire anyone and not discriminate. Overall Google still has the majority as their main employee but you can see that they have pushed to allow minorities to grow in the work place and now most likely feel more welcome than they have before in another work culture. 576 words PermalinkShow parentReply In reply to Cannon Luck Re: Discussion Forum Unit 6 by Kabir Bolarinwa - Saturday, 21 December 2019, 10:23 AM Hello Cannon, Concerning the reply for number 2, I agree with you to some extent but from another angle, I will go with the second one because, it creates more friendship which will serve as an avenue for the business to thrive well in the market. Thank you 48 words PermalinkShow parentReply In reply to Cannon Luck Response to Cannon by Wayne Higgins - Saturday, 21 December 2019, 6:26 PM Hi Cannon, You mentioned: "Privately funded scholarships that are set aside for minorities gives them a chance to do something that they never would have been able to afford to do otherwise". [Show More]

Last updated: 1 year ago

Preview 1 out of 54 pages