Breaking norms and lying is perceived as wielding power effectively by a great many (most according to research) people. See Stanford GSB prof Jeffrey Pfeffer's work.

I think in most cases, yes.

Committing voter fraud — being registered in three states — while accusing others of it, would seem to be another question mark on ethics and honesty.

ie: Lance Armstrong accused others of doping, while doing it himself. Was NOT required to give back money he made through endorsements. He's living "super rich" in mansions....having lied....and defamed the sport of cycling.

It's the world we live in. Everyone is suspect.

I am going to say in reality, probably not, if you have been competent at your level of employment and have not falsified any required licensure or other qualifying exams.

I know people who have verifiably false information on websites, LinkedIn etc. so I am assuming their CV does, too.

But this sort of thing is why now, in some cases you have to sign a separate document that says you did not knowingly provide false information, did not cheat on exam, did not plagiarize paper, etc.

I am guessing that sometimes credential requirements act as gatekeeping and may keep out those who are proficient but could not afford schooling or perhaps had family obligations that prevented schooling.

I am all for some credentialling requirements, I would want a surgeon to have actually graduated from medical school and not have knowledge of various organs because previous experience came from working as a butcher; or having watched all of the MASH episodes several times.

I thought this post was about a politician/government hack.

In my industry, yes, absolutely. Now that it is far easier to verify info, there is very little tolerance. Because, people who lie--- they are liars. And who wants that?

At least that is the world I live in.

I didn’t name anyone, because this could apply to anyone. And I wanted the thread to stay up.

But I did have a rotten M&M yesterday.

No one wants a liar. But no one wants credentialling requirements that act intentionally or not, as a barrier to those of a particular race or gender, for those who are intelligent, proficient but did not have the kind of opportunities that others may have had.

Sorry, there is simply no excuse for lying. Oh, and it is stupid.

I think you know or can guess my stance on equal opportunity, affirmative action, FAPE, Pell grants, student loan funding and the like.

Sorry, maddielee. My mind went immediately to the gutter. For most people, obviously falsifying achievements, lying about line items on CVs, these are all no-nos.

But there is a line of thinking, that the world is rigged a certain dishonest way and those who partake in the deceptions are simply operating intelligently.

The notion that everything is a sham excuses all the lies for some people. It's actually a big part of how crypto currencies were sold to unsophisticated investors.

LOL, Zalco and sophisticated ones too, but don't get me going.

But there is a line of thinking, that the world is rigged a certain dishonest way and those who partake in the deceptions are simply operating intelligently.

This is a rot in society and very dangerous.

Mtn, It's how we got here, I think.

And why extricating ourselves is very very very hard

I think we need to teach Stats. Philosophy/Ethics and Civics to all high schoolers.

Anyone remember the Robert Putman's (I think) work on the importance of trust in building an advanced economy? He compared Northern and Southern Italy and how trust networks allowed the Northerners to build rapidly after the War.

In my last company, prior to retirement, we terminated employment of people who lied about having a four-year college degree, regardless of how well they were doing the job. We had zero tolerance for dishonesty and lack of integrity. People who are comfortable lying don't just do it once. Fortunately over time we did background checks, including education verification, before we hired people so we weeded out anyone who lied about their education before we hired them.

I work in a field where you have to have graduated from a fully accredited program, apply for licensure every two years, other permits every three years, have background checks, have our fingerprints registered, have clearance because we may have contact with children, be certified in CPR or ACLS, have a minimum annual continuing education requirements and take a number of required courses and review courses on a regular basis that are not included in our CE requirements having to do with everything from radiation safety, to HIPPA to sexual harassment in the workplace to gender and racial equity and sensitivity.

So I get credentials, and although there are probably people who get around parts of it, there are lots of checks and balances that I don't think are part of the regular comparatively free-wheeling corporate world.

That said, I don't think people can actually be Taught how to be Ethical. Coursework may help you sort out your own parameters, but if you aren't I don't think anybody make you be so.

I don't think people can actually be Taught how to be Ethical.

I agree but I think it is useful if only to get people thinking about how to make decisions.

@Zalco/bring back Sophie!...sorry. Didn't mean to side track. I meant to say this, better said by Pal:

That said, I don't think people can actually be Taught how to be Ethical.

Isn't this what background checks are meant to vet?

Perhaps people could be taught that not being Ethical is a negative? The ethics class could teach the difference between having ethics and not having ethics.

And what should happen if you ever became a government employee with a high security clearance.

People who are comfortable lying don't just do it once.

My point exactly, 2Katz

Hopefully people are being taught some values at home, but I do think Phil. and Ethics are helpful so that people can learn from great thinkers about how to make choices. Just expose them to these ideas; as you well know it includes a very broad range of ethical paradigms, so the discipline is by no means a prescription. It's closer to developing metacognition in kids.

Sorry, there is simply no excuse for lying. Oh, and it is stupid.

I think you know or can guess my stance on equal opportunity, affirmative action, FAPE, Pell grants, student loan funding and the like.

I agree, but at the end of the day you have those who told the truth, those who lied, and those who did not even apply because although they were competent and may have done well, they did not have the proper credentials due to circumstances they could not easily control, and refused to lie.

I hope there are some HR people who take note of those in the last group, to see whether hiring them could benefit the company.

Not quite sure who is being referred to, but this conversation made me think of the latest news about Ernst & Young employees getting caught cheating on ethics exams, of all things...

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/28/1108044858/accounting-giant-ernst-young-admits-its-employees-cheated-on-ethics-exams

"...Because it's their job to hold others accountable, Ernst & Young — one of the "big four" accounting firms — says it holds itself to a high standard of ethics. In fact, the firm's entire global code of conduct is based on an "ethical" framework.

"At EY, nothing is more important than our integrity and our ethics. These core values are at the forefront of everything we do," Brendan Mullin, a spokesperson for Ernst & Young, said in an email to NPR. "Our response to this unacceptable past behavior has been thorough, extensive, and effective."

Many of the employees interviewed during the federal investigation said they knew cheating was a violation of the company's code of conduct but did it anyway because of work commitments or the fact that they couldn't pass training exams after multiple tries.

The SEC said that the cheating went on for many years, going back to 2012. Following the discovery of an earlier cheating scheme, the firm took disciplinary actions and repeatedly warned its audit professionals not to cheat on exams. Still, the cheating continued...."

All that said, lying is off the table.

I agree with you, and was writing of the difficulties encountered by those barred by lack of credentials who refused to lie and despite as you say, other ways to showcase skills, part of the reason that there is a gap involving race/gender, still.

<any brush with law enforcement, even without a conviction, is the end of the application>

It is illegal to ask whether someone has ever been arrested on a job application, but it is legal to ask whether one has been convicted of a crime. This is what my sister (who is a lawyer) told me. This does not stop the State of Texas from asking applicants this question. One can refuse to answer an illegal question, but that causes suspicion. I noticed this when I was applying for a job in Texas as a social worker. I also had to answer a questionnaire that would reveal how likely I would be to offer assistance to various groups of people, and if one responded with beneficent answers, they would not be hired.

When DH taught at a major university, he handed me a handwritten paper from one of his students and asked for my opinion of the paper. It started slowly, I told him, but the rest of the paper was fabulous. That's when DH told me that the paper was actually one of the seminal essays in the field that he taught and was required reading in the course. Despite the fact that the student had clearly plagiarized, DH was told by his department head that he could do nothing about it.

Well, science, in many forms, including political science, can help you learn how to evaluate evidence for it's gibing with reality. The truth is not always black and white, but it can be discerned by careful examination of evidence and by getting information from a broad set of avenues. I did that when I vetted employees as a summer camp director. I checked references, I looked for evidence that the resume was accurate. I also read up on how to interview people and what questions to ask to get the best set of information to evaluate a candidate's likelihood of success in the job. So, yes, one can learn to evaluate the truth. For some people, like lawyers and judges for example, it is the bread and butter of their profession. Scientists too. Whether you commit yourself to it or not, well, that's another matter. One can only lead a horse to water, not make it drink.

In my experience, there are a lot of people who just aren't comfortable with thinking that hard about things. They just don't want to go there.

Despite the fact that the student had clearly plagiarized, DH was told by his department head that he could do nothing about it.

That's interesting because in the lowly Community College program I teach part time in it's an automatic 0 on the assignment which could mean failure of the course and it's a potential grounds for dismissal from certain programs, and this is stated in the course syllabi as well as various other student resources. There is even a document to sign in some classes that you attest to not plagiarizing.

However, I wonder if this would be so clear cut in the much more expensive Ivy League institution I work in where there is much more at stake and the student is more likely to be able to lawyer up.

Pal, why is there more at stake in an Ivy league institution like Penn than in a community college? On the face of it, I would vehemently disagree.

I had an employee once who had lied about having a degree. He had just been promoted to a position that required a degree when I found out. I chose to demote him back to the position that did not require a degree. I absolutely hated demoting him because he would have done well in the new position.

cyn, I won't speak for Pal, but the view I have into this matter is that students at the tippy top are given the benefit of every doubt and their grades are inflated. There is a customer service mentality when the tuition is as high as what institutions like Penn charge.

Only to the extent that at community college we have students who apply, get accepted, and don't show up. We have students who drop out on a regular basis for relatively minor reasons, it's very inexpensive, and the majority are non-traditional students who have been previously employed. I had a student who was caught cheating on a security camera in the testing center, told me herself before the testing center even contacted me, and said "I will be suspended from the program and have to come back next year." When there is occasionally the ethical violation, the student usually owns up to it and re enrolls after sitting out a year or whatever it is. One student did reach an agreement that the reason she left the program (permanently) would be sealed her record would say she withdrew in the last semester and her grades for the first half of the program would be available for transfer to a different school, which she did.

At the program I work at at Penn, the students all have undergraduate degrees, some have masters, and some have taken a 2-year post bach in order to get into the doctoral program because it is so competitive (artificially so, in my opinion). So they have 4-6 years of post HS education behind them, often in preparation for this doctoral program only but not that well rounded to get a job with and 95% of them have never had a professional sort of job of any kind. They are paying well over $100K in expenses for each year, and if they are expelled they are not going to be making anything close to what they would need to to start paying that money back. And they are not likely to easily get a space in another program. So when they do get caught cheating they are much more likely to fight tooth and nail to not get kicked out of the program. Usually it involves something along the lines of legal due process was not followed (because it's not a court of law and there is no "trial") so whether they cheated or not is irrelevant, the legality of the dismissal is called into question and the school doesn't want to waste time on it. So the student stays. A student when I was in school struck a bargain that would not be charged with breaking and entering if he just went away. But he still went away with a year of coursework under his belt and told people he didn't like it which is why he left the program.

I taught at a university, four year undergraduate college and community college. You absolutely can give a zero on a plagiarized assignment. I have done it. And I don't know about all colleges, but many will allow you to fail a student for plagiarizing. I have never done that, I thought it was too extreme, but maybe that's what Suero was referring to. I have never heard of a college allowing plagiarism. In fact, I have always been totally supported in calling out plagiarism by the colleges I worked for. I would be very remiss as an instructor if I allowed plagiarism to pass. That's what I told my students, I knew immediately this was not your work because it was so phony. It made the student look very bad and I would not want them to think they could get away with that kind of thing and be successful in the professional world. That's what I was supposed to be doing, familiarizing students with the standards of the professional work world in my field.

When I was in college, we had an Honor Council who kicked students out on more than one occasion for plagiarism during my four years there. It was a small liberal arts school.

Pal and Zalco, I was thinking more of the affect on the student and felt that those at a community college actually have more to lose since they are most likely starting with far fewer advantages than most attending Penn or another four-year college. They also have probably had more of a struggle to get to college and stay than quite a few elsewhere.

I know the difficulties they face from the start of their lives and they rarely get the benefit of a doubt. There could be so many reasons to register and then not show up that have nothing to do with a poor character. What may be relatively minor to us may not be to these young students. I am not in any way supporting plagiarism or lying, but imho, anyone accepted into a top tier university program should absolutely understand the rules and not receive any kid glove treatment. Sounds like the CC students are more ethical and honest than the others by admitting their actions.

You could argue they have more to lose in an abstract sense, I see that.

However, legally, they would probably consider tuition expense as part/most of the economic loss. At top undergraduate schools that can surpass $80k/yr so if you were unfairly thrown out for plagiarizing the provable damages are pretty high. It would be worth lawyering up.

Given the norms of today, the moral code young people live by 'if you don't get caught it wasn't wrong and in some cases it's considered approval if you care then yes you double down on playing dog catcher. Most don't want to spend their careers suspicious and hunting down all the lies so they sift through the cracks. Daughter's lab is experiencing that. Someone lied about having a Master's degree. He's doing his job. He's liked in the company. His salary is higher due to this degree it turns out he doesn't have...if they let him go they will have trouble in this climate finding a replacement as good as he had been. What to do???

There have been several high profile coaches, etc. who said they had masters degrees they did not possess.

There are people who apply for jobs that require a doctorate and who never finished their dissertation, (ABD or ”all but dissertation”). We have applicants provide unofficial transcripts but upon hire, an official transcript is required. This is pretty common in academia.

And for plagiarism/cheating, we have done everything from a 0 on the assignment to failure of the course. Seriously, sometimes a 0 on an assignment or test is not enough of a deterrant for some people. But for my tests, I have to make alternate versions, seat people apart, no phones/smartwatches, nothing but a pen/pencil. Since going back to in person instruction, all my tests are pencil and paper. I will do low-stakes quizzes online.

And DLM, people like them are a huge drawback of moving to the mountains for us. I at least got put in the new 14th district, which Jeff Jackson should hopefully win. But I’ve been pinponged between the 9th and the 12th district for several years now.

“Given the norms of today, the moral code young people live by …”

Every generation says this about the younger generations. Because apparently there was no lying, plagiarism, falsifying info, etc in the good old days.

These issues have plagued society since the dawn of time, it’s not any worse now.

I’m quite proud of the younger generations for having the fortitude in dealing with so much carp in this world.

@arcy_gw, do you actually know any young people? If you do and they are all like you believe, where are you meeting them?

eta: the guy, the subject in my OP, is not a young person. He was also in a high government position during the last administration.

It is certainly not the world i live in. The young kids I meet today are so impressive. Very concerned and committed to equity, fairness, and doing the right thing. Far moreso that my generation; these things were not even on my radar screen.

The young people I know all do public service, all follow the issues of the day and vote, are wonderfully inclusive and open-minded, care about their planet, and are very thoughtful about life decisions.