Depends if you take a consequentialist, deontological, or virtue ethic perspective. The consequentialist would say that cheating is justified when it benefits more people than harmed, the deontoligist would say that cheating is never justified, and the virtue ethicist would say that cheating displays poor character so it is not justified.

A 'gene' has no concept of (the 'childish' notions of) 'cheating' or 'playing fair'.
There are only two prime directives for a gene; survive and reproduce (like a 'belief').
You are merely one gene's means of reproducing.
Welcome to evolution.

Well, you know what, sometimes I think for classes that really don't apply to you (the majority of general ed), if you supplement time away from studying to learn more practical/beneficial things to your life, then I think it could be argued. I don't want to condone cheating, and if one accepts the risk, they deserve the consequences if caught. But sometimes, if it doesn't affect a curve, I don't see reasons why not to do it, especially if the class isn't really of ANY moral significance. However, personal values lie in each and everyone so I can't really speak on others behalf. I just hated general ed. - A

thanks guys! I got an extra few more minutes using this!

too late? Cheating is always justified, as all injustice is always justified... What is just is just on its face, its front and back... Only injustice requires the extra effort...What people do is a function of what they are and how they conceive of themselvses... Honorable people are not honorable because it is easy, but because honor is desirable to them... It is not that the things they want would not give them pleasure, but a more profound pleasure is arrived at by honor and the honorable conduct of ones life... If it does not matter, and does not seem to matter then sugar is both sweet and bad for you, but what a person does to themselves having no consequences for others cannot be considered unjust, as justice is a form of relationship...On theother hand; If they would cheat for sugar, they would cheat for shet; and the reason is simple: their self conception does not involve their community... Since they see themselves opposed to society, as outlaws, as individuals in the American sense always are, not heroes, but anti heroes... Generally more like anti-hotdogs...

Justification is made by those who are intent on somehow making an exception out of whatever they're doing. So, it varies whether it would be "justified" or not based on what set of moral standard you're comparing the act to. I personally don't cheat, as being caught would cause serious problems for my future, but I see it as a strategy of sorts. One that is looked down upon by polite society, but a valid strategic path nonetheless...

People cheat because honesty leaves you at the bottom.

No it does not...Even in our society no one is dispised more that a proven cheat and liar.... Okay, we presume that people who do well cheat and lie... Actually they swim in a particular liquid that is foreign to most... If they could conceive of all of humanity as a family their behavior might be offensive to them... Since the conceive of themselves as human as they do not conceive of others, all their behavior is justified... They still have to be better than others at what they do, even if that means cheating; but that is no mean feat since there are so many with the same attitude... But our economy ecourages such behavior, and often people are deformed by their condititions.... We do not tolerate murderers and we should not tolerate any other anti social behavior...Honor is an old idea, and a universal idea...We have it as an idea, a moral form because humanity finds it essential... If dishonor becomes the norm, as it may well be; then police must be everywhere, and the law caourts must forever be busy enforcing even the most basic decencies, and obligations... In other words, each man will be forced to be his own cop because society cannot support so many cops...Where I live, in this county, law enforcement of every sort is the largest part of the budget by far...If you count the military as international police you see how extreme the problem is... We have a society that encourages anti social behavior on a vast scale while breaking down the traditional methods of social control...To say it does not work is the understatement of all time...

In a society of cheats, everybody cheats... My wife was standing by a woman at a yard sale.. She picked up an old purse for sale for a quarter, and when she looked inside she found a big roll of twenties.. Which she quickly turned over to the owner... It is not uncommon to be honest, and for me pointless to be otherwise... But we accept so much that goes on because we know that if we made an issue of all that was wrong it would totally consume our lives... We accept much, but try to do little that is dishonorable, but if we are honest we always know we could and should do more...

A couple of quick thoughts on this if I might.

I was thinking about what cheating is. Cheating, in just a popular, off-the-cuff sort of definition, I'd say is "going against the rules" for where some 'rules' are in place. 'Rules' are what a society, group or other gathering of people have established (or had established for them). Whether or not such 'rules' are legitimate, right, wrong, justified, make sense or have any bearing isn't relevant just yet.

So when I "cheat" at something, I do something that's 'not allowed' by some standard or another.
[INDENT] I think that in the sense where rules exist to protect individual rights, a concept of fairness or cooperation, 'cheating' would generally be a bad thing. Where such 'rules' are arbitrary, forced, unjustified or otherwise ill-established, 'cheating' wouldn't have any bad connotation in practice. These factors all depend on who's making the call, of course (and what standard they're using)
[/INDENT]Any judgment of cheating as good or bad would be contingent on (1) the details of the situation, (2) the rules/taboos/guidelines/mores in place -and- (3) the mind of the judger and what standard they use to judge good, bad, just and unjust by. Combine these together and ultimately you come up with a formula that is relative (situation and ethical standard).

Always the devil's in the details.

Cheating is a non prescribed way to the goal. When the goal alone and not the path is rewarded or appreciated, it kind of makes sense to use its own way of getting to goal.

And +1 for Khethil's nice post above.

Where money is dear honor is cheap, but it is wrong to think we can live without it... Where money is impossible to find, honor is the most essential quality.... They are different economies, and different forms of relationship, but the difference is that humanity has survived an honor economy.... Because money justifies every sort of behavior, no one can say what it will do to us... We should never draw a line between wealth and power, and what was done to get that wealth and power..... The means justifies the end...