Cheating is theoretically wrong. But can it be justified?

[pateuvasiliu]

I'll give you an example of how my university works.


700 or so people in one year ( Medicine ) are split in series of around 80-90, 8 of them in total.

Each series has its own teachers for the most part except for some fields like Cell Biology, where everyone has the same teachers.


For instance, in Anatomy, there are around 7 professors ( one of them has 2 series ). At the exam the professor gives you 3 subjects and then grades you. The scholarships are given at the end of the year, as well as the free tuition spots ( first 400 or so ), based on your average grade. Now the issue is that we, all 700, are competing with each other, despite having different teachers with different expectations.

In Anatomy, for instance, there's my teacher that is 100% fair. You draw 3 subjects, you are stuck with them. You can't pick another if you don't know one and he's regarded as being fair. That's cool. Everyone has his chance ( it's a lottery really, you can draw 3 subjects that are 1 page long together in total or 9 pages long if you're unlucky ). It's a game of luck where everyone has the same odds of a jackpot.

Now the problem is when you move onto other series, where literally 3 people out of 90 fail ( in my series around half fails ) because the professor spends 20 minutes with the student asking him basic shit until he can get a passing grade. Similarly in other series professors give higher grades way easier and even allow you to repick a subject if you don't know it.


When you factor in that I'm competing with people that get higher grades much easier and have a lower chance of failing due to more kind professors, why would it be considered morally wrong if I cheat? It's unfair for me to compete with them when my teacher is way more harsh and has the tendency of failing people much more often.

We're talking about a couple thousand dollars ( it's quite a lot here ).


Yes, I know. Cheating is wrong. Go study noob. But it's simply unfair that we're all competing with each other when the conditions are different.

[vindicatorx]

But it's simply unfair that we're all competing with each other when the conditions are different.

So, you think it is ok to cheat because you aren't as smart as those you are competing with? Well we found the cause of your shitty logic I guess.

[Independent voter]

If you are caught do they kick you out of school?

Yes, we all know it's fundamentally wrong, but there might be repercussions if you're caught. It's not worth cheating if so.

[Herecius]

Anything can be justified. Murder can be justified. Blowing up Alderaan was justified.

That doesn't make the justification not stupid or morally wrong, but it's still being justified.

Unless it's one of those weird tests where the whole point is to cheat. Those are neat.

[Bathory]

Absolutely can be justified. You sadly don't get ahead by being the good guy all the time.

[Rukh]

People always think they can justify cheating. There's always an excuse. And usually a great reason why their excuse totally justifies it but everyone else's excuse is just an excuse.

[Garnier Fructis]

Winning against other people while being at a disadvantage is much more satisfying. Just sayin'.

[ItachiZaku]

You could just learn the material and be better off for it.

[Kelorek Dar]

I don't think you can ever justify cheating. It'll usually be looked upon as wrong, even if you get the short end of the stick (obligatory "life isn't fair).

Sometimes you gotta do what you have to in order to pass. It's only punishable if you get caught.

[Lava Bucket]

How in the world does adding a monetary incentive to cheating justify it? It's more rewarding because now you get money in addition to getting a better grade, but it's no more ethical than it was before.

[Temp name]

Cheating is another way of studying. One that can fail catastrophically if you get caught. It's different skills that you learn, and some that aren't used as much and generally valued lower than the skills you'd learn by studying. But oh well, your choice.

[Deleted]

it's not cheating if she refuses to put out

[Cattleya]

The flaw here is that you're using "two wrongs make a right" logic. The first wrong being inequality when it comes to the judging of performance, and the second wrong being cheating.

[Mystile]

it's not cheating if she refuses to put out

Living up to that signature. So proud

[pateuvasiliu]

The flaw here is that you're using "two wrongs make a right" logic. The first wrong being inequality when it comes to the judging of performance, and the second wrong being cheating.

But why is it wrong on my behalf? I'm simply leveling the playing field. They don't have to worry about the worst exam of the bunch, which half my series fails while in series 7 everyone but 3 people failed.

- - - Updated - - -

You could just learn the material and be better off for it.

The material is useless. The first 2 years of med school are pure garbage. You're given 30 books of theory that you forget 10 minutes after the exam.


They don't care about you understanding the logic or remembering this shit, they just want you to know it by heart at the exam.

All the more incentive to cheat because no one remembers what they studied 2 weeks later.

[Dsonsion]

The system is not completely fair, no. Cheating, you can justify, yes, but it doesn't make it acceptable, as you agreed to a certain code of conduct when you first entered school.

[pateuvasiliu]

The system is not completely fair, no. Cheating, you can justify, yes, but it doesn't make it acceptable, as you agreed to a certain code of conduct when you first entered school.

Obviously I don't expect them to let me do it. But I am arguing I have no reason to feel bad for doing it.

[Dsonsion]

Obviously I don't expect them to let me do it. But I am arguing I have no reason to feel bad for doing it.

How much is your word worth it? Because basically you promise to behave in a certain way and then proceed to do otherwise.

[Lava Bucket]

[snip]
The material is useless. The first 2 years of med school are pure garbage. You're given 30 books of theory that you forget 10 minutes after the exam.

They don't care about you understanding the logic or remembering this shit, they just want you to know it by heart at the exam.

All the more incentive to cheat because no one remembers what they studied 2 weeks later.

The thing about cheating, though, is that it becomes a hard habit to break. If you skimp on the fundamentals, then you'll be lost when more advanced concepts are introduced. The curricula is designed to progress from simple to complex, so cheating on the basic stuff means you are likely setting yourself up for failure in the the future.

I saw it happen many times when I was in college. Students played and skated through the early classes and then were totally fucked when they got to the advanced classes and either washed out or got a tutor and had to work twice as hard in their final couple of years.

[pateuvasiliu]

The thing about cheating, though, is that it becomes a hard habit to break. If you skimp on the fundamentals, then you'll be lost when more advanced concepts are introduced. The curricula is designed to progress from simple to complex, so cheating on the basic stuff means you are likely setting yourself up for failure in the the future.

I saw it happen many times when I was in college. Students played and skated through the early classes and then were totally fucked when they got to the advanced classes and either washed out or got a tutor and had to work twice as hard in their final couple of years.

I don't know how other universities are like, but in medicine you have to know so much shit for the exam and you chug it down so fast that you forget half of it the second you turn in the paper.

The whole '' you'll need it later '' doesn't hold meaning because most students forget the exam material 2 weeks later and that's being generous.