Is helping other students cheat wrong?

[MunchyBrain]

Now I have a question for people who voted against charging: why is that wrong? Are you only supposed to help people for free? What's wrong with fair exchange?

Because I only think cheating is okay as as an act of rebellion against compulsory state education which prepares children to be little capitalist wage-slaves, or to exploit the little capitalist wage-slaves, depending on how much their parents earn. So making money out of it basically defeats the point. (I don't actually think that kids cheat because they hate the capitalist system, haha. But I just meant that's why I don't find it morally wrong.)

 

[oye terence]

And how are you helping them if you don't help them cheat?

well you are helping them by helping them cheat, but have they actually learned anything?

 

[chica]

well you are helping them by helping them cheat, but have they actually learned anything?

Why is it your moral obligation to stop other people from doing things that they freely chose to do? Like choosing to cheat, instead of work hard?

 

[Not Right in the Head]

Because I only think cheating is okay as as an act of rebellion against compulsory state education which prepares children to be little capitalist wage-slaves, or to exploit the little capitalist wage-slaves, depending on how much their parents earn. So making money out of it basically defeats the point. (I don't actually think that kids cheat because they hate the capitalist system, haha. But I just meant that's why I don't find it morally wrong.)

Is anything that can be considered an act of rebellion OK in your book?

 

[chica]

Is anything that can be considered an act of rebellion OK in your book?

Not if it harms or threatens other people.

But why don't you explain us why you think cheating is wrong?

 

[MunchyBrain]

Is anything that can be considered an act of rebellion OK in your book?

Depends what's being rebelled against..

 

[oye terence]

Why is it your moral obligation to stop other people from doing things that they freely chose to do? Like choosing to cheat, instead of work hard?

it is not my obligation.
I said cheating just shows that the student may not have learned what was expected of them.

if you had to have surgery, say a heart transplant would you rather have the surgeon who know what he was doing or the surgeon who cheated his way through school?
that is a drastic example,certainly if someone just goes out and cheats on some simple weekly math quiz there will probably be no harm done other than to the student cheating.
but where do you draw the line where cheating could cause harm?

 

[chica]

it is not my obligation.
I said cheating just shows that the student may not have learned what was expected of them.

if you had to have surgery, say a heart transplant would you rather have the surgeon who know what he was doing or the surgeon who cheated his way through school?
that is a drastic example,certainly if someone just goes out and cheats on some simple weekly math quiz there will probably be no harm done other than to the student cheating.
but where do you draw the line where cheating could cause harm?

If it's possible to become a surgeon (lawyer, teacher) solely thanks to cheating, then evaluation systems of both academic institutions and employers are seriously flawed and need to be corrected asap. However, I don't think it is. I don't think that cheating can cause harm; bad systems can cause harm.

 

[Not Right in the Head]

But why don't you explain us why you think cheating is wrong?

Cheating is wrong for several reasons. First, it fools the cheater into thinking that he is going to have a more successful outcome by cheating than by studying or working hard enough not to have to cheat. Second, it gives the person to allowed the cheater to cheat the mistaken belief that he's helped someone out, when in fact all he's done is reinforce the cheater's idea that it's OK not to solve his own problems. Third, it gives the cheater an unfair advantage over those who choose not to cheat, but who will perform more poorly than the cheater. Lastly, it's a major headache for the teacher, who has to spend extra time looking for signs of cheating, and disciplining the cheaters accordingly. Believe me, I've been on all sides of this.

If you're not smart enough or didn't work hard enough to do the work correctly, do everyone a favor and don't cheat. That's the fail-fast method that should ultimately keep you at the employment level that you deserve.

Depends what's being rebelled against..

Common sense, apparently.

 

[chica]

Cheating is wrong for several reasons. First, it fools the cheater into thinking that he is going to have a more successful outcome by cheating than by studying or working hard enough not to have to cheat. Second, it gives the person to allowed the cheater to cheat the mistaken belief that he's helped someone out, when in fact all he's done is reinforce the cheater's idea that it's OK not to solve his own problems. Third, it gives the cheater an unfair advantage over those who choose not to cheat, but who will perform more poorly than the cheater. Lastly, it's a major headache for the teacher, who has to spend extra time looking for signs of cheating, and disciplining the cheaters accordingly. Believe me, I've been on all sides of this.

I don't see how the first two points are morally objectionable. As long as it's their choice, people are free to fool themselves to oblivion.

The third assumption is not correct, because it's impossible to fare better in life through cheating than through working hard.

As for the last one, since cheating is obviously not wrong, I don't see why teachers would make a big deal out of it.

 

[MunchyBrain]

Common sense, apparently.

Compulsary education can't and doesn't work.

 

[Not Right in the Head]

Ok, I'll play along.

I don't see how the first two points are morally objectionable. As long as it's their choice, people are free to fool themselves to oblivion.

Not morally objectionable, but ethically objectionable. Not in the culture that you grew up in, purportedly, but I suspect that you're grossly oversimplifying the truth, and I'm not buying it.

The third assumption is not correct, because it's impossible to fare better in life through cheating than through working hard.

Tell that to our current president.

As for the last one, since cheating is obviously not wrong, I don't see why teachers would make a big deal out of it.

Obviously not wrong? If it's in the school's rulebook as being wrong, then it's wrong. Ah, but I bet your argument is that my first through third points failed to prove that it's wrong.

 

[Not Right in the Head]

Compulsary education can't and doesn't work.

If your education was compulsory, then I see your point.

 

[chica]

Ok, I'll play along.



Not morally objectionable, but ethically objectionable. Not in the culture that you grew up in, purportedly, but I suspect that you're grossly oversimplifying the truth, and I'm not buying it.



Tell that to our current president.



Obviously not wrong? If it's in the school's rulebook as being wrong, then it's wrong. Ah, but I bet your argument is that my first through third points failed to prove that it's wrong.

Yes, that.

As for your president, whatever gave him unfair advantage over other candidates, be sure cheating is very low on that list. If who is elected president of the USA depends on how effective American teachers are in dealing with cheating, I'd be worried about the future of the world.

 

[MunchyBrain]

If your education was compulsory, then I see your point.

My education is compulsory, but, I'm going to come out the other side like a real person, unlike most people you are subjected to it. Which is probably why you find me annoying.

 

[Not Right in the Head]

Yes, that.

As for your president, whatever gave him unfair advantage over other candidates, be sure cheating is very low on that list. If who is elected president of the USA depends on how effective American teachers are in dealing with cheating, I'd be worried about the future of the world.

And you're not?

My education is compulsory, but, I'm going to come out the other side like a real person, unlike most people you are subjected to it. Which is probably why you find me annoying.

No, I find you annoying because you have no idea how naive and ridiculous you sound.

 

[chica]

And you're not?

No, I'm not... I believe in oral exams You can only cheat there if the professor allows you to cheat.

 

[MunchyBrain]

No, I find you annoying because you have no idea how naive and ridiculous you sound.

The thing is, I find you annoying because, to be honest, you're boring, institutionalised,and completely oblivious to it all which is actually fairly amusing. I feel sorry for you.

 

[Amy]

Because I only think cheating is okay as as an act of rebellion against compulsory state education which prepares children to be little capitalist wage-slaves, or to exploit the little capitalist wage-slaves, depending on how much their parents earn. So making money out of it basically defeats the point. (I don't actually think that kids cheat because they hate the capitalist system, haha. But I just meant that's why I don't find it morally wrong.)

What the hell does a 14 year old know about capitalist 'wage-slaves'?
Someone got carried away with the Communism textbook

 

[Not Right in the Head]

No, I'm not... I believe in oral exams You can only cheat there if the professor allows you to cheat.

But oral exams are hardly a comprehensive way to prove that a student is competent enough to pass/graduate/whatever. Sure, they're pretty much guaranteed to make cheating much tougher, but for any profession that actually requires the slightest bit of non-verbal skills, they're useless. I don't care whether the engineer who designed the skyscraper I work in could articulate herself well enough to pass an exam; I want to know that she knew how to design a sturdy building.

Oral exams are for the useless subjects in the humanities. Personally, I loved taking them.