It's only cheating if you get caught

  • Thread starter DaveC426913
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Tips
In summary, cheating is only considered cheating if one gets caught. This means that as long as a person is able to successfully hide their dishonest actions, they may not be punished or face consequences. However, this does not make cheating morally or ethically acceptable. It is important to consider the potential harm and consequences of cheating, regardless of whether one is caught or not. Ultimately, true integrity and success come from honest and hard work, not deceitful actions.

It's only cheating if you get caught

  • True

    Votes: 3 8.1%
  • False

    Votes: 34 91.9%

  • Total voters
    37
  • #1
DaveC426913
Gold Member
22,497
6,168
10 chars
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Of course it's cheating if you don't get caught what the heck kinda question is that? If you think it IS only cheating if you get caught then why you in a relationship in the first place?

EDIT: Waaaiiit I assumed that this had to do with relationships :rofl:. My answer still stands if it was cheating on a test or cheating anything else. That's why it's still called cheating...
 
  • #3
Any particular reason for this poll?

Cheating is cheating, no matter if you get caught or not. The moon is there even when I'm not looking! XD
 
  • #4
It's a reaction to another thread where people seem to be supporting the screwball notion that it's only cheating if you get caught or you hurt yourself.
 
  • #5
Moonbear said:
It's a reaction to another thread where people seem to be supporting the screwball notion that it's only cheating if you get caught or you hurt yourself.

Weird, so to them the statement 'I cheated but thankfully, I didn't get caught' doesn't exist?? I don't get it... If there are specific rules set out to limit an advantage, or ability and you around, or through those rules then you are cheating. It has nothing to do with being caught or not...
 
  • #6
Do you believe that or is this just semantics?
 
  • #7
caljuice said:
Do you believe that or is this just semantics?

is this directed at me or the OP?
 
  • #8
The definitions of the word are satisfied whether or not one gets caught.

Oxford says:

cheat | ch ēt|
verb

1 [ intrans. ] act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, esp. in a game or examination : she always cheats at cards.
• [ trans. ] deceive or trick : he had cheated her out of everything she had.
• use inferior materials or methods unobtrusively in order to save time or money : they cheat by photographing mashed potatoes instead of ice cream.
informal be sexually unfaithful : his wife was cheating on him.

2 [ trans. ] avoid (something undesirable) by luck or skill : she cheated death in a spectacular crash.
archaic help (time) pass : the tuneless rhyme with which the warder cheats the time.

noun
a person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage : a liar and a cheat.
• an act of cheating; a fraud or deception.

I voted false.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
I voted false.

In an academic setting where the idea is to test individual candidates on an even playing field. Then yes most definitely 'cheating' is cheating and you should be kicked in the arse for it.

However I've acutally learned a few things in the real world. If it explicitly states you can't do it, you can't do it. If it's not explicity stated, and you find an advantage over your rivals by explaiting a grey area that that's fine.
 
  • #10
Who voted true that's what I want to know...
 
  • #11
Cheating is a choice. More often than not, cheating pays off. But in the interest of equidistance and fairness an instructor should be completely intolerant of a cheater who got caught.
 
  • #12
It's amazing how there are many many people who do believe this is true.
 
  • #13
Moonbear said:
It's a reaction to another thread where people seem to be supporting the screwball notion that it's only cheating if you get caught or you hurt yourself.

It's probably nothing else than cognitive dissonance. Some cheaters feel a internal conflict after cheating, and they solve it by changing the beleifs about the act of cheating.

It's only the most visible side. Other ppl who cheat once may solve they conflict by changing the attitude toward cheating, and never do it again. This is less visible.

So, it's no screwball. It's human nature.

All this becomes fairly irrelevant if a person looks at cheating simply as a unfair advantage which pays off as long as you don't get caught. This is an equilibrium, they do no fool themselves cheating is not what it is, but they acknowledge they can get a very big pay-off if they can get away with it. So it becomes a risk taking issue.
 
  • #14
Let me get this straight are we talking about cheating? Or Cheating? I'm not totally sure what one we are talking about here.
 
  • #15
magpies said:
Who voted true that's what I want to know...

They are called "Politicians."


C'mon. You were all thinking it. All I did was say it.

OW! quit it quit it. OW!
 
  • #16
Actually I voted true :) Figured someone had too.
 
  • #17
zomgwtf said:
is this directed at me or the OP?

No, to the guy who thinks cheating is not cheating unless he gets caught. I thought that was the OP, but apparently not.
 
  • #18
caljuice said:
No, to the guy who thinks cheating is not cheating unless he gets caught. I thought that was the OP, but apparently not.

Lordy no.

In https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2735052&postcount=15", I get all shirty about someone who does think this way. I thought I'd throw it open to the board to see if maybe I was crazy or something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
:rofl: I like that


Cheating is cheating weither you get caught or not :tongue:
 
  • #20
magpies said:
Who voted true that's what I want to know...
They only voted true if we catch them...
magpies said:
Actually I voted true :) Figured someone had too.
...Aha!
 
  • #21
Matterwave said:
The moon is there even when I'm not looking! XD

you can't prove that scientifically, though.
 
  • #22
AUK 1138 said:
you can't prove that scientifically, though.

Of course he can. He need only ask me, who was watching when he wasn't.
 

1. What is the meaning of "It's only cheating if you get caught"?

The phrase suggests that cheating is only considered wrong or unethical if the person doing it is caught and faces consequences. Otherwise, it is seen as acceptable or not a big deal.

2. Is it true that cheating is only wrong if you get caught?

No, cheating is considered wrong regardless of whether or not the person is caught. It violates principles of honesty, integrity, and fairness and can have negative consequences for both the cheater and those affected by their actions.

3. Does this phrase promote dishonesty and unethical behavior?

It can be interpreted this way, as it suggests that cheating is only a problem if someone is caught. However, it is important to consider the context in which this phrase is often used - in a joking or sarcastic manner - and not as a serious justification for cheating.

4. Are there any instances where cheating could be seen as acceptable, even if you get caught?

This is a subjective question and opinions may vary. However, the general consensus is that cheating is never acceptable and can have negative consequences regardless of whether or not the person is caught.

5. How can we discourage the idea that "it's only cheating if you get caught"?

As scientists, we can promote ethical behavior and discourage cheating by setting a good example and emphasizing the importance of integrity in research. We can also educate others on the consequences of cheating and the value of honesty in scientific endeavors.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
645
Replies
66
Views
3K
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
819
Replies
19
Views
366
Back
Top