Thread: morals

Would you be having fun replacing your mailbox some morning after a drunk guy smashed it off? I can think of things that would be more fun than that.

It's just one of this big red "deposit" mail boxes that are made out of metal and stand there. No smashing, just changing it's...orientation. It's nobody's property but the government's.

Be horrified and think of me as a monster if you like, I can justify it to myself and I can handle any consequences/"what if YOUR mail was in the box?" scenarios. But this is far off topic from the morality of helping someone cheat on homework, so it's the last I'll post about it.

No. Just because something is against the rules doesn't make it immoral.

That's true, in specific cases.

If the point of the assignment is to practice writing a paper (such as in a research methods or creative writing class), then I agree. In that case, the end result is not the focus.

However, if the professor is more interested in the paper than the process, then why do the work again? Having a previously written paper that has already been marked over by a professor is a great tool for improvement. Since the paper will most likely be for a different class, the paper will need to be modified anyway to fit the requirements of that particular assignment.

The thing is, we're working with a general case. I'm looking at it from the point of view that it makes sense to start from scratch in order to learn or practice something new. Presumably the work re-submitted without modification wont score high marks since it will be somewhat off, but it will do as a lazy way out.

Ok, I think everyone knows my position on cheating is...but allow me to make one point....

No one on this thread has answered the original question: Is it moral to help someone cheat for money?

Plenty of people have stated why they believe it is not immoral. However, just because something isn't immoral, does not mean it is moral. Why is it "conforming to a standard of right behavior" citation to help someone cheat for money?

The biggest justification I've seen given is it's their problem take money. However, that indicates that the justification is greed. Is greed moral?

So I will restate the original question: Is it moral to help someone cheat for money?

I do not believe so...

To another issue mentioned:

Unfortunately thats not the case. Anytime you copy something without referencing it it is plagerism (even if you wrote the original!). For example, if you write an essay for some class and then later on submit the same essay in a different class, your're actaully plagerising yourself! I've had profs warn against this...

Then again, [it's retarted that it's plagerism to not cite yourself]

(paraphase of a couple of posts)


To be tactless: You're wrong. It makes perfect sense to cite oneself. The place that I've see authors cite themselves most often is in scientific journals and books. An author is presenting the findings from a scientific expirement. That study builds on previous research. If I'm reading the second study, I sure as hell want references to the first. I will probably want to go back and read the first study to make sure I understand the foundation, and so I can decide if I think that it's a solid study. If the author had just assumed that I knew what he was talking about because he had written it previously, then his writing would look like an unfounded claim.

No one on this thread has answered the original question: Is it moral to help someone cheat for money?

Zuh? It's been answered several times.

You're an idiot if you don't know this is wrong.

It's clearly wrong to help someone cheat.

Morals is something that the individual has to decide for themselves.

etc etc

Plenty of people have stated why they believe it is not immoral. However, just because something isn't immoral, does not mean it is moral. Why is it "conforming to a standard of right behavior" citation to help someone cheat for money?

If something isn't immoral, and it's not moral, what is it? Your last sentence in there doesn't make any sense, either.

To be tactless: You're wrong.

You're right, here. I'm incorrect.

That's sneaky and underhanded and I like it, but I don't know where it is on "Ye Olde Morality Metre (c)"

>>Please people, just be appropriately bastardly and do the assignment for him, get paid, and then send the code to the professor

I won't say that I've ever taken someone's IP and turned them in for cheating...but.....

Originally Posted by Govtcheez

That's sneaky and underhanded and I like it, but I don't know where it is on "Ye Olde Morality Metre (c)"

Every one knows that morality is measured in feet, not meters.

I swear we've had this conversation before.

Whether you think is moral is ultimately up to how well you can rationalize it to yourself, but there's no escaping it's unethical. It clearly goes against the ACM and IEEE ethics codes, and your university likely has rules about this you're breaking, too.

Why not charge money to tutor kids? There's plenty of money to be made by smart kids helping others through certain courses.

>Although that would depend on how harsh the punishment is, I guess.

Yah, usually it's expulsion (at least here at my Uni) so I don't know how productive that would be.