Two Discrimination Distinctions
On 29 May Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen gave a talk at the workshop “Work and Social Justice”, University of Barcelona on meta-distinction between two distinctions between different kinds of discrimination.
The workshop was organized by organized by BIAP - Barcelona Institute for Analytic Philosophy.
Title of talk: Two Discrimination Distinctions
Abstract: It is common in social science to distinguish between taste-based and statistical discrimination. Taste-based discrimination occurs when a discriminator has a preference against discriminatees with a particular group identity, independently of whatever other traits the discriminator believes this group identity is correlated with. Statistical discrimination occurs when a discriminator relies on statistical inferences about people with the discriminatee’s group identity as an indicator of whether the discriminatee has some target property in question. We argue that this distinction is conflated with a different and, thus far ignored, distinction, i.e., substitute vs. non-substitute discrimination. Roughly, substitute discrimination occurs when a discriminator ceases to discriminate once they acquire more information about the discriminatee, whereas non-substitute discrimination takes place when the discriminator persists in discriminating independently of acquiring more information. Whereas the taste-based versus statistical discrimination distinction is drawn based on the nature of the motivating state of the discriminator, the substitute versus non-substitute discrimination distinction is drawn based on another dimension, i.e., the effect of changes in the information available to the discriminator. This meta-distinction between two distinctions between different kinds of discrimination is important, in part because it affects what we can infer from data indicating change or constancy in people’s discriminatory behaviour when supplied with additional information, in part because it deepens our understanding of the morality of discrimination. Most importantly in the latter respect, it alerts us to the possibility that our concern for non-discrimination is a concern for modally robust non-discrimination.
Authors:
- Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (lead author), Centre for the Experimental-Philosophical Study of Discrimination, Bartholins Alle 7, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark: lippert@ps.au.dk
- Mathias Kruse: Centre for the Experimental-Philosophical Study of Discrimination, Bartholins Alle 7, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark: matkr@ps.au.dk
- Andrew Latham: School of Culture and Society, Philosophy, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark: andrew.latham@cas.au.dk