Using Affirmative Action as a Tiebreaker

We argue in favor of affirmative action. There are two central points to our argument. First, if two or more candidates for a position are matched in competence, then one ought to prefer a candidate from a disadvantaged, disenfranchised, or minority background rather than defer to the outcome of a lottery. Second, a closer look at actual selection procedures reveals that situations where candidates are matched in competence are much more common than one might think. Our argument results in a robust justification for affirmative action from minimally controversial premises.