Does anyone feel like they're an immoral person?

[Lunasly]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I don't know what's been up with me lately, but I can't help but think I am an immoral person (at least in comparison to those I work with). I started a job last year with the university I attend and a lot of the people that I work with are religious (Christians to be exact). The way in which I like to live my life and the various decisions I have made in the past on various issues makes me look like a bad person in comparison to them.
When I hear them speak about various issues, they seem like very moral people who would always try their best to do the right thing. In comparison, I feel like I only care about myself.

For instance, we were talking about medical school interviews this questions was asked: You live in an apartment complex and your friend (who can't afford a gym pass) asks if they could have access to the gym (which is part of the complex and is only allowed to be used by residents of that complex). Do you lend them your key?

Every single one of them said that they found it highly immoral to lend out the key to their friend. Myself, however... I could care less. If I know my friend can't afford a gym pass then I'd be glad help them out even if it goes against the rules. No one is harmed in the process. Chances are that no one will ever find out. Now, in an actual medical school interview, I would argue the opposite, but in reality I feel like it isn't a big deal.

Another example is with regard to a recent exam we had. A student who had taken the class last semester had held on to a copy of his exam and decided to share it with a few of us. Of course, one of my coworkers refused to look at the exam because they felt that it was unethical to look past exams and considered it cheating. When I was offered to look at the old exam, I said yes without second thought or reservations. Why not? If an opportunity arises whereby I could potentially score a higher grade because I know the type of questions that are likely to be asked, then why wouldn't I take it? I already studied excessively for the exam, so I don't see the harm.

These are two of many cases where I feel like I am an immoral person in comparison to these people. That is, there are some decisions in this world that I would still make even though I know they are unethical. It is just the extent to which they are unethical makes me think that the ends justify the means (I'm not sure if I used that phrase in the proper context). I feel like this laid back attitude where I'm not paranoid about every decision I make and whether or not its moral will come back to bite me when it comes time for me to interview.

Perhaps I am being overly paranoid and I've been hanging around these co-workers for too long.

 

[knv2u]

To answer the question in the title: no. To the rest of the post tl;dr. I will add, however, that while I am in no way judging either way, if there is something about your personality that you wish to improve, then why not work to fix it?

 

[sourdoughllama]

Heeeelllll yeah. I'm like a modern day Judas Iscariot with a touch of Monica Lewinsky. I love politicians and taxes

 

[Lunasly]

To answer the question in the title: no. To the rest of the post tl;dr. I will add, however, that while I am in no way judging either way, if there is something about your personality that you wish to improve, then why not work to fix it?

See that's the thing: I don't find a problem with it and I don't necessarily want to improve it. I feel like its a quality that makes people think that I am laid back and not so uptight about everything. If I were going to improve that part of my personality, then it would only be for the sake of appealing to medical schools. I think I'm just overthinking it, but I can't be sure. In a way, I almost wish that I was more considerate about certain issues, but at the same time it would take away a part of who I really am as a person. I don't want to be the individual who is extremely uptight about everything.

Does my description about the people I work with make any sense or at least resemble any people you might know?

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

It's telling that your main concern is how this will affect your interview outcomes, not whether a profession dedicated to the service of the sick and dying is right for someone who readily admits they are selfish.

Choose banking.

 

[Womb Raider]

For instance, we were talking about medical school interviews this questions was asked: You live in an apartment complex and your friend (who can't afford a gym pass) asks if they could have access to the gym (which is part of the complex and is only allowed to be used by residents of that complex). Do you lend them your key?

Every single one of them said that they found it highly immoral to lend out the key to their friend. Myself, however... I could care less. If I know my friend can't afford a gym pass then I'd be glad help them out even if it goes against the rules. No one is harmed in the process. Chances are that no one will ever find out. Now, in an actual medical school interview, I would argue the opposite, but in reality I feel like it isn't a big deal.

Another example is with regard to a recent exam we had. A student who had taken the class last semester had held on to a copy of his exam and decided to share it with a few of us. Of course, one of my coworkers refused to look at the exam because they felt that it was unethical to look past exams and considered it cheating. When I was offered to look at the old exam, I said yes without second thought or reservations. Why not? If an opportunity arises whereby I could potentially score a higher grade because I know the type of questions that are likely to be asked, then why wouldn't I take it? I already studied excessively for the exam, so I don't see the harm.

Perhaps I am being overly paranoid and I've been hanging around these co-workers for too long.

Scenario 1: Not giving your friend the pass is just ridiculous. The only reason I could see myself not giving a friend the pass is if I really didn't want them hanging around or thought they'd start taking the opportunity for granted. People like your friends just tick me off.

Scenario 2: Professors aren't stupid. If they actually allow their exams to be taken home (a lot at my university did not) they EXPECT this type of behavior - they weren't born yesterday. Chances are, they changed the test anyway. Don't see it as cheating (it's not) rather, see it as an opportunity to get a feel for what his tests are like and a good set of practice questions. You are doing NOTHING wrong by looking at these tests.

You've definitely been hanging around those co-workers too long, and boy do I feel sorry for you - I'm very fortunate that my friends at work are *similar* to me and aren't that anal.

I feel like its a quality that makes people think that I am laid back and not so uptight about everything.

Hit the nail on the head.

When asking yourself if you should change, watch the following:

 

[cs24]

See that's the thing: I don't find a problem with it and I don't necessarily want to improve it. I feel like its a quality that makes people think that I am laid back and not so uptight about everything. If I were going to improve that part of my personality, then it would only be for the sake of appealing to medical schools. I think I'm just overthinking it, but I can't be sure. In a way, I almost wish that I was more considerate about certain issues, but at the same time it would take away a part of who I really am as a person. I don't want to be the individual who is extremely uptight about everything.

Does my description about the people I work with make any sense or at least resemble any people you might know?

You can be more considerate about certain issues without being extremely uptight about everything.

You sound like you have some cognitive dissonance going on with what your values are and how you think you want to act. Regardless, you're still in college and figuring out who you are, I wouldn't stress out about it. Change if you want to, if not don't. Don't be surprised if life changes you unexpectedly either (ie a serious relationship).

I don't think it will affect anything regarding your desire to go to medical school. All personality types get in.

 

[amazing tekkers]

I try to live my life the way I can through the decency and morals my parents taught me. For instance, the hospital I volunteer, they have a stack of tickets for free food or subway, you can easily abuse those things, even feeding your friends, no one will stop you or will know, but I don't do this because it's not right . Also at work, I fill out my own timesheets, I can easily cheat on the hours and get more money, but I don't want to do that because my supervisor trusts me.

 

[GM2006]

I've actually felt that way before, too. I know, personally, I would answer the common interview question, 'would you turn your best friend in if you found out they cheated on the last exam' very differently in a non-interview situation.

There are doctors out there who commit fraud and cheat the system, and those are the sorts of people med schools are trying to weed out, I guess. I know I would never make any decisions that would put my patients in harms way, and that's what's most important. So to answer your question -- no, I don't necessarily feel like an immoral person.

 

[Member10billion]

OMG YOU'RE SO EVIL.

Juuuust kidding.

Dude, you're okay. Do well in school (old tests are fine to study off of), but be good to your fellow man. It's how you treat your neighbor that may define you as a good or bad person.

 

[Lunasly]

Scenario 1: Not giving your friend the pass is just ridiculous. The only reason I could see myself not giving a friend the pass is if I really didn't want them hanging around or thought they'd start taking the opportunity for granted. People like your friends just tick me off.

Scenario 2: Professor's aren't stupid. If they actually allow their exams to be taken home (a lot at my university did not) they EXPECT this type of behavior - they weren't born yesterday. Chances are, they changed the test anyway. Don't see it as cheating (it's not) rather, see it as an opportunity to get a feel for what his tests are like and a good set of practice questions. You are doing NOTHING wrong by looking at these tests.

You've definitely been hanging around those co-workers too long, and boy do I feel sorry for you - I'm very fortunate that my friends at work are *similar* to me and aren't that anal.



Hit the nail on the head.

When asking yourself if you should change, watch the following:

I'm really glad to hear that. That's exactly how I feel. I was even having a conversation with them about what they considered cheating. They claimed that if you're married and you even LOOK at another women while walking down the street, then that's considered cheating. They claimed that I made a vow to love my wife and no other woman when I married her. I just wanted to back hand all of them because of how ridiculous that argument was. However, when you have multiple people taking that stance with the exception of yourself, you begin to question your own judgement.

The funny thing is, I go to a very small school and all of the people I know who have been accepted to medical school over the last several years are hardcore religious people (only 8 or so people get interviews each year given how small the university is). I know correlation doesn't = causation, but I can't help but think that I am not as "good" of a person as they are when it comes to dealing with certain issues.

 

[chillaxbro]

Well are you immoral enough to massage the truth at an interview to make yourself seem moral?

 

[Boolean]

I wouldn't say I feel immoral at this point. In the past, certainly. But not now. I feel that is one of the very positive aspects of doing hospital volunteering and mentoring. You're truly humbled. I see kind, underprivileged people who truly work their tails off every day just to barely scrape by. I figure if they can find some moral compass, so can I.

 

[knv2u]

Another example is with regard to a recent exam we had. A student who had taken the class last semester had held on to a copy of his exam and decided to share it with a few of us. Of course, one of my coworkers refused to look at the exam because they felt that it was unethical to look past exams and considered it cheating. When I was offered to look at the old exam, I said yes without second thought or reservations. Why not? If an opportunity arises whereby I could potentially score a higher grade because I know the type of questions that are likely to be asked, then why wouldn't I take it? I already studied excessively for the exam, so I don't see the harm.

I absolutely do find this to be unethical, and I consider it cheating personally. Many professors reuse exam questions. I had one professor in college who was like this. By looking at old exams, you are obtaining an unfair advantage over your classmates, and if there is a curve, you are skewing it against other classmates who obtained their grades without an unfair advantage. At my school at least, a professor could easily report you and you would be expelled for this. The only time I think it would be fair game is if you asked the professor ahead of time, and even then I would personally feel badly about the advantage unless the materials were in the public domain.

 

[Boolean]

I absolutely do find this to be unethical, and I consider it cheating personally. Many professors reuse exam questions. I had one professor in college who was like this. By looking at old exams, you are obtaining an unfair advantage over your classmates, and if there is a curve, you are skewing it against other classmates who obtained their grades without an unfair advantage. At my school at least, a professor could easily report you and you be expelled for this. The only time I think it would be fair game is if you asked the professor ahead of time, and even then I would personally feel badly about the advantage unless the materials were in the public domain.

Agreed. I feel this is cheating, and I feel the institution would think similarly. As cliche as it is, the only person you are cheating is yourself. Even if you do not get caught, nothing positive can come of this.

 

[knv2u]

Professors aren't stupid. If they actually allow their exams to be taken home (a lot at my university did not) they EXPECT this type of behavior - they weren't born yesterday. Chances are, they changed the test anyway. Don't see it as cheating (it's not) rather, see it as an opportunity to get a feel for what his tests are like and a good set of practice questions. You are doing NOTHING wrong by looking at these tests.

You would think that; however, it isn't always the case. I learned from other classmates that old exams for one of my courses were available online and about 30-40% of the questions were recycled. I refused to look at the exams prior to taking my own exam.

Edited: The final wasn't cumulative.

 

[Lunasly]

I've actually felt that way before, too. I know, personally, I would answer the common interview question, 'would you turn your best friend in if you found out they cheated on the last exam' very differently in a non-interview situation.

There are doctors out there who commit fraud and cheat the system, and those are the sorts of people med schools are trying to weed out, I guess. I know I would never make any decisions that would put my patients in harms way, and that's what's most important. So to answer your question -- no, I don't necessarily feel like an immoral person.

That's exactly right. I'd never put people in harms way.

I try to live my life the way I can through the decency and morals my parents taught me. For instance, the hospital I volunteer, they have a stack of tickets for free food or subway, you can easily abuse those things, even feeding your friends, no one will stop you or will know, but I don't do this because it's not right . Also at work, I fill out my own timesheets, I can easily cheat on the hours and get more money, but I don't want to do that because my supervisor trusts me.

See and that is where you and I differ. I wouldn't necessarily abuse the system, but would I take a few free subway sandwich coupons? Hell ya I would. Is it wrong? Of course it is. But is anyone else being harmed in the process? No, I don't think so. If anything, I justify that decision by the work I have put into volunteering at that organization.

With regard to the timesheet issue, I wouldn't lie about my hours, but deep down it's not because I think it's morally wrong. I wouldn't do it because of the potential risk of being caught. I have from time to time slightly exaggerated the number of hours I have volunteered (e.g., if I volunteer 3 hours in a day, but write down 4), but its because I was certain that I would' get caught. Perhaps its the pre-med mentality whereby I feel that I have to be better than everyone else. I admit, it's a sick mentality and I am a bit ashamed about it as I know it's wrong, but for some reason I don't find it highly immoral like many others would. It goes back to being self-centered. I want to win and at times I am willing to take a bit of risk to do that, even if my decisions may seem immoral to others. The point is that I don't feel like I am harming anyone in this case.

 

[Member10billion]

Well are you immoral enough to massage the truth at an interview to make yourself seem moral?

I'll massage you're truth 😉

 

[Womb Raider]

I'm really glad to hear that. That's exactly how I feel. I was even having a conversation with them about what they considered cheating. They claimed that if you're married and you even LOOK at another women while walking down the street, then that's considered cheating. They claimed that I made a vow to love my wife and no other woman when I married her. I just wanted to back hand all of them because of how ridiculous that argument was. However, when you have multiple people taking that stance with the exception of yourself, you begin to question your own judgement.

The funny thing is, I go to a very small school and all of the people I know who have been accepted to medical school over the last several years are hardcore religious people (only 8 or so people get interviews each year given how small the university is). I know correlation doesn't = causation, but I can't help but think that I am not as "good" of a person as they are when it comes to dealing with certain issues.

I definitely understand how this feels. It's very hard when you're surrounded by people who are polar opposites, especially when you have no one like yourself to act as a safe haven and reinforce your belief system - eventually, like you described, you start questioning whether something really IS wrong with you.

The best piece of advice I can give you is this:

First, find a good support system, someone(s) you truly look up to and believe to be a genuinely moral person. Bounce these type of issues off of them to get feedback from someone you can relate to and most importantly, aren't afraid of questioning - this will bolster your confidence. If you don't know where to look, your parents are probably the best place to start (at least they were for me).

Second, don't allow yourself to get too worked up with these type of people. Honestly, you just have to laugh it off, silently say a prayer thanking god that you aren't like them, and go on your merry way.

Third, join a fraternity if you haven't already.

 

[Womb Raider]

You would think that; however, it isn't always the case. I learned from other classmates that old exams for one of my courses were available online and about 30-40% of the questions were recycled. I refused to look at the exams prior to taking my own exam.

Lol any college professor who gives back tests for students to keep and doesn't change the test next semester is a total noob. Seriously though, it isn't rocket science. I hope they aren't tenured.

 

[Lunasly]

I absolutely do find this to be unethical, and I consider it cheating personally. Many professors reuse exam questions. I had one professor in college who was like this. By looking at old exams, you are obtaining an unfair advantage over your classmates, and if there is a curve, you are skewing it against other classmates who obtained their grades without an unfair advantage. At my school at least, a professor could easily report you and you be expelled for this. The only time I think it would be fair game is if you asked the professor ahead of time, and even then I would personally feel badly about the advantage unless the materials were in the public domain.

I agree that it is unethical in a sense that it provides an unfair advantage over those who do not have the opportunity to see the exam, but I still don't see a problem doing it. The way I see it is that it's an opportunity to get ahead of those who I am competing against. I don't mean that in a gunner-type of way. It's not like I'd stab someone in the back to get ahead. But if I have access to something that going to help me out, why not take it? You have everything to gain by taking a peek at the exam. You;ve already studied your ass off for it, anyway. Why put yourself at a disadvantage by not taking the advantage?

With regard to the exam I just wrote, I scored nearly 100% and I'll admit that the past exam helped as it resembled many of the questions on the test (not exact, but similar type). The individual who refused to look at the test scored in the low 80's. Granted they didn't study as much as I did, but they would have came out on top had they just looked at the past exam. I can't justify to myself why in the world I wouldn't look at the exam. If you aren't doing it, someone else is.

 

[Boolean]

I agree that it is unethical in a sense that it provides an unfair advantage over those who do not have the opportunity to see the exam, but I still don't see a problem doing it. The way I see it is that it's an opportunity to get ahead of those who I am competing against. I don't mean that in a gunner-type of way. It's not like I'd stab someone in the back to get ahead. But if I have access to something that going to help me out, why not take it? You have everything to gain by taking a peek at the exam. You;ve already studied your ass off for it, anyway. Why put yourself at a disadvantage by not taking the advantage?

It's a matter of principle, which this entire thread is about.

 

[Patros]

Mmm... Asking the big questions, yes? I think you would benefit from reading some of Camus' works on ethics, particularly The Fall. Can you afford to do the right thing always? No excuses ever, for anyone; that's my principle at the outset. I deny the good intention, the respectable mistake, the indiscretion, the extenuating circumstance. As you might guess, this is an interesting thought experiment, but not a feasible way to live life.

My understanding of the matter is this: If you define your morality in terms of individual actions, then you will always fall short because you will never be perfect. But consider the alternative: instead of striving to do good deeds, strive to be a good person. The difference is subtle, but it is a theme that has been echoed for thousands of years, from the ancient Greeks to the New Testament. In other words, if you say "I inadvertently did the wrong thing (e.g. lent out my card and broke the rule), thus I am immoral," you will never stop being immoral because you cannot be perfect. Yet if you say "I am striving to be a good person, and the rules are only a guideline for my actions," you won't find being moral such an impossible task.

If you also happen to be interested in medical ethics, this is the fundamental difference between principle-based ethics (Beauchamps and Childress) and virtue-ethics (Pellegrino and Thomasma). Both sides have their pros and cons, which is what makes the debate interesting.

 

[knv2u]

See and that is where you and I differ. I wouldn't necessarily abuse the system, but would I take a few free subway sandwich coupons? Hell ya I would. Is it wrong? Of course it is. But is anyone else being harmed in the process? No, I don't think so. If anything, I justify that decision by the work I have put into volunteering at that organization.

With regard to the timesheet issue, I wouldn't lie about my hours, but deep down it's not because I think it's morally wrong. I wouldn't do it because of the potential risk of being caught. I have from time to time slightly exaggerated the number of hours I have volunteered (e.g., if I volunteer 3 hours in a day, but write down 4), but its because I was certain that I would' get caught. Perhaps its the pre-med mentality whereby I feel that I have to be better than everyone else. I admit, it's a sick mentality and I am a bit ashamed about it as I know it's wrong, but for some reason I don't find it highly immoral like many others would. It goes back to being self-centered. I want to win and at times I am willing to take a bit of risk to do that, even if my decisions may seem immoral to others. The point is that I don't feel like I am harming anyone in this case.

Yes, there are people being hurt (i.e. the person or organization that you are effectively stealing lunch money from). Also, your second paragraph is particularly troubling. Apparently, everything is fine as long as you haven't been caught, and you don't appear to have a conscience at all. It's almost like you're a sociopath without the violent tendencies. You seem to justify and rationalize immoral behavior, and I can only wonder where this will take you in the medical field. Perhaps it is okay to defraud Medicaid/Medicare/insurance companies, right? Not.

 

[knv2u]

I agree that it is unethical in a sense that it provides an unfair advantage over those who do not have the opportunity to see the exam, but I still don't see a problem doing it. The way I see it is that it's an opportunity to get ahead of those who I am competing against. I don't mean that in a gunner-type of way. It's not like I'd stab someone in the back to get ahead. But if I have access to something that going to help me out, why not take it? You have everything to gain by taking a peek at the exam. You;ve already studied your ass off for it, anyway. Why put yourself at a disadvantage by not taking the advantage?

It sounds more like an Anti-Social Personality/Narcissistic Personality Disorder type of way to me.

 

[Lunasly]

Yes, there are people being hurt (i.e. the person or organization that you are effectively stealing lunch money from). Also, your second paragraph is particularly troubling. Apparently, everything is fine as long as you haven't been caught, and you don't appear to have a conscience at all. It's almost like you're a sociopath without the violent tendencies. You seem to justify and rationalize immoral behavior, and I can only wonder where this will take you in the medical field. Perhaps it is okay to defraud Medicaid/Medicare/insurance companies, right? Not.

Defrauding the medical system is a larger issue in my opinion. Taking one or two subway coupons isn't that big of a deal. I know you might that argue that small decisions like those may eventually lead to larger, riskier decisions, but that isn't true in my case.

With regard to the time sheet issue, I'm not going to write down 400 hours when I only volunteered 40 hours. Even if I wouldn't get caught I still wouldn't do it. However, writing that you volunteered 45 hours when you volunteered 40 isn't that big of a deal in my mind. I am obviously wrong here, but does it make me a highly immoral person?

 

[Boolean]

Defrauding the medical system is a larger issue in my opinion. Taking one or two subway coupons isn't that big of a deal. I know you might that argue that small decisions like those may eventually lead to larger, riskier decisions, but that isn't true in my case.

With regard to the time sheet issue, I'm not going to write down 400 hours when I only volunteered 40 hours. Even if I wouldn't get caught I still wouldn't do it. However, writing that you volunteered 45 hours when you volunteered 40 isn't that big of a deal in my mind. I am obviously wrong here, but does it make me a highly immoral person?

That's just it though. You say it may not be your case, but if you continue on this path, who knows what may come of it. Sure, you may say that fudging a few hours here and there is minimal. Honestly, it may very well be. But it's the basic principle. If you get by doing one thing, you aren't going to want to do another thing that requires more work but the same end result. It's just a matter of principle. Does this make you a bad person? no. Does this make you a highly immoral person? Not necessarily, but it certainly isn't helping you.

 

[knv2u]

Defrauding the medical system is a larger issue in my opinion. Taking one or two subway coupons isn't that big of a deal. I know you might that argue that small decisions like those may eventually lead to larger, riskier decisions, but that isn't true in my case.

With regard to the time sheet issue, I'm not going to write down 400 hours when I only volunteered 40 hours. Even if I wouldn't get caught I still wouldn't do it. However, writing that you volunteered 45 hours when you volunteered 40 isn't that big of a deal in my mind. I am obviously wrong here, but does it make me a highly immoral person?

Yes. And those little dishonest acts can add up and have huge cumulative effects. Look at the auto insurance industry with people that will intentionally cause minor car accidents to have their vehicles fixed or replaced. It does happen. Even minor repairs, added among several policy holders, can equate to a larger problem both ethically and in terms of future insurance premiums for everyone.

 

[knv2u]

With regard to the time sheet issue, I'm not going to write down 400 hours when I only volunteered 40 hours. Even if I wouldn't get caught I still wouldn't do it. However, writing that you volunteered 45 hours when you volunteered 40 isn't that big of a deal in my mind. I am obviously wrong here, but does it make me a highly immoral person?

Also, I knew of a pharmacist who was indicted and lost his or her license for subtly removing a few Oxycontin pills from each order and selling them on the street. Does it matter that he or she only stole a couple at a time and sold them on the street? When someone's kid is harmed in a drug deal gone bad or an overdose because of one of those pills, does it matter that it is only "one little pill"? What about a life long addiction that leads to predictably negative consequences?

Put another way, is it okay to sell prescriptions for narcotics every now and then? One or two every now and then doesn't really matter, right? 🙄

 

[Chipster.]

That's just it though. You say it may not be your case, but if you continue on this path, who knows what may come of it. Sure, you may say that fudging a few hours here and there is minimal. Honestly, it may very well be. But it's the basic principle. If you get by doing one thing, you aren't going to want to do another thing that requires more work but the same end result. It's just a matter of principle. Does this make you a bad person? no. Does this make you a highly immoral person? Not necessarily, but it certainly isn't helping you.

Good point. I heard about this guy who wanted to do some minor lawbreaking to make money for his family but ended up murdering dozens of people.

Made bank tho...



Edit: I think he even may be on SDN... @Walter White where you at?

 

[Lunasly]

It sounds more like an Anti-Social Personality/Narcissistic Personality Disorder type of way to me.

Maybe you're right. I've been so caught up with how competitive medical school have become (I'm from Canada where we only have a few medical schools) over the last few years that I have in some odd way justified some of these decisions that I know are wrong. Of course, this is all in an effort to get ahead. I just don't do it excessively.

It's the same idea with the MCAT. When people tell me that they're going to go with Kaplan and Gold Standard (no offence to these companies), I intentionally don't tell people about other effective prep companies like Berkley Review (Gen Chem, Physics, and OChem) and Princeton Review Verbal Reasoning because I feel that keeping that information to myself puts me at an advantage. I justify not giving them that friendly advice because I am the one that put in the effort to search online for that information. In other words, I do not gain anything by providing them with that information. Does this make me a bad person? I don't think so. But it certainly is indicative how neurotic I have become since beginning this journey. Ultimately, I hate it. It stresses me out and makes me feel insecure about my ability to succeed. But I can't help myself at times because I feel that if I'm not doing it, someone else is. I also realize that my logic if flawed here.

 

[knv2u]

It's the same idea with the MCAT. When people tell me that they're going to go with Kaplan and Gold Standard (no offence to these companies), I intentionally don't tell people about other effective prep companies like Berkley Review (Gen Chem, Physics, and OChem) and Princeton Review Verbal Reasoning because I feel that keeping that information to myself puts me at an advantage. I justify not giving them that friendly advice because I am the one that put in the effort to search online for that information. In other words, I do not gain anything by providing them with that information. Does this make me a bad person? I don't think so. But it certainly is indicative how neurotic I have become since beginning this journey. Ultimately, I hate it. It stresses me out and makes me feel insecure about my ability to succeed. But I can't help myself at times because I feel that if I'm not doing it, someone else is. I also realize that my logic if flawed here.

That's different. There is a difference between being an honest person and being a nice person; the two don't always go hand and hand.

 

[Lunasly]

Also, I knew of a pharmacist who was indicted and lost his or her license for subtly removing a few Oxycontin pills from each order and selling them on the street. Does it matter that he or she only stole a couple at a time and sold them on the street? When someone's kid is harmed in a drug deal gone bad or an overdose because of one of those pills, does it matter that it is only "one little pill"? What about a life long addiction that leads to predictably negative consequences?

Put another way, is it okay to sell prescriptions for narcotics every now and then? One or two every now and then doesn't really matter, right? 🙄

You're completely right, it's all about the principle. It's just in my mind I don't equate selling a few pills on the side with fudging a few volunteer hours to gain an advantage that likely doesn't exists. Ultimately, I agree that these types of actions could potentially lead to actions that you've described. Perhaps I just think that I am a good enough person who wouldn't do that because of the potential consequences. No one is going to die because I fudged a few volunteer hours. You see where I'm coming from?

I'll admit, I'm messed up, lol.

 

[moop]

It's telling that your main concern is how this will affect your interview outcomes, not whether a profession dedicated to the service of the sick and dying is right for someone who readily admits they are selfish.

Choose banking.

Investment* banking. Commercial banking divisions are sorta different.

 

[Boolean]

You're completely right, it's all about the principle. It's just in my mind I don't equate selling a few pills on the side with fudging a few volunteer hours to gain an advantage that likely doesn't exists. Ultimately, I agree that these types of actions could potentially lead to actions that you've described. Perhaps I just think that I am a good enough person who wouldn't do that because of the potential consequences. No one is going to die because I fudged a few volunteer hours. You see where I'm coming from?

I'll admit, I'm messed up, lol.

I think the most important thing here is that you recognize that both situations are ultimately a bit wrong. That's a big step towards a positive direction. Now, not everyone is going to be all holy and virtuous and expect nothing but the utmost level of morals from you, but recognizing that things are not morally right creates a huge difference (albeit, being able to decide against something because it is morally incorrect would be better, but look at that as another step).

 

[deleted407021]

I'm really glad to hear that. That's exactly how I feel. I was even having a conversation with them about what they considered cheating. They claimed that if you're married and you even LOOK at another women while walking down the street, then that's considered cheating.

I was raised in a Baptist church, so I fully understand their mentality. Most of these people won't even acknowledge that humans are in kingdom Animalia, much less the fact that sexually mature males will express mating behavior toward mature females, regardless of their respective statuses within a social construct.
Your sample size is very small, and it just sounds like most of the premeds you know happen to be religious. No correlations there, I'm certain. And I guarantee you that just because someone is religious, does not mean they are "good". Many Christians I know are quick to judge, often hatefully, most anyone who may adhere to a different belief system than themselves. God forbid they're gay or anything else one may not be able to easily wrap one's mind around. We must accept our natural behaviors, but we certainly don't have to act on them always. That is something they have yet to grasp. They are afraid of breaching the long obsolete 10 Commandments and are perhaps hiding within self righteousness.

Now to yourself. You have stated that you wouldn't knowingly do anything to harm another person. That is covering up what you know is immoral. Christ said to love your neighbor as you love yourself. Whether you are a Christian or not, that bit of philosophy is sound. By taking something that was not intended for you, or cheating on hours, you are stealing and lying. It may not have any real bearing in what happens to you because you probably won't get caught, right? However, you asked if you are moral. That concept has nothing to do with what happens to you or where you end up. It has to do solely with your idea of yourself. Is stealing and lying, however petty, showing love for your neighbor? Would you openly do the same to one you love most, such as your closet family and friends? If so, then you are not a moral person. The Eightfold Path (a part of my personal Zen mentality) states that we should not abuse or exploit man or animal for gain. By lying and stealing in order to push yourself closer to a goal, you are doing just that. You aren't harming anyone. No one will die or suffer or exact harm on another being as a result of your small actions, but you will not be doing good. As long as you knowingly and actively fail to love your fellow humans (and non humans), you will fail to be moral.

At least as far as I'm concerned. Do whatever you like.

 

[MedBrah]

Also, I knew of a pharmacist who was indicted and lost his or her license for subtly removing a few Oxycontin pills from each order and selling them on the street. Does it matter that he or she only stole a couple at a time and sold them on the street? When someone's kid is harmed in a drug deal gone bad or an overdose because of one of those pills, does it matter that it is only "one little pill"? What about a life long addiction that leads to predictably negative consequences?

Put another way, is it okay to sell prescriptions for narcotics every now and then? One or two every now and then doesn't really matter, right? 🙄

Lol

Just lol

 

[Lucca]

A moral person does bad things sometimes and then feels awful about it, repents, takes responsibility, and then changes his behavior to not do the bad thing anymore.


An immoral person does bad things sometimes and then keeps doing them.


It sounds like you are conscious of the parts of your values that other people have a problem with, so, no, you are not necessarily a bad person.

 

[knv2u]

Lol

Just lol

It's completely plausible. As long as he doesn't get caught, very little seems off limits for him.

 

[nOchemallday]

This reminds me a lot of an interview question I have heard asked (not to me but to others): "Have you ever done anything illegal?"
To which most premeds immediately respond "No."

Some of the hypotheticals thrown aroun have been the extreme side of unethical so I will present the other extreme of unethical. Seemingly innocuous illegal acts. The assumption of those responding "no" is typically to infer illegality as a) having to be caught for said illegal act and/or b) the act was harmful or in someway a wrong-doing. The question is often used as a trap because it is highly unlikely that you've managed to go your entire 20+ years without doing at least 1 thing illegally - speeding, parking ticket, crossed the sidewalk on a red light, littered, etc. We often disregard any of these things as illegal because of the severity of their harmfulness or because they are foolish under certain circumstances. Of course I'm going to cross the street at a red light in rural nebraska at 11 at night; there's no one there.

If you'll let me define immorality as the act of knowingly commiting illegal acts, it is a @Boolean argument (ironic): either the act was illegal/immoral or it was not. The severity of the act only influences the severity of the consequences if convicted of that act. This is a double-edged sword because if any illegal act is outright immoral then we have all acted immorally and, as some posters in this thread have identified, the severity of the act is inconsequential on its state of immoral or not which thereby damages our credibility as morally sound characters who are qualified to gauge others morality.

I'm not suggesting that severity is moot, rather that some of the conclusions reached ITT seem farfetched to me. Namely:
Does this imply that all of us will escalate to serial murderers because we knowingly break the law?
Does the fact that we knowingly commit these crimes and have no intention to change our actions make us immoral?

My personal recommendation: there is such a thing as karma. Even if there are no harms to others, there are harms to yourself. You perpetuate a menality of dog-eat-dog, "inspiring" others to engage in sabotage. You also threaten your own wellbeing strictly from a physical and psychological perspective - spending time worrying about whether certain actions make you immoral - prolonged stress takes it's toll on the body. And there's always the inherent risk of getting caught when lying; if you lie enough times, eventually you'll get caught.

@'Title: I know I am immoral by way of the boolean nature of illegality, but my life philosophy suggests that I ought to strive for ethical and moral soundness.

TL;DR Ain't no such thing as halfway crooks.

 

[Psai]

Morality is a concept used by the weak to oppress the strong. There's no intrinsic value in suffering or selflessness. There's only power and those who can wield it. Many Christians expouse moral behavior and then you find out later that they don't exactly practice what they preach (look at how the bible belt consumes more gay porn than the rest of the nation).

 

[ZeaL6]

"Guys I don't see the harm in shredding peoples notes and magnetizing their hard drive, it's competitive out there and I need to stay ahead!"

 

[graviton]

"Does anyone feel like they're an immoral person"

No - perks of being a sociopath.

jk

 

[Psai]

"Guys I don't see the harm in shredding peoples notes and magnetizing their hard drive, it's competitive out there and I need to stay ahead!"

There's a huge difference between giving yourself an advantage and interfering with someone else. It's called positive and negative freedom.

 

[ZeaL6]

There's a huge difference between giving yourself an advantage and interfering with someone else. It's called positive and negative freedom.

This is true but if he/she is using previous tests in a class that is curved against your peers and they don't have them that IS interfering with someone else. Obviously I gave a drastic example

 

[touchpause13]

I would have answered the hypotheticals the exact same way as you OP. If a prof gives back tests, there is no way they aren't going to expect people to share them (especially if there is greek life on campus) that's not cheating, it's being resourceful.

And why would you not let your friend go to the gym? Are you just a ****ty friend or what?

The people you work with are a bunch of uptight squares

 

[Psai]

This is true but if he/she is using previous tests in a class that is curved against your peers and they don't have them that IS interfering with someone else. Obviously I gave a drastic example

I guess we shouldn't let anyone use AAMC practice tests for the MCAT since we wouldn't want to interfere with the curve for other people.

 

[Womb Raider]

@touchpause13

Holy **** 3 likes from touchpause in one thread, I had to pinch myself to make sure I wasn't dreaming.

 

[ZeaL6]

I guess we shouldn't let anyone use AAMC practice tests for the MCAT since we wouldn't want to interfere with the curve for other people.

Everyone can have access to the AAMC practice tests because the AAMC provides them for everyone to have if they are purchased. We're not talking about professors selling their previous exams to people that everyone can get (a few professors actually do this at my school).

 

[Boolean]

I guess we shouldn't let anyone use AAMC practice tests for the MCAT since we wouldn't want to interfere with the curve for other people.

They are practice tests for a reason, for practice. Utilizing a test not designated for practice to gain an advantage over other people without consent from the professor is cheating in the eyes of many, including myself.