Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

The Morality of "Paper Writing"

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I have a friend who recently began working as a "paper writer" for a company that offers specialized essay writing services to students. Basically how it works is: a student contacts the company with a topic and a deadline, the company has one of their writers write it, the client signs a form stating that the paper is for research use only and will be properly cited in the essay the student hands in, money is exchanged, end of story. Everyone knows, however, that these students will simply hand in the paper they bought, rather than use it for "research purposes."

Initially, when I heard about this job, I sensed (although I couldn't articulate exactly why) that it was immoral. It just left that sour taste in my mouth--the whole idea was so second-handed. But, the more I think about it the more I reconsider. Technically, one would simply be doing the job he was hired to do: writing a paper to be used as a research tool. Of course, that paper could (and, in this case, would) be plagiarized just as anything else one writes and puts out in the public might be. Also, because the clients agree when purchasing the paper to use it as a research tool, any repurcussions for not doing so fall on their shoulders. I guess I would analogize it to selling guns. It's not the gunseller's responsibility to make sure his clients don't use the guns he sells to kill puppies.

Here is the disclaimer on the website

All research papers are owned by The Paper Store Enterprises, Inc. and are the property of the corporation and our contracted writers. Our work is designed only to assist students in the preparation of their own work. Students who use our service are responsible not only for writing their own papers, but also for citing The Paper Store as a source when doing so.

So, what do you all think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know much about gun-stores, but I've always assumed that -- for most of them -- the bulk of their customers are hunters and folks who want a gun for recreation or for protection. If I were running such a gun store and someone occasionally came in who made me suspiscious (for whatever reason ... say, by the types of questions he was asking) I might refuse to sell him a gun (assuming I could legally refuse). On the other hand, if I am an honest guy, and almost all my customers are crooks who buy guns from me to hold up honest guys, it would not be practical to be in that business.

The question is not whether people buying those research papers say they want them for research; rather, the question is: does one believe them. Since it's an issue of morality rather than legality, it isn't about what others are claiming, but about one's own individual judgement of them and their intent and then... of one's willingness to contribute to their purposes (as far as you can estimate those purposes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, if I am an honest guy, and almost all my customers are crooks who buy guns from me to hold up honest guys, it would not be practical to be in that business.

The question is not whether people buying those research papers say they want them for research; rather, the question is: does one believe them. Since it's an issue of morality rather than legality, it isn't about what others are claiming, but about one's own individual judgement of them and their intent and then... of one's willingness to contribute to their purposes (as far as you can estimate those purposes).

I think this is good to consider in any line of work.

In this particular case, if the likelihood that a university would discover the plagiarism was minimal to almost nil, I think there could be (and are) classes for which the "actual" purpose is moral.

For example, a couple semesters ago I took what was described as a US history class covering the last century, and was instead bombarded with insane dissertations about socialism and repressed women and minorities. It would have been very nice to buy someone else's time to save myself the irritation of writing about the great importance of Malcolm X and blacks (void of actual historical or philosophical context), as was required.

For most students, classes like this are unavoidable (and sometimes unforeseeable).

Edited by JASKN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is significant that there are almost certainly no honest clients for the business. I would not feel the least jot of sorrow if these fundamentally dishonest enterprises went out of business because the customer base dried up and the suppliers went away. We're doing our best to catch the customers and deal with them as harshly as possible (not harshly enough, in my opinion). It would also help if these bogus papers were poor quality, since that would defeat the main point of buying a paper, i.e. why pay money for a C-. The one thing that might make sense to a potential supplier (though not in all cases) is the effect on their lives.

What you have is a group of people of ability, and a group of people lacking ability. If the people of ability sell the product of their ability to the dishonest students of no ability, then we have a hard time identifying the nature of a student. Does that matter? Maybe not -- if you can get a interview with the employer or graduate / professional school, you may be able to make it clear that *you* are the person of actual ability. Unfortunately, law and medical schools (to take a couple of examples) get huge numbers of similar looking applications, and they have to do sifting according to these cold, impersonal statistics like grades, picking the person with the better grades over the person with the worse grades. If you are a 4.0 student anyhow, it won’t matter (until grade inflation makes 4.0 meaningless).

In helping a person to fake a resume and thus achieve the unearned, you may be indirectly creating the impression that your abilities are no better, and maybe even worse, than that of the paper-buying scum. It may not matter to you that you've contributed to the evaluation-inflation of these other people, if for example you're not competing for a job or admission to school. So that argument may only apply to people who need to be "picked" on the basis of the quality of their work compared to that of others, and who don’t have a 4.0 grade average.

And, uh, James, I have to disagree with the implication that dishonesty is moral. It may be that you get stuck with classes you don't like, but that does not justify being dishonest. But my comments are really about the morality of enabling this kind of dishonesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone knows, however, that these students will simply hand in the paper they bought, rather than use it for "research purposes."

....

Technically, one would simply be doing the job he was hired to do: writing a paper to be used as a research tool. Of course, that paper could (and, in this case, would) be plagiarized just as anything else one writes and puts out in the public might be.

Johnglatline, here's where I think the problem lies: your second statement requires evasion of the first. The people who write these papers can only pretend they are doing honest work. In actual fact, they knowingly do work that will be used dishonestly and are thereby supporting such vice. To use the analogy of a gunseller, a gunseller would be immoral if he were to, for instance, knowingly sell weapons to communists who used them to enslave nations. A moral gunseller acts on the premise of selling to honest, rights-respecting buyers. If he's tricked into selling to a criminal, then he's mistaken, not immoral. But if he knowingly (or through evasion) sells to a criminal, he is immoral -- because he is explicitly rejecting rational prinicples. The same prinicple is true (albeit with less violent consequences) with these "research" services. :dough:

I also agree with David Odden that college students helping others cheat are directly harming themselves by lowering the value of their own degree (of course, the universities are doing this quite well on their own). When employers find a person with a high college GPA to be incompetent, the degree loses its value for all holders, not just the cheater. Cheating aside, I'm almost ashamed to think of some people I know who will be counted alongside myself as "college graduates." :dough: Thankfully it's not yet to the point of incompetence by association.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, what do you all think?

The disclaimer with my emphasis added:

"All research papers are owned by The Paper Store Enterprises, Inc. and are the property of the corporation and our contracted writers. Our work is designed only to assist students in the preparation of their own work. Students who use our service are responsible not only for writing their own papers, but also for citing The Paper Store as a source when doing so."

If these customized papers are copyrighted, then when you put your name on that paper and turn it in, that would be exactly the moment where the breach with morality/legality occurs, in this situation. Regardless of whether or not they are copyrighted, the customized papers are to only be used as sources, just like with reference material used in research papers (the works cited page), and plagiarism rules still apply to them, of course. The service itself is not immoral.

This is what I think.

Edited by intellectualammo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, uh, James, I have to disagree with the implication that dishonesty is moral. It may be that you get stuck with classes you don't like, but that does not justify being dishonest.
You've changed my mind in the case of a university, where being dishonest about your work is immoral because it will always lower the value of your degree.

In fact, I can't think of any instance where being dishonest is moral outside of an emergency situation, so I was mistaken in my previous post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never met anyone who uses one of these services for anything other than plagiarism. Most of those get caught, too, since I'm in high school and high school students, especially the ones who buy papers instead of writing them, do not write like university students.

I don't think there's any need for such a service, outside of the dishonest one of getting a paper to plagiarise. If a student needs research material, he should research. Even asking for someone to write the paper for him as research material is somewhat dishonest. If the paper requires outside research, he should be doing it himself.

Incidentally, I often find it irritating that while students who plariarise papers from services like this are generally condemned, many people find it perfectly acceptable that politicians have speechwriters write their speeches for them, but I digress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any need for such a service, outside of the dishonest one of getting a paper to plagiarise. If a student needs research material, he should research.

But I view the use of the service part of his research. The service holds that view as well, according to the disclaimer.

Btw, nice pic of Kira!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I view the use of the service part of his research. The service holds that view as well, according to the disclaimer.

Btw, nice pic of Kira!

Well, as a student that spends hours at a time copying articles from encyclopedias to use in history papers, I don't consider buying a paper with all the reserach built-in researching. Though, this is one of those things that I think individual teachers will have to develop a policy on eventually.

Thanks! :dough:

Edited by non-contradictor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though, this is one of those things that I think individual teachers will have to develop a policy on eventually.

I don't necessarily think that they have to develop one. But if they were to do so, I can only think of them not allowing the service to be a part of the works cited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I basically agree with johngaltline, just as in the analogy a gunmaker is not responsible for how others use the gun. However, one thing:

Everyone knows [...] that these students will simply hand in the paper they bought, rather than use it for "research purposes."

If this is generally known to the owners of the company, and to the employees, then that's another issue. In other words, if the citation requirement is merely a legal loophole not to get in trouble, then I would say the company and employees are culpable as well, to a degree. It'd be legal, but not 100% moral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words, if the citation requirement is merely a legal loophole not to get in trouble, then I would say the company and employees are culpable as well, to a degree. It'd be legal, but not 100% moral.
There is no law requiring students to be honest in turning in their material and not representing someone else's material as their own. If you do not directly hand in the purchased hardcopy paper (i.e. if you retype it or just print it out from an electronic version, putting your name on it) then you might be in violation of copyright law, unless you actually have permission to make a copy. Even if you are in violation of copyright law, the company would have to go after you for damages, which will not happen. The citation requirement is a non-legal loophole to give the fake appearance of not being entirely dishonest. I am really not sure why they bother with giving the appearance of being honest, except to enable their customers to not feel like the dishonest evaders that they are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am really not sure why they bother with giving the appearance of being honest, except to enable their customers to not feel like the dishonest evaders that they are.

Well that's the real question, whether it's merely an appearance or something more than that. If the company knows and considers it fine for the students to cheat, including the "terms of use" clause is just a way to not get caught, although most of the blame is still on the student who is cheating. In morality what matters is not the result (as that would be "consequentialism") but the intention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...