etbr Posted November 3, 2006 Report Share Posted November 3, 2006 I just got the letter indicating my geographical status... The letter said they determine your status from the autobiographic sketch... Somehow they thought I'm in Ontario eventhough I didn't mention Ontario in my sketch.... anyone had this problem...? If I mail back saying I'm actually out-of-province, what kind of proof do I have to mail along with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonesRN Posted November 4, 2006 Report Share Posted November 4, 2006 I don't think you really need to attach any proof to be re-classified back as an OOP applicant. Just mention the discrepancy and they will verify it through your autobiographical sketch. I think that proof is only necessary to be classified as an Ontario resident because this is a more desirable classification. Now whether one is honest enough to inform the school and potentially place him/herself in a less desirable position for admission is a matter of personal ethical values, which is an entirely different topic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etbr Posted November 5, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2006 haha an ethical situation indeed.... well if i don't tell them the mistake, i might eventually be caught and blacklisted - a really bad consequence... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uofthopeful07 Posted November 6, 2006 Report Share Posted November 6, 2006 haha an ethical situation indeed.... well if i don't tell them the mistake, i might eventually be caught and blacklisted - a really bad consequence... i agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonesRN Posted November 6, 2006 Report Share Posted November 6, 2006 haha an ethical situation indeed.... well if i don't tell them the mistake, i might eventually be caught and blacklisted - a really bad consequence... Well I also agree with you. But I find it interesting how the fear of persecution can tend to sway our ethical inclinations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmellon Posted November 7, 2006 Report Share Posted November 7, 2006 Well I also agree with you. But I find it interesting how the fear of persecution can tend to sway our ethical inclinations... Indeed, the premise should be to do what is morally right. Would you keep $10 extra change from a cashier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonesRN Posted November 7, 2006 Report Share Posted November 7, 2006 Coincidentally, a couple of weeks ago, a cashier gave me back an extra $5 and I pointed the mistake out to her. Now before people start thinking that I'm a saint (or utterly stupid, depending on your perspective), I also once had an assignment which was incorrectly added up giving me a higher mark that I actually deserved. In this case, I didn't say anything and kept the higher mark. So in fact, I created a double standard with regards to moral actions. Is this right? That's open to debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuantum Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 Coincidentally, a couple of weeks ago, a cashier gave me back an extra $5 and I pointed the mistake out to her. Now before people start thinking that I'm a saint (or utterly stupid, depending on your perspective), I also once had an assignment which was incorrectly added up giving me a higher mark that I actually deserved. In this case, I didn't say anything and kept the higher mark. So in fact, I created a double standard with regards to moral actions. Is this right? That's open to debate... In those two situations, you had two options. In the store situation, you weighed the pros vs. the cons. The pros being you have an "extra" five dollars, the cons being its wrong. Further on the con, I think you gave it back with the subconcious notion that if you can steal $5 dollars, what else can you steal. The possibility of that was enough for you to lay off that slippery slope and just give the money back. In the test situation, you weighed the pros against the cons again. The pros being you have an extra five marks, the cons being you don't get that five marks. In this situation, you don't look at it in the same way as the store situation because you didn't cheat on the test (the teacher made a mistake) and this is a rare occurence so you aren't in danger of starting on some slippery slope of academic dishonesty. Also, the fact that you get extra marks is enough excitement that you think it might be a little silly to just throw them away. This is university afterall and you need all the marks you can get. Was it the right thing to do? No it wasn't. Are you a bad person because it? Probably not because others won't really see you as a cheater because so many of us would have done the same thing. Now in the first situation if you hadn't given the money back, I'd consider you a filthy, dirty liar. J/K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonesRN Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 Now in the first situation if you hadn't given the money back, I'd consider you a filthy, dirty liar. J/K. Well then it's a good thing that I gave the money back b/c I would really hate to lose the respect of of some random guy on an pre-med forum internet site...I really dodged a bullet there But seriously though, the 2 situations are not as different as you point them out to be. You said that I was justified in the test example b/c the teacher made the mistake and it's a rare occurrence, and besides...we could all use a few extra marks, right? But in the store situation, the cashier is the one who made the mistake (not me) and this is also a rare occurrence. It can be argued, with the same reasoning, that who couldn't use a little bit of extra money? So in the end, I think we all take our moral and ethical beliefs, however strong or firm they may be, and modify their usage and importance in specific situations. Is this right? In theory...no. In practicality...maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satsuma Posted November 8, 2006 Report Share Posted November 8, 2006 I am procrastinating here....but this was a thread with some intersting food for thought. I wonder if the difference between the 2 scenarios is in the case of an exam, people often feel that some questions were not justified or clear, or that they knew something and just couldn`t remember it or just didn`t explain it right. Marks on exams seem a little grey in terms of really representing what we know. So maybe we would tend to feel more like, well, as though we easily could have gotten those extra 5 marks...cause we knew the material and just ran out of time or whatever. For the store scenario, the price of the item is black and white. Also, there is the cashier who will be penalized for the shortage at the end of the day...and the prof will suffer no consequences. OK well, back to studying. Hopefully I'll remember to come back here, but since I don`t go to MAC, I probably won't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonesRN Posted November 9, 2006 Report Share Posted November 9, 2006 Hey Sats, Your arguments raise some good points and I believe they have some merit to them. Yes, exam results tend to be subjective and it can be argued that a different marker may have assigned a higher grade. But I think using arguments like this, only further substantiates my previous point that our moral inclinations are modified in specific circumstances. Through the very process of attempting to justify what is considered morally wrong, we form arguments (or excuses) which lessen the importance of of our moral beliefs in that situation. I'm not saying that this is bad, because certainly we all do it. With regards to the rammifications of our actions (cashier losing her job/no consequences for prof), I really don't think we have the mentality of 'what's best for these third parties' at heart, at least at the time of the incident. Most people will do what they personally feel is right for themselves in the specific circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.