Bubbling in answers after time is called..fair game? Forum

[Curious1]

I think most people realize that it is 'wrong' or illegal, the question is whether or not it is fair game, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is not fair game.

Whether or not other people do it will affect your own score (as you will be graded compared to them) so if 99 people bubble in answers after the end of a section and get 1 out of those 3 questions right while you are the 1 person who does not do it and gets all 3 wrong your score is worse and theirs better.

Thus, in essence, you choosing to take the moral high ground in this will actually be NOT FAIR GAME, you being disadvantaged and it being unfair to you. Basically it's up to the LSAT proctors to check this and make sure it is fair game for everyone, not yourself.

This is wrong on several levels.

For starters, the bolded part of your post is incorrect. Your ethical and moral point of view is horribly scary. You hit the 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lawyer' trifecta by claiming people that don't do it are disadvantaged, that the rule is unfair to them and that it is not the responsibility of students to play fair and obey the rules.

Good luck since you'll need luck with your point of view and set of values and possibly need a good defense attorney in the future.

I like how you drew conclusions about my set of values on an example that i used to illustrate that what is morally right is not always fair.

Answer me this, if on a test, everyone except you got the answers ahead of time and you didn't due to your choice of not wanting to cheat, and no one ever got caught, would it be fair to you?

If you answered no, then you agree with my earlier example.

Fair does not equate to being morally right. 2 different things. Never did I mention that cheating is right or morally okay.

In the example you just provided, what would be fair = what would be morally right:
-it would not be fair or morally right for the student to suffer;
-it would be fair and morally right for the student who did not cheat to have the better score.

If you are doing something that is morally wrong, what you are doing is unfair to all those who suffer as a result of doing the right thing. Fair does equate to being morally right. When you are morally wrong and benefit, that is not fair.

Actually there's something called, for lack of a better term, the "sucker exemption", which basically says its ok to do something objectively immoral if everyone around you is doing it and causing you a disadvantage. But I don't think we're quite at the point where 99/100 of test takers are being dishonest. Most people are too scared/honest/risk averse/don't care that much.

[bruss]

I think most people realize that it is 'wrong' or illegal, the question is whether or not it is fair game, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is not fair game.

Whether or not other people do it will affect your own score (as you will be graded compared to them) so if 99 people bubble in answers after the end of a section and get 1 out of those 3 questions right while you are the 1 person who does not do it and gets all 3 wrong your score is worse and theirs better.

Thus, in essence, you choosing to take the moral high ground in this will actually be NOT FAIR GAME, you being disadvantaged and it being unfair to you. Basically it's up to the LSAT proctors to check this and make sure it is fair game for everyone, not yourself.

This is wrong on several levels.

For starters, the bolded part of your post is incorrect. Your ethical and moral point of view is horribly scary. You hit the 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lawyer' trifecta by claiming people that don't do it are disadvantaged, that the rule is unfair to them and that it is not the responsibility of students to play fair and obey the rules.

Good luck since you'll need luck with your point of view and set of values and possibly need a good defense attorney in the future.

I like how you drew conclusions about my set of values on an example that i used to illustrate that what is morally right is not always fair.

Answer me this, if on a test, everyone except you got the answers ahead of time and you didn't due to your choice of not wanting to cheat, and no one ever got caught, would it be fair to you?

If you answered no, then you agree with my earlier example.

Fair does not equate to being morally right. 2 different things. Never did I mention that cheating is right or morally okay.

In the example you just provided, what would be fair = what would be morally right:
-it would not be fair or morally right for the student to suffer;
-it would be fair and morally right for the student who did not cheat to have the better score.

If you are doing something that is morally wrong, what you are doing is unfair to all those who suffer as a result of doing the right thing. Fair does equate to being morally right. When you are morally wrong and benefit, that is not fair.

how is it fair for the person who didn't cheat to have a better score? One person risked their whole legal career while the other played it safe.