In the ethics committee discussion, what is the proposed assumption about the recognition of both parties involved in cheating?

The assumption about the recognition of both parties involved in cheating being "not made" indicates that during the ethics committee discussion, there may not be a clear acknowledgment or acceptance of the involvement of both parties in the cheating act. This suggests that there might be ambiguity surrounding the situation, leading to different interpretations or perceptions about the actions of the individuals involved.

If the recognition of both parties was made, it would imply a consensus or agreement on the culpability of both individuals, which is not the case here. By stating that the recognition is not made, it also highlights the complexities often encountered in ethical discussions, where the dynamics of personal responsibility, intent, and the nature of the actions may lead to differing views.

This lack of clear recognition can further complicate the committee's ability to address the issue effectively, as understanding the roles of each party is crucial for fair assessment and resolution. The term "not made" underscores the potential for misunderstanding or lack of clarity that can exist in such discussions.