Are you a cheater? It's never so cut and dry.

"Cheaters never prosper".
"Cheaters never win.  Winners never cheat."

We've been told this since we were kids. Competition is important, but what's more important is to compete honestly and fairly.  We were taught that cheating is wrong and that even if we benefit in the short term, in the long run we lose.

That's debatable.

What's more fundamental really is defining what actually constitutes cheating?  Where do we draw the line between cheating and simply being creative within the confines of the rules?

Let's take sports as an example. In most high-level competitions, athletes are not allowed to take certain substances that modify their bodies' chemistry and allow them to enhance their performance. However, athletes are allowed to do resistance training and cardiovascular exercises.  Those activities will result in changes in their bodies' chemistry, composition, strength and endurance. This will eventually enhance their performance. The latter's not considered cheating, but the mechanism is pretty similar (albeit slower).

What if an athlete drinks a couple of cups of coffee or takes a "pre-workout supplement" filled with stimulants right before starting a resistance training work out?  Their body chemistry's changed.  They're more stimulated and able to lift more weight, for more repetitions, and for a longer period of time.  Being able to work out that way will of course have the result of enhancing future performance. Is that cheating?

Let's take it a step further.  When it was finally proven that Lance Armstrong was on PEDs when he won multiple back-to-back Tour de France races, they cycling association tried to award the win to the cyclist who came in second place.  Except that guy was also on PEDs.  So they tried to give it to guy in third place, who they found was also on PEDs.  They had to go all the way down to the person in 17th place or something similar to find someone who wasn't "cheating".  But in that case, if almost everyone is on PEDs, can we still say that it's cheating if someone gets caught using prohibited substances?

Or what about in business?  Sure, there are rules and laws to prevent quid pro quo practices and ensure that no bribery or corruption happens to ensure that competition between companies are fair when interacting with clients.  But ask anyone working in a sales job about "relationship building activities".

Can you consider having a meal or even a coffee with clients a quid pro quo practice?  What about organizing and sponsoring special events for clients?  Or inviting them to your company's special private box at major sporting events and concerts? Or how about paying for a round of golf with a client? Can we honestly say that businesses aren't engaging in these activities to get something in return from their clients?  If so, is that really cheating or just improving business relationships?

It is possible to set rules to ensure that specific behaviours are discouraged and cheating is well-defined. Sure, you could work perfectly by the book all the time to ensure that you're not cheating. The problem is, when you're trying to win at such a high level, no matter what the field, your competitors are going to be operating within the gray areas between the strict application of the rules and cheating. So if you decide to stay away from that area, you're putting yourself at a disadvantage.

The Near Impossibility of Being a "Good Person"

Unless you've been diagnosed as a clinical sociopath or psychopath, it's usually not your intention to cause other people harm.  I genuinely believe that the majority of people do something with the end goal of doing something good for their family, their friends or even for themselves.  If they end up doing something harmful to others, it's usually because it's the side-effect of their original intention to do good.

The problem is that in our world today, it's almost impossible to "do good" for one or two people without causing unintended harm to a whole bunch of others.

Let's use a simple example of a "good deed".  Let's say that this weekend, I decide to surprise my wife by making her a delicious breakfast in bed made up of her favourite foods: bacon, scrambled eggs, avocado toast, and crepes topped with Nutella and fruit.

Seems like a nice, unselfish and harmless gesture, right?  Not quite.

Bacon requires raising and killing a relatively intelligent, sentient animal. The raising of pigs produces a lot of waste, mainly rivers of pig feces.  It causes water pollution that kills fish in surrounding lakes and rivers, damaging local ecosystems. This also pollutes the air and causes a permanent, nasty smell for people living nearby.

Most eggs (unless they're free range) come from chickens that are stuck in little cages and barely see the light of day their entire lives.  The chickens are usually pumped with antibiotics and hormones to keep them "productive" and prevent illnesses caused by their terrible living conditions.

The avocado on her toast usually are imported from Mexico because they don't grow in Canada.  What most people don't know is that a large amount of avocado farms are now either under the control of or being extorted by Mexican drug cartels. A lot of profits from avocado sales are now going to these violent cartels.  This means a lot of the avocados coming to Canada and the USA are helping fund murder, extortion, smuggling, kidnapping, rape and slave labour.  Of course, transporting avocados from Mexico to Canada requires the use of fossil fuels and does leave a significant carbon footprint.

What about the crepes? Aside from the problematic eggs and milk that I use to make the actual crepes, the problem is the Nutella that my wife loves to eat.  One of the main ingredients of Nutella is palm oil.  While the Nutella website does say that they use "sustainable palm oil", I'm not sure how credible that is.  In any case, the production of palm oil requires deforestation of rain forests in Southeast Asia.  Sure the palm farms create jobs, but it's causing many species like orangutans to become endangered.

Then there's the breakfast itself. Yes, it's delicious (I'm an amazing cook, after all). But it's also a meal that's full of sugar, carbs and trans fat. So while she may enjoy the well-intentioned gesture and the taste of it, I'm actually contributing to the decline of her future health.

I love my wife and I want to find small ways to make her happy on a daily basis. This simple gesture that seems like a "good act" will help do just that. However, with all the unintended consequences, I would have done more harm than good in the world.

The same can be said about sending your mother flowers, volunteering abroad to build houses, and donating canned goods to charity.

Despite our desire to do good, today the old adage is more true than ever: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."  We can do the smallest nice things for our friends and families, but in the process, the choices we make to get to those nice small things end up causing more harm to the environment, to other people living far away from us, and future generations.