Apropos of nothing - a random HP thought.

[ridicully]

Where does half the fandom get the impression that Harry is cheating by using a book with notes in it?

They are allowed to use their book while brewing and are supposed to have read up on the potion they are preparing in class.
And in written tests, I doubt they are allowed to use their books anyway, so the notes won't be any help to him there.
The only difference I see between Harry and a Ravenclaw (in this instance) is that the Ravenclaw would have made the notes himself - and probably not in the book, but on a spare bit of paper.

Having better reference material is rarely considered cheating. No matter how much of an advantage it gives you.

Comments

[asphodel-ale.livejournal.com]

Actually, it is cheating, not because there are notes in the book, but because he is using what is essentially a stolen book--the agreement was that he was to use that book only until his own came in. Turning in a new book in place of the old isn't sufficient: it'd be like swapping covers on a Gutenberg Bible with a modern one--the value of the insides isn't equal. (Religious value aside, of course.)

Had he asked permission to keep the old one and been granted it, everything would have been perfectly acceptable, morally speaking.

(Note: A higher moral standard would have been to get that permission, then use it to do the equivalent of the DA, only with potions.)

[ridicully]

But is using a stolen book actually cheating?
Isn't it mereley wrong because of the stealing? *g*

[conuly]

It's stealing, but it's not cheating.

[asphodel-ale.livejournal.com]

Well, it's definitely stealing, but I consider it cheating because he went against the agreement with his teacher. Had he gotten the book from anyone else, it'd have just been plain stealing.

[conuly]

It might be cheating in the sense of "going against an agreement", but it's not cheating in the academic sense. Since the terminology is confusing, I won't use the word at all.