Coverart for item
The Resource Justice for the past, Stephen Kershnar

Justice for the past, Stephen Kershnar

Label
Justice for the past
Title
Justice for the past
Statement of responsibility
Stephen Kershnar
Creator
Subject
Language
eng
Summary
Among the most controversial issues in the United States is the question of whether public or private agencies should adopt preferential treatment programs or be required to pay reparations for slavery. Using a carefully reasoned philosophical approach, Stephen Kershnar argues that programs such as affirmative action and calls for slavery reparations are unjust for three reasons. First, the state has a duty to direct resources to those persons who, through their abilities, will benefit most from them. Second, he argues that, in the case of slavery, past injustice -- where both the victims and perpetrators are long dead -- cannot ground current claims to compensation. As terrible as slavery was, those who claim a right to compensation today owe their existence to it, he reasons, and since the events that bring about a person's existence are normally thought to be beneficial, past injustices do not warrant compensation. Finally, even if past injustices were allowed to serve as the basis of compensation in the present, other variables prevent a reasonable estimation of the amount owed
Member of
Cataloging source
DLC
http://library.link/vocab/creatorName
Kershnar, Stephen
Index
index present
LC call number
JC599.U5
LC item number
K447 2004
Literary form
non fiction
Nature of contents
bibliography
Series statement
SUNY series in American constitutionalism
http://library.link/vocab/subjectName
  • Minorities
  • Women's rights
  • Minorities
  • Women
  • Affirmative action programs
  • African Americans
Label
Justice for the past, Stephen Kershnar
Instantiates
Publication
Copyright
Bibliography note
Includes bibliographical references (pages 131-155) and index
Carrier category
volume
Carrier category code
nc
Carrier MARC source
rdacarrier
Content category
text
Content type code
txt
Content type MARC source
rdacontent
Contents
  • Job Qualification
  • More General Approach to Diversity
  • p. 126.
  • Part 4.
  • Equal-Opportunity Arguments
  • p. 128
  • p. 14.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Best Conception of a Job Qualification Yields at Most a Very Weak Reason to Favor a Meritocracy
  • p. 22.
  • Part 3.
  • Antidiscrimination Laws Cannot Be Justified by Meritocratic Concerns
  • p. 26.
  • Part 4.
  • Section 2.
  • Qualifications for Educational Institutions
  • p. 27.
  • Section 3.
  • Strong Affirmative Action
  • 2.
  • Strong Affirmative-Action Programs at State Institutions
  • p. 33.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Duty to Judge Persons according to Their Interests and Desert
  • Civil Rights Laws
  • p. 35.
  • Part 3.
  • Strong Affirmative-Action Programs at State Educational Institutions Cannot Be Justified via Compensatory Justice
  • p. 40.
  • 3.
  • Uncertain Damages to Racial Minorities and Strong Affirmative Action
  • p. 53.
  • Part 1.
  • The
  • Hypothetical Imperative to Distribute Resources in a Just Manner
  • 1.
  • p. 53.
  • Part 2.
  • Compensatory Justice and the Assessment of Damages
  • p. 54.
  • Part 3.
  • Compensatory Justice and Inadequate Knowledge of Damages
  • p. 55.
  • Part 4.
  • We Do Not Have Adequate Knowledge of the Amount of Compensable Injury to Current Members of Some Racial Minority Groups
  • p. 58.
  • The
  • Section 4.
  • Reparations for Slavery
  • 4.
  • The
  • Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 69.
  • Part 2.
  • Slavery Did Not Harm the Descendants of Slaves
  • p. 70.
  • Part 3.
  • Most Qualified Applicant
  • Compensation May Be Owed to the Descendants of Slaves As a Result of a Legitimate Inheritance Claim
  • p. 76.
  • 5.
  • Reject the Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 83.
  • Part 1.
  • Objections to the Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 83.
  • Part 2.
  • Who Owes Compensation?
  • p. 11.
  • p. 87.
  • Section 5.
  • Proper Respect
  • 6.
  • Intrinsic Moral Value and Racial Differences
  • p. 95.
  • Part 1.
  • The
  • Expression of Equal Moral Value
  • p. 95.
  • Part 1.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Argument
  • p. 98.
  • Part 3.
  • Implications of the Argument
  • p. 111.
  • Section 6.
  • Educational Diversity
  • 7.
  • The
  • Experiential Diversity
  • p. 119.
  • Part 1.
  • Grutter and Bakke
  • p. 120.
  • Part 2.
  • Experiential Diversity and Truth
  • p. 122.
  • Part 3.
  • A
Control code
54529412
Dimensions
23 cm
Extent
xii, 158 pages
Isbn
9780791460726
Isbn Type
(pbk. : alk. paper)
Lccn
2004045254
Media category
unmediated
Media MARC source
rdamedia
Media type code
n
Label
Justice for the past, Stephen Kershnar
Publication
Copyright
Bibliography note
Includes bibliographical references (pages 131-155) and index
Carrier category
volume
Carrier category code
nc
Carrier MARC source
rdacarrier
Content category
text
Content type code
txt
Content type MARC source
rdacontent
Contents
  • Job Qualification
  • More General Approach to Diversity
  • p. 126.
  • Part 4.
  • Equal-Opportunity Arguments
  • p. 128
  • p. 14.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Best Conception of a Job Qualification Yields at Most a Very Weak Reason to Favor a Meritocracy
  • p. 22.
  • Part 3.
  • Antidiscrimination Laws Cannot Be Justified by Meritocratic Concerns
  • p. 26.
  • Part 4.
  • Section 2.
  • Qualifications for Educational Institutions
  • p. 27.
  • Section 3.
  • Strong Affirmative Action
  • 2.
  • Strong Affirmative-Action Programs at State Institutions
  • p. 33.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Duty to Judge Persons according to Their Interests and Desert
  • Civil Rights Laws
  • p. 35.
  • Part 3.
  • Strong Affirmative-Action Programs at State Educational Institutions Cannot Be Justified via Compensatory Justice
  • p. 40.
  • 3.
  • Uncertain Damages to Racial Minorities and Strong Affirmative Action
  • p. 53.
  • Part 1.
  • The
  • Hypothetical Imperative to Distribute Resources in a Just Manner
  • 1.
  • p. 53.
  • Part 2.
  • Compensatory Justice and the Assessment of Damages
  • p. 54.
  • Part 3.
  • Compensatory Justice and Inadequate Knowledge of Damages
  • p. 55.
  • Part 4.
  • We Do Not Have Adequate Knowledge of the Amount of Compensable Injury to Current Members of Some Racial Minority Groups
  • p. 58.
  • The
  • Section 4.
  • Reparations for Slavery
  • 4.
  • The
  • Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 69.
  • Part 2.
  • Slavery Did Not Harm the Descendants of Slaves
  • p. 70.
  • Part 3.
  • Most Qualified Applicant
  • Compensation May Be Owed to the Descendants of Slaves As a Result of a Legitimate Inheritance Claim
  • p. 76.
  • 5.
  • Reject the Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 83.
  • Part 1.
  • Objections to the Inheritance-Based Claim to Reparations
  • p. 83.
  • Part 2.
  • Who Owes Compensation?
  • p. 11.
  • p. 87.
  • Section 5.
  • Proper Respect
  • 6.
  • Intrinsic Moral Value and Racial Differences
  • p. 95.
  • Part 1.
  • The
  • Expression of Equal Moral Value
  • p. 95.
  • Part 1.
  • Part 2.
  • The
  • Argument
  • p. 98.
  • Part 3.
  • Implications of the Argument
  • p. 111.
  • Section 6.
  • Educational Diversity
  • 7.
  • The
  • Experiential Diversity
  • p. 119.
  • Part 1.
  • Grutter and Bakke
  • p. 120.
  • Part 2.
  • Experiential Diversity and Truth
  • p. 122.
  • Part 3.
  • A
Control code
54529412
Dimensions
23 cm
Extent
xii, 158 pages
Isbn
9780791460726
Isbn Type
(pbk. : alk. paper)
Lccn
2004045254
Media category
unmediated
Media MARC source
rdamedia
Media type code
n

Library Locations

    • Pardee Legal Research CenterBorrow it
      5998 Alcalá Park, San Diego, CA, 92110-2492, US
      32.771471 -117.187496
Processing Feedback ...