Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Does Everybody Cheat?. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
An 8 page analysis of essays on the topic of cheating offered by Michael Cooley and Katherine Powell in their book Making Choices: Reading Issues in Context. Each essay introduces a situation or moral dilemma that involves the issue of cheating and stimulates the reader to form moral judgements based on the given situations. In essence, the authors provide fuel for a discussion centered on the central question of 'does everybody cheat?' The writer summarizes the articles and then offers some perspective on the question. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
8 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_90cheat.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
offer essays that broach many aspects of this moral issue. Each essay introduces a situation or moral dilemma that involves the issue of cheating and stimulates the reader to form
moral judgements based on the given situations. In essence, the authors provide fuel for a discussion centered on the central question of "does everybody cheat?" The first essay in
this section, "I Have Deceived My Friends" by Charles van Doren, is a confession written by Van Doren in the 1950s after it was discovered that the Columbia University professor
had been involved in cheating as a contestant on a popular TV quiz show. Van Doren lost his position on the Columbia faculty as a result of his involvement in
the game show scandal. As Van Doren was properly contrite and also an extremely popular professor, many of his students urged the university to rehire him. The second essay, "The
Quisling show," is a reply to these students written at the time by Hans J. Morgenthau, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago. Morgenthau reiterates the
five main arguments offered by the students that Van Doren should be forgiven and rehired. The students, first of all, felt that Van Dorens confession had essentially wiped the
slate clean, that Van Doren certainly would not do it again, that his teaching was above reproach, that academic teaching was not essentially concerned with the issue anyway, and that
the university acted with undue haste (Morgenthau, 1997). All of these arguments sound quite familiar to a nation that has just been through its first impeachment trial of an elected
president. With that trial in mind, Morgenthaus rebuttal of each of these points has added significance for the present moral course on which the nation appears to be embarked.
...