Engineering 6101 – Lecture I

Introduction to Ethics

A Case:  Unlicensed Engineer (47)

For a long time, Charles Landers carried out projects and signed documents as though he were a professional engineer

He was found out and charged with fraud, falsifying documents, etc.

The work he did as an ‘engineer’ was done very competently.

Landers was convicted. 

How harshly should he be sentenced?

Why?

Ethics   

Branch of Philosophy

Study of right and wrong/good and bad

Socrates (469-399BC)

Central Question = “How should I live?”

Professional Ethics

Professional Ethics

Study of right and wrong/good and bad in a particular professional context.

Study of right and wrong/good and bad as they apply to professionals when acting in their professional roles

‘General’ Ethics vs. Professional Ethics

Notice that what ‘general’ ethics and professional ethics tell us to do in a particular case may differ

E.g., a lawyer’s obligation not to release information that incriminates his client

Ultimately, however, professional ethics must be justified in terms of ‘general’ ethics

Engineering Ethics

Engineering Ethics

A particular form of professional ethics

Study of right and wrong/good and bad in engineering contexts.

Study of right and wrong/good and bad as they apply to engineers when acting as engineers

Professional Codes of Ethics

Rules of conduct for particular professions

Have quasi-legal status

Can Be Helpful Guides, if Well Developed

Not our focus

Our focus is on what (should) lie behind professional codes of ethics

What Do We Mean By Studying Right and Wrong?     

Two Approaches:

1. Descriptive:  recording the ethical attitudes of particular individuals or groups

E.g., what does the APEGN Code say?

Doesn’t ask whether we should listen to those ethical attitudes, e.g., doesn’t endorse or reject the APEGN Code

What Do We Mean By Studying Right and Wrong?

Two Approaches

2. Normative:  investigating what people’s ethical attitudes (and actions) should be

Some would say ‘investigating the facts of morality’

Note:  for our purposes ‘moral’ and ‘ethical’ are interchangeable terms

Our Project:  Normative Ethics

In this class, our focus will be on normative engineering ethics, i.e., how people should behave in engineering contexts.

A big question: ‘uhhhh....how people should behave in engineering contexts, according to whom?’

According to Whom?             

1st answer:  Normative Ethics ask how we should behave in engineering contexts if we want to be ethically decent people.

‘OK, but what determines what an ethically decent person is?’

2nd Answer:  Shut up.

Ethical Value and Other Values

Ethical value is not the only sort of value

e.g., aesthetic value

Many would claim however that ethical value is the most important sort of value

Another important sort:  legal value

What is the relationship between ethics and law?

Legal Value

Shares many of the basic concepts of ethical value

rights

obligations

justice

Differs in some respects from ethical value

sanctions and enforcement

source

Illegal vs. Immoral 1

If it’s illegal, is it immoral?

Ethics provides the backdrop for law.  In order for laws to be legitimate they must ultimately be ethically defensible.

Some legally prohibited things are clearly immoral (e.g., killing for fun), others only because the legal prohibition is broadly ethically defensible (e.g., driving when the light is red).

Illegal vs. Immoral 1

If it’s immoral, should it be illegal?

Telling lies is in most cases immoral, but should it really be made illegal?

Moral Value is broader than Legal Value

Law is about not being bad.

Morality is about being decent.

Ethical Analysis

Three elements to focus on

Facts, principles, concepts

When encountering ethical disagreement or conflict, it is important to identify the source of the conflict

Does it arise from differences about facts, principles or concepts?

Facts, Principles and Concepts     

Facts = the concrete details of the situation being considered

Principles = the moral rules or norms that are relevant to the situation described by the facts

Concepts = the categories that have to be interpreted when deciding what the facts & principles tell us about the situation

Facts

e.g., Landers was not a certified engineer.

What about ‘Landers was reckless’?

Facts are supposed to be about description, not evaluation

Some, particularly in the late 20th century, asked whether there was any such thing as pure description.

Principles

The moral ‘rules’

e.g., Do not mislead people

Next session we will consider the source of such principles

Concepts

The ideas we must apply in interpreting the facts and principles

E.g., reckless

Certified

Resolving Moral Disagreement

In an important sense disagreements about facts are the easiest sort of moral disagreement to resolve.

Disagreements about principles may be the hardest sort to resolve