Thus affirmative action for admission to a school of social work is a better idea than it is for admission to a graduate program in physics. I have long argued that the difficult and troubling issues of race, equality, and affirmative action cannot readily be reduced to the kind of moral absolutism that denies legitimacy to the inevitable complexities and nuances inherent in the problem. I do not think there is only one morally correct answer. I reject both of the ideologically pure extremes, one being that anything that overcomes the disadvantages of race is acceptable and the other that taking race into account is never appropriate for any reason whatsoever. I generally share the perspective of James Q. Wilson, emeritus professor at UCLA, who insists on judging cases differently because in some organizations excellence at a specific task is thought to be the sole or dominant criterion for office, but in other organizations some combination of excellence and social representation is considered important.
Distinctions are important.
No one would favor choosing a brain surgeon or an NFL quarterback on the basis of race. Colleges and universities present their own special concerns. This is not a semantic quibble. Policies that admit minority students who clearly lack the academic qualifications to make it to graduation should be abandoned. This is still the law of the land.