Some Mistakes in Thinking about Affirmative Action*

Once I was a member of a university council that, among other things, played "watchdog" when decisions were being made regarding whom to appoint to high places in the univeristy administration. One of my colleague's favorite points was that if a candidate hedged with a "yes and no" or a "yes, but..." to the query, "Would you support affirmative action?", such a response should be taken as prima facie evidence that the candidate didn't really support affirmative action and so should not be hired. It is difficult not to empathize with the "yes, but" response. Most anyone who works in educational institutions can cite cases in which it seems that affirmative action worked—that it encouraged just decisions. As illustration, there is the case of the brilliant young minority professor who would likely have been passed over for lesser applicants had it not been for affirmative action. But also it is disappointingly easy to recall cases in which injustice has reigned in the name of affirmative action, e.g., the woman who, with minimal qualifications, was appointed project director, in consequence of which both the project and the woman suffered. Indeed, it is with such cases in mind that many of us (whether of the minority or majority, whether female or male) reply with a "yes and no." How are we to understand the inconsistent results of affirmative action policies? That is, why is it that affirmative action seems to promote both just and unjust decisions? Is it that affirmative action policies, by their very nature, encourage arbitrary decisions?