Why do you think some people resort to cheating on tests?
Pages: 12
I've just finished the final test in my c++ course, and quite frankly it was a very easy test (at least for me). But throughout the test i saw a few people resorting to cheating, even the person next to me was trying to whisper me to help her on some of the problems. I kept telling her that the professor said we can't whisper to each other, but she kept insisting that i help her.
Why do you think some people will go as low as to cheat just to pass a test? I understand that grades are important. But a grade can't possibly help you with the more advanced classes that are to come.
Why do you think some people will go as low as to cheat just to pass a test? I understand that grades are important. But a grade can't possibly help you with the more advanced classes that are to come.
It can be as simple as just wanting a single answer or piece of information while still having a good grasp on the rest of the material, or the problem could be deeper. Some people (like my roommate *cough cough*) like to do nothing but smoke weed and play super smash bros, skip class then (unsurprisingly) need "help" on tests and exams in order to pass. People that can't think more than one meal ahead certainly can't think ahead to higher level classes that build on previous knowledge. Let them do their thing, they'll only get so far before they fail, wasting lots of time and money in the process.
If I sound bitter, I am. Studying for exams while my roommate does nothing but fuck around is extremely frustrating, not to mention the absolute obnoxiousness of having tons of stoned people sitting around laughing like retarded seals all the time. If they all froze to death while smoking up for the tenth time in one day out in the snow I can't say that I would be devastated, or care much at all actually.
If I sound bitter, I am. Studying for exams while my roommate does nothing but fuck around is extremely frustrating, not to mention the absolute obnoxiousness of having tons of stoned people sitting around laughing like retarded seals all the time. If they all froze to death while smoking up for the tenth time in one day out in the snow I can't say that I would be devastated, or care much at all actually.
We live in a world where people believe that they should get stuff without having to actually work for it. This idea, nebulously formed in their heads, bleeds into all aspects of their life. They may occasionally realize that they must perform at some point, and then want help, without realizing that they have become the Little Red Hen's antagonists.
People like to feel like they are good people, like they are good guys. But they don't even fathom how much time they spend on the other side of the fence.
Personally, I've never understood the need to cheat either. If I do something well, it's because I'm a real man* and I learned to do it myself instead of having to get someone else to do it for me. (I wipe my own behind and everything. I even go so far as to believe that when I leave a room I should leave it in at least as good a condition as when I entered it.)
Not to rant or anything,** but I can't tell you how often things people say as fact are total hogwash unverifiable opinion and, as often as I am actually educated on the matter (which isn't that often, but when it happens), total bunk. It's frustrating to read, because it does two things:
• It contributes to the entropy of the universe.
• It hinders people who don't know better from actually learning truth.
We, as a people, are horribly soft-minded about things. And often incredibly arrogant about it.
Alas, it's part of the disease of our society.***
*If I were a woman, I'd be a real woman, so buzz of anti-femi-nerds.
**Which means, of course, rant coming. Just like saying "not to be offensive" as a prelude to saying something offensive.
***We're worse than Rome. And we think they were barbarians.
People like to feel like they are good people, like they are good guys. But they don't even fathom how much time they spend on the other side of the fence.
Personally, I've never understood the need to cheat either. If I do something well, it's because I'm a real man* and I learned to do it myself instead of having to get someone else to do it for me. (I wipe my own behind and everything. I even go so far as to believe that when I leave a room I should leave it in at least as good a condition as when I entered it.)
Not to rant or anything,** but I can't tell you how often things people say as fact are total hogwash unverifiable opinion and, as often as I am actually educated on the matter (which isn't that often, but when it happens), total bunk. It's frustrating to read, because it does two things:
• It contributes to the entropy of the universe.
• It hinders people who don't know better from actually learning truth.
We, as a people, are horribly soft-minded about things. And often incredibly arrogant about it.
Alas, it's part of the disease of our society.***
*If I were a woman, I'd be a real woman, so buzz of anti-femi-nerds.
**Which means, of course, rant coming. Just like saying "not to be offensive" as a prelude to saying something offensive.
***We're worse than Rome. And we think they were barbarians.
Duoas: I TOTALLY agree with your "rant". I can't even count how many times this has happened to me and it is soooooooo frustrating! And 90% of the time they won't even listen to your side of the argument, even if you've read extensively on the subject and try to tell them "hey I'm not trying to be mean, I'm trying to educate you".
A disease indeed.
A disease indeed.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| Duoas wrote: |
|---|
| Are you hot? |
It is winter and the heating isn't working very well.
As to why people cheat; I would say that we teach them young that failure is not an option. This one thing screws people up. The inability to be able to say "you know what, I'm not the least bit interested in [insert subject here], I'm going to concentrate on the subjects I like and am good at" leads to all sorts of pressures and anxieties that they shouldn't have.
Yes, that's exactly the source of many problems today. IIRC it began back in the late 70's when they began preaching self-esteem to kids in schools. (You can google it, it's called "Affective Education".)
There's some interesting reading in here:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=self-esteem+bad
The pedagogy of self-esteem is wrong.
Also, I particularly enjoyed this blog I ran across -- he makes a very clear indictment of "self-esteem" (and names it for what it is: narcissism).
http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/23/narcissism-was-a-bad-thing-until-we-started-calling-it-self-esteem/
Warning for bigots: his analysis fits with his Christianity. If you can't handle that, then don't read it. Just sit back and enjoy your narcissistic understanding of the universe.
There's some interesting reading in here:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=self-esteem+bad
The pedagogy of self-esteem is wrong.
Also, I particularly enjoyed this blog I ran across -- he makes a very clear indictment of "self-esteem" (and names it for what it is: narcissism).
http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/23/narcissism-was-a-bad-thing-until-we-started-calling-it-self-esteem/
Warning for bigots: his analysis fits with his Christianity. If you can't handle that, then don't read it. Just sit back and enjoy your narcissistic understanding of the universe.
What was her major? Some people have no interest in programming and only end up in those classes because of scheduling conflicts and\or the "easy" credits filling up to quickly. I can't help but to feel bad for these people myself. Programming is by no means easy even if you have an interest in it. The fact that universities force people to take classes that have nothing to do with their major is complete garbage in my opinion. But to add insult to injury they force these people to pay for those credits and even deny them their degree until they pass this arbitrary requirement. Why? To ensure that everyone coming out of there is a "well rounded" individual? Do you honestly give a damn if your dental hygienist or your pharmacist can write a sorting algorithm?
Warning Rant. Not a nice and rational one like what Duoas had either.
I try to look at their position from the same perspective I have about mandatory "English" classes in college (I am American by the way). I can't stand the idea of paying hundreds or thousands of dollars to sit for hours in a class and listen to some hippy-reject ask brain-dead questions like "What do you think the author means when he said the character climbed into the boat?" Personally I think the author means the guy climbed in a god-damn boat. It probably has something to do with it being a mode of transportation. I don't think it has anything to do with Communism or the Great Depression and if you do then I suggest you seek professional help. You think the author meant for the reader to "look for a deeper meaning"? Well the guys been dead for a hundred years and he's left zero documented proof indicating that his work had any other meaning then what was written so that's really inconvenient for you isn't it? Maybe we should break out the Ouiji board and ask him. And to think, this is the same asshole teaching me about logical fallacies.
Warning Rant. Not a nice and rational one like what Duoas had either.
I try to look at their position from the same perspective I have about mandatory "English" classes in college (I am American by the way). I can't stand the idea of paying hundreds or thousands of dollars to sit for hours in a class and listen to some hippy-reject ask brain-dead questions like "What do you think the author means when he said the character climbed into the boat?" Personally I think the author means the guy climbed in a god-damn boat. It probably has something to do with it being a mode of transportation. I don't think it has anything to do with Communism or the Great Depression and if you do then I suggest you seek professional help. You think the author meant for the reader to "look for a deeper meaning"? Well the guys been dead for a hundred years and he's left zero documented proof indicating that his work had any other meaning then what was written so that's really inconvenient for you isn't it? Maybe we should break out the Ouiji board and ask him. And to think, this is the same asshole teaching me about logical fallacies.
In the English speaking world, self-esteem is synonymous with (or very close in meaning to) self-respect.
Perhaps, it means something quite different, may be almost contrary, in American.
As I see it, stooping low to do something undignified like cheating in tests is a clear indication of lack of self-respect.
I've observed that good teachers, merely by being good teachers, tend to inspire their students; students of good teachers seldom cheat in tests.
| Definition of self-esteem in English: NOUN Confidence in one’s own worth or abilities; self-respect SYNONYMS self-respect, self-regard, pride in oneself/one's abilities, faith in oneself, pride, dignity, morale, self-confidence, confidence, self-assurance, assurance; French amour propre Oxford English dictionaries http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/self-esteem |
| English definition of “self-esteem” belief and confidence in your own ability and value Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/self-esteem |
Perhaps, it means something quite different, may be almost contrary, in American.
As I see it, stooping low to do something undignified like cheating in tests is a clear indication of lack of self-respect.
I've observed that good teachers, merely by being good teachers, tend to inspire their students; students of good teachers seldom cheat in tests.
| Perhaps, it [self-esteem] means something quite different, may be almost contrary, in American. |
Both those online dictionary definitions seem fairly cherry-picked.
American English:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/self-esteem
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self-esteem?&afid=5052&s=&path=/
UK English:
http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/175228?redirectedFrom=self-esteem#eid
http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/self-esteem
(I'm very disappointed with the oxforddictionaries.com's dumbed-down version of the OED. Oh, and you might need a subscription to see the OED link...)
The word has (and has had since at least Shakespeare) double-meaning. The same double use has been put to self-respect.
The difference is in the qualification of that self-respect -- is it deserved or is it fantasy? The problem is the 'self' part.
You can't always use a dictionary to nail a word down to mean only one thing.
Feeling the need to cheat is a blow to one's (valid) self-esteem/self-respect. Those are the times when people most have a hard time internalizing the narcissism they are taught (false self-esteem).
+1 on the observation about the correlation between good teachers and honest students.
I've never cheated on anything that contributed to a final grade, but only for reasons of personal pride; I have no sentimental attachment to not being a "cheater", and there are situations where I would cheat (I was going to insert "feel justified to" between "would" and "cheat", but actually, that wouldn't matter), such as if the exam was unimportant but I had to pass it anyway. For example, in my computer science degree, there are a few vocational modules that we have to take. I would consider cheating on one of those. They aren't computer science, and not knowing them would not make me a worse computer scientist, but I'm required to do them anyway. I probably won't cheat on them, though, because they are easy.
As opposed to Effective Education? That's hilarious, did someone really call it that? It's like they got the point, and somehow missed it completely at the same time.
Why do you feel that the literary arts are of less intellectual worth than STEM subjects? They are of less financial value in our world of cold numbers and digital money, but the arts are just as important, they give meaning to life. STEM subjects are either trying to find the meaning in the world, or ease the pain of being human. Art gives meaning to a life that is bereft of it, it expands the mind and soul*, and it provides stimulation and experience to the mind in a world where experience is the totality of existence. Also, art is the primary thing that remains after a civilisation has perished. I would not want to live in a world that did not practice art.
In your specific example, it's likely that the character really did climb into a boat, but it's also likely that it was symbolic of something else; for example, it could be an invocation or satire of a work by another author. Unless you are reading "genre fiction" where the plot exists for its own sake, it is likely that nearly everything that happens in a work of literature happens for a good reason; usually to teach the reader something, often about themselves or society at large. Most literary plots are a vehicle for the author's ideas and knowledge.
* I use the word metaphorically.
| Duoas wrote: |
|---|
| Affective Education |
As opposed to Effective Education? That's hilarious, did someone really call it that? It's like they got the point, and somehow missed it completely at the same time.
| Computergeek01 wrote: |
|---|
| I can't stand the idea of paying hundreds or thousands of dollars to sit for hours in a class and listen to some hippy-reject ask brain-dead questions like "What do you think the author means when he said the character climbed into the boat?" |
Why do you feel that the literary arts are of less intellectual worth than STEM subjects? They are of less financial value in our world of cold numbers and digital money, but the arts are just as important, they give meaning to life. STEM subjects are either trying to find the meaning in the world, or ease the pain of being human. Art gives meaning to a life that is bereft of it, it expands the mind and soul*, and it provides stimulation and experience to the mind in a world where experience is the totality of existence. Also, art is the primary thing that remains after a civilisation has perished. I would not want to live in a world that did not practice art.
In your specific example, it's likely that the character really did climb into a boat, but it's also likely that it was symbolic of something else; for example, it could be an invocation or satire of a work by another author. Unless you are reading "genre fiction" where the plot exists for its own sake, it is likely that nearly everything that happens in a work of literature happens for a good reason; usually to teach the reader something, often about themselves or society at large. Most literary plots are a vehicle for the author's ideas and knowledge.
* I use the word metaphorically.
Last edited on
I am currently on the other side of the fence (giving two exams this Winter session). So let me tell you a story of one of my students.
Let's call my student Adam. He is a high school student taking calculus I in 11 grade and now taking Calc II in 12 grade. In my institution, we teach Calc in a pretty hard-core way - I'd say our course is probably on par with the Calc II course in MIT or Harvard.
So Adam is one of my top 3 students in Calc I. Asks questions outside of class, has perfect performance on a number of tests. He has rather unusual slips on elementary things every now and then - but oh hell, who doesn't. He also has unusually poor handwriting - quite unusual for a near perfect performer on a test.
Having a near perfect A in Calc I with me, and top performance in Calc II after the first test, he asks me for recommendations for Universities. He is still in high school and outperforming his university colleagues - I was about to write him a recommendation to try to get him in the best schools. He also applied to the university where I got my degree - there I was going to write him a recommendation that, when read by my adviser (still working there) will get him in.
So I am giving students a quiz in class. The guy comes in late so I let him sit at one of the front desks and take the quiz while I am teaching (I am quite tolerant to all late students, not just him).
This guy has a favorite scarf which he always puts on his desk. So, while narrating my Calc slides, my sight slips onto him. I see him swiping a finger behind the scarf. Can't see the screen of the device - if I could, I'd immediately report him to the student court. I thought, maybe it's just me. So in the next 2 minutes of lecture, I secretly watch him (the resulting lecturing was horrible by the way). He kept on swiping his finger. It's a gesture you can't confuse. It was a screen device, carefully concealed below a scarf.
I showed my students how to go on Wolfram alpha to solve their problems. Even showed them how to quickly google search it if they don't remember the site name. I have told them on a number of occasions that once they are done with calculus, they can use that web-site all they want. However, if they want to learn the material, they cannot use the site while taking Calc II - except possibly to check their homework answers.
So Adam was cheating his ass off with Wolfram Alpha. It all came together - his terrible handwriting (when copying things you don't look at what you write); his elementary mistakes - sometimes it's too easy and he thought he didn't need to cheat. Sometimes he'd have a mistake on one line and correct it on the next - well, that was just an error in copying.
The next two quizzes I kept on watching him. He did the exact same thing with the scarf. He had perfect work on all the standard material, all problem types for which you can find automatic solvers on the internet. I wrote him an email saying I cannot write him a recommendation - for personal reasons. No matter how many emails he wrote me asking why, I replied - it's personal, nothing to worry about, just ask your other instructors.
The next test I picked only tricky problems (ones with proofs); there were a couple of computational ones, but I specifically chose ones that are hard to type in a computer (lots of arcsins and the like).
I put the guy in the very front row. When giving tests, I usually open my laptop and do my own thing - most often C++ programming by the way. This time I spent the whole f***ing session staring at the guy. I don't think he had the opportunity to look at his device.
He had the single worst score in the class. He couldn't do the most basic of arithmetics on his own.
This final, I am going to watch him non-stop. If I see him cheating, he is off to the student court.
This guy was about to get a scholarship to a top university - one of the scholarships I didn't get when finishing high school. Maybe he will still manage to get to a top university - but definitely not with my help.
I cannot wish this guy a success. I surely hope he does not get accepted in any university. And if he does, I hope they catch him and expel him.
If I can see him cheating and can prove it, I will make sure this get on this guy's academic record.
Let's call my student Adam. He is a high school student taking calculus I in 11 grade and now taking Calc II in 12 grade. In my institution, we teach Calc in a pretty hard-core way - I'd say our course is probably on par with the Calc II course in MIT or Harvard.
So Adam is one of my top 3 students in Calc I. Asks questions outside of class, has perfect performance on a number of tests. He has rather unusual slips on elementary things every now and then - but oh hell, who doesn't. He also has unusually poor handwriting - quite unusual for a near perfect performer on a test.
Having a near perfect A in Calc I with me, and top performance in Calc II after the first test, he asks me for recommendations for Universities. He is still in high school and outperforming his university colleagues - I was about to write him a recommendation to try to get him in the best schools. He also applied to the university where I got my degree - there I was going to write him a recommendation that, when read by my adviser (still working there) will get him in.
So I am giving students a quiz in class. The guy comes in late so I let him sit at one of the front desks and take the quiz while I am teaching (I am quite tolerant to all late students, not just him).
This guy has a favorite scarf which he always puts on his desk. So, while narrating my Calc slides, my sight slips onto him. I see him swiping a finger behind the scarf. Can't see the screen of the device - if I could, I'd immediately report him to the student court. I thought, maybe it's just me. So in the next 2 minutes of lecture, I secretly watch him (the resulting lecturing was horrible by the way). He kept on swiping his finger. It's a gesture you can't confuse. It was a screen device, carefully concealed below a scarf.
I showed my students how to go on Wolfram alpha to solve their problems. Even showed them how to quickly google search it if they don't remember the site name. I have told them on a number of occasions that once they are done with calculus, they can use that web-site all they want. However, if they want to learn the material, they cannot use the site while taking Calc II - except possibly to check their homework answers.
So Adam was cheating his ass off with Wolfram Alpha. It all came together - his terrible handwriting (when copying things you don't look at what you write); his elementary mistakes - sometimes it's too easy and he thought he didn't need to cheat. Sometimes he'd have a mistake on one line and correct it on the next - well, that was just an error in copying.
The next two quizzes I kept on watching him. He did the exact same thing with the scarf. He had perfect work on all the standard material, all problem types for which you can find automatic solvers on the internet. I wrote him an email saying I cannot write him a recommendation - for personal reasons. No matter how many emails he wrote me asking why, I replied - it's personal, nothing to worry about, just ask your other instructors.
The next test I picked only tricky problems (ones with proofs); there were a couple of computational ones, but I specifically chose ones that are hard to type in a computer (lots of arcsins and the like).
I put the guy in the very front row. When giving tests, I usually open my laptop and do my own thing - most often C++ programming by the way. This time I spent the whole f***ing session staring at the guy. I don't think he had the opportunity to look at his device.
He had the single worst score in the class. He couldn't do the most basic of arithmetics on his own.
This final, I am going to watch him non-stop. If I see him cheating, he is off to the student court.
This guy was about to get a scholarship to a top university - one of the scholarships I didn't get when finishing high school. Maybe he will still manage to get to a top university - but definitely not with my help.
I cannot wish this guy a success. I surely hope he does not get accepted in any university. And if he does, I hope they catch him and expel him.
If I can see him cheating and can prove it, I will make sure this get on this guy's academic record.
Last edited on
http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/23/narcissism-was-a-bad-thing-until-we-started-calling-it-self-esteem/ |
That guy blew the meaning of "high self-esteem" way out of proportion. You can go as deep as yo u want to take it as far as meaning,but going deeper than the person who "thinks" what high self-esteem is is pointless, because now you're just arguing with what was said rather than what was meant.
Do you think you're a capable human being or don't you. Yes you can have high self-esteem by ignoring all your flaws,and problems(following the ignorance is bliss saying) or by acknowledging them, and knowing that you still have value. It's not a one way street.
"The “self-esteem,” “I’m special,” “love yourself,” dogma ruins everything it touches. It won’t help you at school, it will stifle your career ambition"
I'll take career advice from someone who doesn't have a "DONATE TO HELP MATT" SOS on the side of the page.
"Men are easier to admire when turn we them into myths and monuments."
I'm confused is he religious or is he not?
Last edited on
@tition
It's frustrating how hard it is to discipline students.
Too bad you can't just recommend him to the student court and say that you believe he's been cheating in your courses, and that while you have no proof, it can be easily shown by the fact that he is incapable of doing the work. And too bad that the student doesn't then have to prove to someone that he can do the work in an environment that makes it impossible to cheat.
Academic dishonesty is repellent.
@Cody0023
Yes, you are confused. Try not to be smarter than other people whose thoughts you don't want to understand. When you do that, you might actually discover that people do occasionally think about things deeply, and you might feel less obliged to blithely continue spewing scattered blather.
Now comes the proof. That little nugget makes for some pretty good troll bait. Are you the troll you are acting? Or maybe you've got another snarky and blatantly offensive remark to put me in my place?
@chrisname
I would not be comfortable getting a grade I didn't earn. Even a low grade, earned, is of more value than a high grade, unearned, and I can honestly tell people I know what I know. Even if they don't believe me or don't care.
It's frustrating how hard it is to discipline students.
Too bad you can't just recommend him to the student court and say that you believe he's been cheating in your courses, and that while you have no proof, it can be easily shown by the fact that he is incapable of doing the work. And too bad that the student doesn't then have to prove to someone that he can do the work in an environment that makes it impossible to cheat.
Academic dishonesty is repellent.
@Cody0023
Yes, you are confused. Try not to be smarter than other people whose thoughts you don't want to understand. When you do that, you might actually discover that people do occasionally think about things deeply, and you might feel less obliged to blithely continue spewing scattered blather.
Now comes the proof. That little nugget makes for some pretty good troll bait. Are you the troll you are acting? Or maybe you've got another snarky and blatantly offensive remark to put me in my place?
@chrisname
I would not be comfortable getting a grade I didn't earn. Even a low grade, earned, is of more value than a high grade, unearned, and I can honestly tell people I know what I know. Even if they don't believe me or don't care.
closed account (z05DSL3A)
| Also, I particularly enjoyed this blog I ran across -- he makes a very clear indictment of "self-esteem" (and names it for what it is: narcissism). |
I will start by saying I didn't make it all the way through the blog. The title of the blog, Narcissism was a bad thing, until we started calling it “self-esteem”, should have been a big clue that I was not going to finish reading it.
After a while I got the distinct impression the his grasp of self-esteem was flawed.
I don't see Narcissism, the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's own attributes, as being the same as self-esteem, a person's overall emotional evaluation of his or her own worth.
_______________________________________________________
Rosenberg's Self-Esteem Scale
http://www.wwnorton.com/college/psych/psychsci/media/rosenberg.htm
Duoas I think you need a vacation,lighten up geeez.
I wouldn't have read the whole blog post if I didn't want to understand....duh.
I love deep thinkers,love philosophy. So Yes, I am aware such beings exist in our universe.
Time for that vacation.
| Try not to be smarter than other people whose thoughts you don't want to understand. |
I wouldn't have read the whole blog post if I didn't want to understand....duh.
| you might actually discover that people do occasionally think about things deeply |
I love deep thinkers,love philosophy. So Yes, I am aware such beings exist in our universe.
| Are you the troll you are acting? Or maybe you've got another snarky and blatantly offensive remark to put me in my place? |
Time for that vacation.
Last edited on
I also disliked Duoas' article. Arrogance (which the article seems to be talking about) is certainly not the same thing as high self esteem. At all. Though maybe my definition of "high self esteem" is different from others.
How to explain. You can't understand high self esteem without looking at low self esteem as a contrast. So let's do that.
People with very low self esteem hate themselves (irrationally). When others say negative things about them, they take it extremely personally and they let it dwell because they truly believe it's true. They think of themselves as worthless and unable to accomplish anything.
It's often associated with depression, but is a separate thing. You can be depressed without having low self-esteem, but people with low self esteem are almost always depressed (for obvious reasons).
In contrast, you can say that having "high self esteem" is "normal". It means you are happy with yourself and who you are. The guy writing that article, despite what he claims, probably does have high self esteem. If he didn't, he probably would not have posted the article because he would have thought it sucked and would have been too ashamed of it to post it.
This is different from arrogance which is where you (irrationally) think you are god's gift to the world. Where you build yourself up buy into your own hype that you truly start to believe it.
Actually now that I write that out and think about it... arrogance is kind of the polar opposite of low self esteem, so maybe it would make sense for high self esteem to be arrogance and "normal" to be "medium self esteem". But since self esteem is generally considered to be a positive thing, and arrogance is a negative thing -- it kind of makes sense for it to be as outlined above.
As for the OP's question: A lot of people cheat because they simply don't care. It's the easiest means to accomplish a goal and they either don't see the consequences to it, or the consequences are not severe enough to warrant their concern.
How to explain. You can't understand high self esteem without looking at low self esteem as a contrast. So let's do that.
People with very low self esteem hate themselves (irrationally). When others say negative things about them, they take it extremely personally and they let it dwell because they truly believe it's true. They think of themselves as worthless and unable to accomplish anything.
It's often associated with depression, but is a separate thing. You can be depressed without having low self-esteem, but people with low self esteem are almost always depressed (for obvious reasons).
In contrast, you can say that having "high self esteem" is "normal". It means you are happy with yourself and who you are. The guy writing that article, despite what he claims, probably does have high self esteem. If he didn't, he probably would not have posted the article because he would have thought it sucked and would have been too ashamed of it to post it.
This is different from arrogance which is where you (irrationally) think you are god's gift to the world. Where you build yourself up buy into your own hype that you truly start to believe it.
Actually now that I write that out and think about it... arrogance is kind of the polar opposite of low self esteem, so maybe it would make sense for high self esteem to be arrogance and "normal" to be "medium self esteem". But since self esteem is generally considered to be a positive thing, and arrogance is a negative thing -- it kind of makes sense for it to be as outlined above.
As for the OP's question: A lot of people cheat because they simply don't care. It's the easiest means to accomplish a goal and they either don't see the consequences to it, or the consequences are not severe enough to warrant their concern.
Last edited on
Computergeek01, may I recommend that you read Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon? Now, the book itself is fantastic for many unrelated reasons, but my big one is this- find a copy with the author's introduction. That's the main part that I feel you need to read. Why? She does her own analysis of everything that she tried to imply with the first page of the book- and it's exactly what any English teacher would claim. Hell, in my class back in high school, our analysis of that page covered less than what the introduction mentioned, and did not cover a damn thing that wasn't in the intro. Mind you, the teacher for that class (as well as the rest of the class) lacked book editions with that intro portion.
So yes, when your English teachers blabber on about implications, you'd be surprised how right they actually are.
So yes, when your English teachers blabber on about implications, you'd be surprised how right they actually are.
> I got the distinct impression the his grasp of self-esteem was flawed.
He believes that self-esteem and humility are mutually exclusive; his grasp of self-esteem is flawed; and his grasp of humility is flawed.
He believes that self-esteem and humility are mutually exclusive; his grasp of self-esteem is flawed; and his grasp of humility is flawed.
Pages: 12