To make society work ,you have to convince at least 85% of them not to cheat since no one will want to work.We are fast reaching a situation where more are willing to cheat and our social and thus economic system is under threat.
When you can't trust those with whom you do business,no amount of law making or legality will counter this imbalance.Eventually our society will become dysfunctional.

Perhaps the old fogeys knew a bit more about values and morality than we are willing to admit?

I tend to distinguish between morals and ethics. Morals equates to much for me with sexual codes handed down from a religion. It so often appears that people who go to great pains about their morals can have ethics that let them choose to harm others for their own gain. There are those who have morals which would appear to be an abomination to the religious and yet have great ethics and I know which I would rather have as a friend.

Comments made by Arjay brought to mind how little regard their appears to be for some law's except where a penalty is looming. There is one intersection I cross on my way to work at which very few people wait for the "Walk" sign at the pedestrian crossing, most of the time I do but if I'm running late for the train? Trivial item and most of us probably sit at deserted intersections in our car when the lights are against us (and wonder why) but it does give pause for thought. Walking against the lights is normally a victimless crime as much as any is but does it reflect something about the way we are going with regard to behaviour?

Not sure I agree with you on the moral/ethical split. In my view, morals are about a personal attitude towards right and wrong - and not necessarily only sexual right and wrong, even though the concept of immorality is most often associated with that aspect.

I see ethics as a more codified version of morals, extended from the individual to the group. Which tends to be why otherwise moral and upright citizens sometimes act unethically within a business - they have abandoned their moral standards in favour of conforming to the group dynamic.

And as with business (government, media etc.) so it is with schools and exams. If the ethic is to cheat, otherwise moral people will simply "go along" with it, unless they bring with them a sufficiently strong moral code from home.

Fifteen years ago I worked for a company that lacked any sense of ethics at a corporate level - they are now, as a direct result of this, regarded as one of the most successful companies in the world. I chose to work within my moral values, and as a result was fired within a year. If I had been just a little more desperate to stay employed, I could have buried my morality and become successful too, the only penalty being my own sense of fair play. It is a choice I would make again, too, not from any sense of piety or holier-than-thou-ness, but because my morality was out of synch with their ethics and made it impossible for me to be productive in the way they wanted me to be.

The same applies to exam cheats, only it is even more difficult for them to "buck the system".

Sad but true....
My late father was a wonderful man; kind hearted, selfless, highly ethical/ moral, etc. He pretty much stuck to his convictions thoughout his life, alot of which I didn't agree with , but thats not unusual. ;) I do have the highest admiration for his ability to stick to his guns.

Unfortunately he was a small businessman. Whilst he certainly stuck to his guns, his competitors used (what he considered to be) "unethical" methods. Indeed sometimes such methods were often dishonest and barely, if at all, legal. :O So predictably, my father went under. He did have a small core of customers who stayed loyal to him and his principals, however, these people were elderly nursing home residents and were therefore part of a "dying breed", if you like. Whilst his sound ethical business principals and practise were fine for 1950's and 60's Australia, the 1970's and 80's were not kind. The 90's well....
at least he began to work for someone else, until it was time to retire. Even then the boss treated him like crap, but he plodded along as usual, bless him.

My father passed away in the late 90's. If he were still alive today, he would be struggling finacially. He lost his super as well as his business. Whilst I do NOT condem my father for his strict ethical and moral convictions(the personal qualities of somebody are paramount really, not his or her profit margin), you have to eat at the end of the day.

The point of this story? Is it any wonder young people cheat and lie their way through school, uni and er... life, when the way our society is structured alvolves "getting ahead" and using virtually any means possible?

Cheers all!

Pericles, your comments make a lot of sense. I probably use the differentiation between morals and ethics to try and step away from morality being defined by "christian sexual codes". For me cheating is wrong because of the betrayal of trust rather than what gets put where.

Behaving ethically can certainly cost when dealing with someone who does not choose to do so. Don't ever try it on for size in a Family Law dispute, it is heartbreaking.

I hold with the view that the manner I choose to live is the one thing in my life I can truly control. The willingness to suffer harm rather than give into wrongdoing is a mark of something which seems to be of value (don't really like the harm part though). Giving in to wrongdoing for expediency is a slippery slope that can be hard to step back from.