Prosecuting artful writing: another clever plagiarist bites the dust...
Via Leo Strauss?
(Image from Wikipedia)
A legitimately late paper crossed my desk last week and finally got graded today though I had to come in to my office to check its sources since our home modem stopped working during the weirdnight hours between 12 and 3, when all sorts of mysterious things occur.
Perhaps the modem got bumped off in the night by one of those bump-in-the-night things that we've often heard about.
Enough metaphysics. On to quotidian stuff.
Students will try to be clever, but cleverness, like youth, is wasted on the young. Here's what the late paper had to say about "The Contradiction of the Hobbesian System" -- better titled "Contradictions of the Hobbesian System" -- in a section titled '2nd Hypothesis Is Wrong: Natural Rights Don't Exist':
[I]n my opinion, natural right doesn't exist in [the] real world. All rights are created by humans and are therefore [by] definition "artificial." Sympathizers of natural rights, particularly Hesselberg and Rothbard, have responded that reason can be applied to separate truly axiomatic rights from postulated rights, saying that any principle that requires itself to be disproved is a self-evident truth.
The student then cites Leo Strauss on this point:
Strauss, Leo. Natural Right And History, University of Chicago Press, 1965
Some of the material cited sounded like a quote, so I Googled "Rothbard, have responded" and found this:
Proponents of natural rights, in particular Hesselberg and Rothbard, have responded that reason can be applied to separate truly axiomatic rights from supposed rights, stating that any principle that requires itself to be disproved is an axiom.
Interesting. Let's look carefully at the student's version and at this one, with the identical wording red-fonted:
Sympathizers of natural rights, particularly Hesselberg and Rothbard, have responded that reason can be applied to separate truly axiomatic rights from postulated rights, saying that any principle that requires itself to be disproved is a self-evident truth.
Proponents of natural rights, in particular Hesselberg and Rothbard, have responded that reason can be applied to separate truly axiomatic rights from supposed rights, stating that any principle that requires itself to be disproved is an axiom.
Hmmm ... hard to get that close without copying. Yet, the student copied not from Strauss but from ... Wikipedia, specifically, from the entry on "Natural Rights," under the section 'Criticism.'
Even the citation -- "Strauss, Leo. Natural Right And History, University of Chicago Press, 1965" -- was copied directly from Wikipedia's 'Sources'!
As an aside, let me note that the student was 'misled' by the section heading 'Criticism' into thinking that Hesselberg and Rothbard were critics of natural rights when, in fact, they were proponents being criticized.
Let's see ... egregious plagiarism, false attribution, and utter misunderstanding. This poor student has commited the academic equivalent of sinning against the Holy Ghost -- and thus stands wholly no ghost of a chance to pass this assignment.
The flesh may have been willing -- my student worked pretty hard otherwise -- but, alas, the spirit itself was weak.
posted by Horace Jeffery Hodges @ 3:43 PM
10 comments
10 Comments:
Very interesting. Do the students' Korean professors take an equally dim view of plagiarism?
Anonymous,
From what my students have told me, the answer seems to be, "Probably not."
There are, of course, exceptions-- profs who actually care.
Kevin
A sure cop this one. In the face of your bloodhound-authority, Hobbes would urge your student to obey the law...I imagine.
Anonymous, I don't know and haven't gathered up enough courage to ask the Korean professors, but like Kevin, I'd say that based on students' remarks, the Korean professors -- generally speaking -- don't make much of it.
I've also been told by students that I'm one of the few professors who actually gives copious feedback: corrections, questions, suggestions. and various other 'shuns.'
Tangentially relevant, I might add that one place where I taught -- to remain unnamed -- two professors required their students to memorize 60 English sentences per week, which the students had to recall in class on a weekly test. They also had to give the Korean equivalent ... but also memorized. If I recall, the test was multiple choice, but perhaps not. Anyway, this was considered a sound method for teaching English.
So ... I'd say that in much of Korea, the universities don't yet meet global (i.e., Western) standards.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Kevin, as you know from my reply to anonymous, I share your impression.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Eshuneutics, without me, it'd be a dog-eat-dog world.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Busted! Cool!
It's tough for professors everywhere.
CIV, one has to be mean to be meaningful.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
"Let's see ... egregious plagiarism, false attribution, and utter misunderstanding. This poor student has committed the academic equivalent of sinning against the Holy Ghost -- and thus stands wholly no ghost of a chance to pass this assignment."
You forgot one thing... the paper was late. The holy trinity of academic sins, plus one.
Joe in Korea, that'd be one more strike against the student ... except that I'd given permission in advance because the student was gone to Singapore on official Korea University business.
Probably a conference on anti-corruption...
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Post a Comment
<< Home