Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back
Back

Welcome to Live Chat

Welcome to LiveWebTutors Services, World's leading Academic solutions provider with Millions of Happy Students.

Call Back
logo

24x7 Support Available

To Get the Best Price Chat With Our Experts

chat now

In A Hurry? Get A Callback

logo

Our Buggy Moral Code

icon

Table OF Contents:-

  • Personal Fudge Factor
  • Difference between in-group behavior along with the out-group behavior
  • Opinions
  • Conclusion
  • References

Personal fudge factor and its demonstration

The personal fudge factor discussed here is the cheating and the rationality of the people who creates riots (Li, 2016). The demonstration is that scientific logic behind the functionality of the brain, to misjudge or act in a certain manner, to keep others and one happy. It discusses how cheating a little bit tends to create an expression of happiness and improving morality. The speaker also took the example of Enron business which cheated upon millions of funds from an investor through inflated accounting scandal. To understand the clauses of the cheating, one needs to evaluate how much money would be earned, the probability of getting caught along with the relevant punishment given if caught in the act of dishonesty.  The brain tends to work in the rationality framework of the cost-benefit analysis framework and tends to keep on checking clauses of cheating or not. It tends to also manipulate and ascertain all such factors which would be lead to check the sensitivity of the situation. Within the mind, there would always be two voices which would be debating to cheat or not.

The difference between in-group behavior along with the out-group behavior

The difference between the in-group behavior and the out-group behavior was dependent on the amount of cheating done with respect to small or high numbers involved. The group was given a piece of paper and told, that each individual would be only able to answer 4 questions and people tends to cheat when told that each question would be paid $ 4 and a total of easy 20 questions would be given (Taibi, 2015). On determining, it was found two groups which were a number of people cheating with 5 or 7 were high in comparison to people who were cheating with 12 or more questions. This shows behavior and a general tendency to cheat which can help to understand people rationality.

Opinion

In my opinion, people do cheat but it is individual behavior, factors around him, upbringing, status and the even the environment in which he/she sustain, tends to influence the cheating behavior. The falling into the specific group or having a specific behavior would be dependent on the individual factors then getting influenced by the group behavior. Often cheating gives an adrenaline rush and a sudden jolt of happiness, but an individual should have a  tendency to overcome the negative feeling or behavior (Ariely, 2019). Cheating in any form is a negative thing and by giving it a feeling, it is actually making a negative behavior or attribute of a  person. Even if the person tends to fall into the behavior of cheating, it is important to interpret the end result and associate it with the outcome. I agree with the findings shown by the video, which tends to analyze and introspect the cheating behavior of a group and the tendency of the individual. Each and every outcome should be checked from the cost and benefit analysis, which would help in determining the real course of action.

Conclusion

 Going into the cheating trap is like a vicious circle, which would only make a cumbersome situation for an individual to follow. It is important that the initial punishment or legal actions should be strict, as it becomes a prime determinant for the future cheatings. The moral outcomes and the future repercussions of doing a wrong act or misconduct should be reviewed in order to determine the behavior and tendency of repeating cheating acts.

References
  • Ariely, D. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2019, from https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_on_our_buggy_moral_code
  • Li, Y., Gao, Y., & Zhang, D. (2016). To Speak Like a TED Speaker--A Case Study of TED Motivated. Higher Education Studies6(1), 53-59.
  • Taibi, D., Chawla, S., Dietze, S., Marenzi, I., & Fetahu, B. (2015). Exploring TED talks as linked data for education. British journal of educational technology46(5), 1092-1096.

Upload Assignment

250 words

side

Get Your Assignment

Don’t delay more, place your order now. Quick assignment help will be offered to you.

Order Now