 | ||
| VERY sneaky. |
The pressure to succeed at a top school like the University of Michigan is immense; the student population of our university is a highly intelligent, motivated bunch and thus, very competitive. Students here have lofty goals - to attend a top institution for graduate, law or medical school, to graduate with a 4.0, maybe even to obtain a high-paying position right out of college. What do all of these goals have in common? The necessity of high grades - and, with the level of competition here, achieving straight-As is extremely tough. With finals approaching quickly, the pressure is on. Managing study time, on top of extracurricular activities, on top of a social life (and maybe, if you’re lucky, sleep!) is downright near impossible. So, what better way to maximize grades and free time than to cheat and plagiarize? True, it’s a difficult decision to sacrifice your morals and partake in intellectual deception - but is it justified?
 |
| Michael Walzer - the man behind "dirty hands". |
Honestly, it is. In the eyes of Michael Walzer, author of “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands”, it is at times opportune for one, when making difficult decisions, to relinquish his or her “moral inhibitions” in the interest of the greater good. ‘Dirty hands’, in short, is the result of this departure from morality; when one has dirty hands, they resign themselves to bear the guilt of such decisions. It is essentially the primary role of the politician to face the 'dirty hands problem'; one of the reasons elected officials are so integral to society is so that these officials may perform ‘moral dirty work’ for their constituents. Politicians receive glory and power in exchange for serving as a moral scapegoat, and their voters receive the 'greater good'.
 | |
| Student A: a happy college student on the outside, but inside he's consumed by the guilt of his 'dirty hands | '. |
Okay, okay - now you must be wondering how this concept relates to student cheating in college. Let’s display this with a hypothetical example. However, if you'd like to read about some less than theoretical situations, check out this list of the top ten college cheating scandals. Cheating rings and lying - it doesn't get much better than this. Now, on to the example...
Student A, a sophomore at the University of Michigan, is hardworking and very smart. This semester, he is taking a tough schedule - economics, calculus, and of course, Political Science 101. With finals approaching in a few weeks, Student A is extremely stressed - he has a midterm in economics tomorrow, but he hasn’t even studied! Student A was WAY too busy blogging for his political science class. Suddenly, though, his phone rings.
“Hey, Student A, it’s Student D. I know that Econ midterm is coming up, and I happened to get my hands on a copy of the exam with all the answers... don’t ask questions. Let me know if you want to look it over."Student A thinks it over - if he were to take up Student D’s offer, he’d definitely ace the exam. This is a good thing, because Student A really wants to get into Harvard Law School; and, to be accepted, he needs perfect grades. However, Student A has never cheated on an exam - in fact, he thinks cheating is downright deplorable. But, of course, he’s desperate now.
 |
| Student D in all his delinquency. |
So, what is Student A going to do? This is where the ‘dirty hands’ dilemma enters the picture. Student A has to make a choice; either he must sacrifice his morals or high grades and a bright future, the greater good in this situation. In the mind of a savvy politician, it's an obvious choice - Student A must cheat, and he does.
This is, in all actuality, is a justified decision for two reasons; first of all, the motive behind every political campaign is a single goal: achieve power and glory. And, in the words of Walzer, "hustling and lying are necessary [for politicians to partake in] because power and glory are so desirable". Now clearly Student A is no politician, but his motives are essentially the same. High grades and an acceptance letter to Harvard Law School equals prestige and high income - “glory”. With prestige and high income usually follows authority, perhaps in the courtroom or in the government - “power”. To get to the ‘gist’ of it, Student A must do what is necessary - abandon his morals and live with the guilt - to achieve his desired rewards.
"Power" - one of the underlying motives behind 'dirty hands'.
With finals and term paper deadlines approaching, the stress within Ann Arbor's city limits is palpable - and for some, the desire to cheat may be hard to ignore. It's easy to see why; at least in the eyes of Walzer, cheating and plagiarism are considered quintessential cases of 'dirty hands' rather than purely immoral acts. Though I do not advocate either of the two deeds, they're completely justified in the search for power, glory, and the 'greater good'. So, Political Science 101 classmates, please don't go and cheat on all of your finals - but always remember that “eternal praise is the supreme reward for not being good".
Lindsey,
ReplyDeleteInteresting post, and an aspect of dirty hands that probably goes through the heads of every ambitious student at an institution like ours. Now while I don't necessarily disagree with your interpretation of what Walzer would consider "moral" in this scenario, I think there is at least an additional aspect to consider.
There is a (sometimes immense) personal cost to cheating that complicates the dirty hands equation. Does the idea of earning grades and glory have a part of enjoying that glory? In the abstract this is a difficult idea to grapple with, but on a practical level I think it's rather easy "yes." Additionally, it is even necessarily for the "greater good" that Student A attends Harvard Law? Possibly at the expense of Student Z, who did not get accepted because of Student A's cheating? Clearly the Machiavellian action would be to cheat, but I am not convinced that Walzer would advise the same course of action.
Again, very interesting post to think about as exams approach!
Brad
Lindsey,
ReplyDeleteGreat job! I found your post really interesting. I agree with your discussion of the struggle to decide to cheat or not to cheat, especially where pressure is higher at a place like Michigan. You are right that cheating is to some people considered necessary, as Walzer writes, “Hustling and lying are necessary for power because power and glory are so desirable.” Yet, I do disagree with your argument that one student cheating is just a case of dirty hands.
This is because cheating only benefits the individual student, it does not help the students of the University of Michigan as a whole. In reality, one student cheating along with others who decide to cheat can actually hurt students or “cause harm” to their grades by changing or ruining the curve along with added grade inflation. Walzer writes that in order for the politician to have dirty hands, he must benefit the “greater good.” This greater good, I believe is larger than one student. It could be considered as all of the students at the University of Michigan, or the entire school as a whole. When the politician hustles and lies, Walzer says that, “He hustles, lies, and intrigues for us.” He is doing it to benefit himself, but also to benefit the state. One student doing well on their test will benefit them, but will not benefit anyone else which is where Walzer’s argument disconnects from your example.
Overall, though I disagree with your idea of what Walzer’s greater good entails, I definitely agree that cheating puts the student in jeopardy and also causes them to take chances. You do a great job truly showing what the pressure to dirty ones hands does to a person, especially such a relatable subject as a student.
Lindsey,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post and found the topic interesting, but I am going to have to disagree with you.
I don't think cheating constitutes as having "dirty hands." You mention that Student A's cheating would be justified because it benefits "a greater good." But can his academic career and future really be considered a greater good? I think the greater good usually pertains to more than one person (or even two, if you count Student D). In fact, Student A's cheating would be for his own personal gain. His cheating would result in a higher curve for the rest of the Economics class and one less spot in Harvard Law School for a qualified candidate. I can't see how this would constitute a greater good.
Very interesting read!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading the text, particularly the conflict between Student A and Student D, but I feel that Student A, by cheating, will not be dirtying his hand, but simply acting wrongly. Student A's decision to cheat or not stems from the assumption that cheating is better for the greater good. Instead, I feel that Student A's decision to cheat is more selfish than beneficial for the greater good, assuming that his cheating only benefits him. Rather, if he were to cheat and eventually attend Harvard Law to become a world renowned lawyer that fought poverty, corruption, and violence, it is possible that his decision to cheat will actually benefit the greater good, as it would affect many more people than himself in a positive manner.
Ben