GENG 201

ETHICS MODULE
Introduction
 Module will focus on professional ethics, not personal ethics or common 3
morality.

May 6, 2024
 Engineering is a profession by some definitions of professionalism and not
as clearly a profession by other definitions.
 Ethical commitment is central to most accounts of professionalism.
 Professional ethics has several characteristics that distinguish it from
personal ethics and common morality.
 Possible conflicts between professional ethics, personal ethics, and
common morality raise important moral questions.
 Professional engineering ethics can be divided into a negative part, which
focuses on preventing disasters and professional misconduct, and a
positive part, which is oriented toward producing a better life for
humankind through technology.
 4
The Engineering Profession & Ethics

May 6, 2024
 You are not being asked to study general ethics but engineering ethics.

 A profession is a number of individuals in the same occupation

voluntarily organized to earn a living by openly serving a moral ideal in a
morally permissible way beyond what law, market, morality, and public
opinion would otherwise require.

 Engineering is not only an occupation, it is a profession that has special

characteristics: Extensive training, vital knowledge & skills, control of
services, autonomy in the workplace & claim to ethical regulation.

 All professions are occupations. Some occupations are professions.

 5
Two Models of Professionalism

May 6, 2024
 The Business Model
 Make profit within the boundaries set by law.
 Gain a monopoly over certain services to increase profit.
 Persuade governmental regulators that a great deal of autonomy should
be granted in the workplace.

 The Professional Model

 Implicit trust relationship with the public (Social contract).
 Hold paramount the safety, health & welfare of the public.
 May seek monopoly or at least considerable control, but this is in order
to protect the public from incompetent providers. In return, the public
confers on professionals a number of benefits.
 6
Three Types of Ethics or Morality

May 6, 2024
 Common Morality
 The set of moral beliefs shared by almost everyone.
 Characteristics: Precepts are negative (Don’t do), contain a positive or aspirational
component (Help, prevent …) and distinction between actions & intentions.

 Personal Morality
 The set of moral beliefs that a person holds.
 Beliefs closely parallel the precepts of common morality, but differs in some areas
where common morality seems to be unclear or in a state of change.

 Professional Ethics
 The set of standards adopted by professionals.
 Characteristics: Formal codes, focus on important profession’s issues, take
precedence over personal morality, differ from personal morality in the degree of
restriction of personal conduct and have negative/positive dimensions.
 7
Preventive Ethics

May 6, 2024
 Consist of provisions that are negative and prohibitive in character (Do not, shall
not, only …).

 Common morality supports the idea that the first duty of moral agents, including
professionals, is not to harm others (Not to murder, lie, cheat or steal, ..).

 Codes are formulated in terms of rules that can be enforced. It is easier to enforce
negative rules than positive ones.

 The influence of what are often called ‘‘disaster cases’’.

 Limitation is the relative absence of the motivational dimension.

 8
Aspirational Ethics

May 6, 2024
 Emphasis on the more positive and welfare-promoting aspect of
engineering (Save lives, reduce pollution, …).

 Good works: Exemplary actions that may go beyond what is professionally

required.

 Ordinary positive engineering: No heroism or self sacrifice.

 The ‘‘good engineer’’ is the engineer who has those traits of professional
character that make the best or ideal engineer.

 Professional character traits: Pride in technical excellence, social

awareness and environmental consciousness.
 9
Example

May 6, 2024
Air Bags

Carl Clark (1924-2006) helped to develop air bags. Even though he was a scientist and not
a degreed engineer, his work might well have been done by an engineer. He is now
advocating air bags on bumpers, and he has even invented wearable air bags for the elderly
to prevent broken hips. He does not get paid for all of his time, and the bumper air bags
were even patented by someone else.
 10
The Philosophy of Engineering

May 6, 2024
One of the most positive views of the engineer comes from Samuel Florman. He suggests that engineering is
in effect a very high calling, which involves fundamental ‘existential pleasures’ involving the whole person –
reason, feeling and physical. Engineering, he suggests, is an attempt to engage with and utilize the social and
physical environment in order to fulfil human needs, desires and aspirations. Existential pleasures include:
• The very act of being able to change the world in some way. There is a human impulse to change and
improve, and the pull of these endless possibilities ‘bewitches the engineer of every era’.
• The joy of the applied scientist who is able to begin to understand the laws of the universe in the context
of the creative enterprise. This is not a sterile or simply functional relationship to the universe, or a grasp
of numbers and formulae. Florman suggests that it is a relationship to the environment that can actually
involve ‘quasi-mystical moments of peace and wonder’.
• The engineer is also involved in response to what Florman calls ‘mammoth undertakings’ that appeal to
the human passions.
• The engineer finds pleasure through using technology. This is partly the pleasure of control and of
attempts to solve problems.
• There is finally the pleasure of service. ‘The main existential pleasure of the engineer will always be to
contribute to the well-being of his fellow man’. Florman calls on the testimony of engineers who have
reflected on their work. What makes the task worthwhile is its contribution.
Responsibility in Engineering
 12
 Responsibility has to do with accountability; both for what one does in the

05/06/2024
present & future and for what one has done in the past.
 The obligation-responsibilities of engineers require not only adhering to
regulatory norms & standard practices of engineering, but also satisfying
the standard of reasonable care.
 Engineers can expect to be held accountable, if not legally liable, for
intentionally, negligently or recklessly caused harms.
 Responsible engineering practice requires good judgment, not simply
following algorithms.
 A good test of engineering responsibility is the question, ‘‘What does an
engineer do when no one is looking?’’
 Impediments to responsible practice.
 13
Engineering Standards

05/06/2024
 Commit to a code of ethics to endorse high performance standards.

 Standards include: Safety, quality, competency, efficiency and

responsibility. Applying these standards requires professional
judgment.

 Engineers are expected to satisfy a more demanding norm; the standard

of care which goes beyond basic job responsibilities as defined by
employment terms. This is positive responsibility.

 Responsibility for harm is negative responsibility that is related to the

causation of harm. It follows a blame-responsibility approach.
 14
Engineering Standards Example

05/06/2024
The preamble of the code of ethics of the National
Society for Professional Engineers (NSPE) states the following:

Engineering is an important and learned profession. As members of this

profession, engineers are expected to exhibit the highest standards of
honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the
quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by
engineers require honesty, impartiality, fairness, and equity, and must be
dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior that
requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

Profession, honesty, integrity, quality of life, impartiality, fairness, equity,

protection of public health, safety, welfare, standard & ethical conduct.
 15
Liability

05/06/2024
 Liability for harm involves things such as malicious
intent, recklessness and/or negligence.

 A person can: Intentionally and deliberately cause

harm, recklessly cause harm or negligently cause harm
(Driving fast).

 As engineers develop innovative designs they should

expect formal standards of practice to be challenged
and changed.

 The problem of many hands: Usually occurs in large

organizations where many individuals had a hand in
causing the harm.
 16
Impediments to Responsible Action

05/06/2024
 Self-Interest: Engineers are humans with personal hopes & ambitions that are not restricted to
professional ideals.

 Self-Deception: An intentional avoidance of truths that would be found painful to confront self-
consciously.

 Fear: Fear of acknowledging mistakes, losing jobs, punishment, retribution or other bad consequences.

 Ignorance: Results from a lack of imagination, from not looking in the right places for information,
from a failure to persist or from the pressure of deadlines.

 Egocentric Tendencies: Tendency to interpret situations from very limited perspectives. It takes
special efforts to acquire a more objective viewpoint. Maybe based on insufficient or inaccurate info.

 Microscopic Vision: Embracing a limited perspective. Info is usually accurate & precise but limited.

 Uncritical Acceptance of Authority: A decrease in the engineer’s sense of personal

accountability for consequences for the public.

 Groupthink: When groups come to agreement at the expense of critical thinking.

Framing and resolving problems
 Determining the Facts 2/2
 Known and Unknown Facts

 Disagreements are very difficult to resolve if it is difficult to obtain the information

needed to resolve them.

 Important facts are not frequently known making it difficult to resolve disagreements.

 Some of the needed facts relate to something that has already happened. But we also
want to know what consequences are likely to result from the various options before
us.

 It is important to distinguish not only between relevant and irrelevant facts but also
between known and unknown facts.

 Weighing the Importance of Facts

 Agreement on which facts are relevant does not mean agreeing on their relative
importance.

05/06/2024  Engineering considerations of cost vs. safety as example. 18

 Clarifying Concepts
 Good moral thinking requires attending carefully to facts and getting as clear as possible
about the meanings of key terms.

 Engineering Ethics Key Terms: Public health, safety, welfare, conflict of interest, bribery,
extortion, confidentiality, trade secrets and loyalty. Their meanings are open-ended.

 Controversial Terms: Paradigms, dishonesty, substantial, burden of proof, material

impairment and acceptable.

 Disputants might interpret regulatory standards differently based on their different

understandings of the terminology.

 Example: It is possible to agree that ‘‘safe’’ is best understood in terms of ‘‘acceptable risk’’
05/06/2024
rather than ‘‘absolutely risk-free’’; a standard that is virtually unattainable. 19
 Application Issues
 Even when we are reasonably clear about what our concepts mean,
disagreement about their applications in particular cases can also arise.

 No matter how precisely we attempt to define a concept, it will always

remain insufficiently specified so that some of its applications to
particular circumstances will remain problematic.

 A question regarding a concept’s application in a particular situation

can also be raised. It is one thing to determine what we mean by
‘‘safe’’ (Conceptual question) and another to determine whether a
given situation should count as safe, considering the definition
(Application question).

 The inherent limitation of definitions and explanations of concepts gives rise to problems in applying concepts and calls for
05/06/2024
further reflection. 20
 Common Ground
 What are the relevant facts and what are the relevant kinds of ethical
considerations?

 Which facts? Know what is ethically important in order to know which of

the many facts available to us we should be considering.

 The ideas of common morality, professional codes of ethics and personal

morality may be helpful in determining what facts are relevant in any given
case.

 There are common features of human life that suggest the sorts of general
moral beliefs we share: We are vulnerable, we value autonomy, we are
interdependent, we have shared expectations and goals and we have
05/06/2024 common moral traits. 21
 Utilitarian Thinking
 Utilitarianism
focuses on the idea of bringing
about ‘‘the greatest good for the greatest
number.’’
 Three approaches maybe followed:

 The cost–benefit approach.

 The act utilitarian approach.
 The rule utilitarian approach.

05/06/2024
22
 The Cost-Benefit Approach
 The course of action that produces the greatest benefit relative to cost is the
one that should be chosen. This approach is usually used in engineering and
may have the following challenges:

 Must know which course of action will produce the most good in both the
short and the long term. Unfortunately, this knowledge is sometimes not
available at the time decisions must be made.
 Determining the scope of the audience over which the good is maximized.
 Favoring sometimes the greater aggregate good at the expense of a
vulnerable minority.

 Cost–benefit analysis involves three steps: Assess the available options,

assess the costs and the benefits (Both measured in monetary terms) of each
option and make the decision that is likely to result in the greatest benefit
05/06/2024 relative to cost. 23
 A Cost-Benefit Approach Example
 A plant discharges a pollutant into the local river, where it is ingested by fish. If
humans eat the fish, they experience significant health problems. Eliminating the
pollutant will be so expensive that the plant will become, at best, only marginally
profitable. Allowing the discharge to continue will save jobs and enhance the overall
economic viability of the community. The pollutant will adversely affect only a
relatively small proportion of the population—the most economically deprived
members of the community who fish in the river and then eat the fish.

 Under these conditions, allowing the plant to continue to discharge the pollutant might
seem justifiable from a utilitarian perspective, even though it would be unjust to the
poorer members of the community.

 Thus, there is a problem of justly distributing benefits and burdens. Many would say
that the utilitarian solution should be rejected for this reason. In such cases, utilitarian
reasoning seems, to some, to lead to implausible moral judgments, as measured by our
understanding of common morality.
05/06/2024
24
 The Act Utilitarian Approach
 Focuses attention on the consequences of particular actions. It is often
helpful in analyzing options in situations that call for making moral
decisions. Determining all of the consequences of actions is very
challenging.

 Will this course of action result in more good than any alternative course
of action that is available? To answer this question, the following
procedure is useful:

 Identify the available options in this situation.

 Determine the appropriate audience for the options comprehensively.
 Bear in mind that whatever option is selected, it sets an example for others.
Anyone else in relevantly similar circumstances would be justified in
making a similar selection.
 Decide which available option is likely to bring about the greatest good for
the appropriate audience taking into account harms as well as benefits.
05/06/2024
25
 The Rule Utilitarian Approach
 Problems are best resolved by having commonly accepted rules that
enable us to predict reliably what others will do. Example: Traffic lights,
stop signs and yield signs.

 Would utility be maximized if everyone acted similarly?

 Rules must be justified by their utility.

 If there are widespread departures from rules or practices, it is less clear

whether overall utility is still promoted by continuing to conform to the
rules or practice.

 Criticism: Utilitarian thinking can approve violating the rights of some

groups of individuals in order to promote the greater good of the majority.

 Rule Utilitarian Response: There is greater utility in following a rule that

disallows this than one that permits it.
05/06/2024
26
 Utilitarian Approaches Summary
 In cost-benefit analysis, monetary units are used to express the
benefits and drawbacks of various alternatives in a decision-
making process. According to this approach, any project in which
the dollar amount of the benefits exceeds the dollar amount of the
damages must be executed.

 Act-utilitarian approach holds that the rightness of the action is

determined solely by its consequences. According to this
approach, what makes the human being best off and provides
benefit is good and what makes the human beings worse off and
provides harm is bad.

 Rule-utilitarian approach ignores the consequences of the actions

and focuses on the nature of the actions and rules from which they
follow. So, one must not think of the action just perform it or
05/06/2024 avoid it based on the laws. 27
 Respect for Persons Approach
 Rules and practices approved by rule utilitarian thinking are not necessarily
exception-less. Some exceptions may occur at the expense of respect for the
rights of individuals.

 People have rights because, as individuals, they are entitled to respect, not
simply because treating them as if they have rights might maximize overall
utility.

 Actions or rules are right that regard each person as worthy of respect as a
moral agent. This equal regard for moral agents is the basic requirement of
justice.

 Moral agents must be distinguished from inanimate objects (Knives or

airplanes) which can only fulfill goals that are imposed externally. They have
autonomy.

 Three approaches to respect for persons thinking: The golden rule approach,
05/06/2024
the self-defeating approach and the rights approach. 28
 The Golden Rule Approach
 It employs the idea of universalizability which implies that judgment should
not change simply because the roles are reversed.

 The results of using the Golden Rule as a test of morally permissible action
seem to vary depending on the values and beliefs of the actor. Example:
Plant emissions.

 One way of trying to avoid some of these problems is to interpret the Golden
Rule as requiring not only placing one’s self in the position of the recipient
but also that adopting the recipient’s values and circumstances.

 Unfortunately, this tactic does not resolve all the problems. Sometimes,
placing one’s self in the position of others and assuming their values creates
new problems.

 Viewing oneself as both agent and recipient is required. The Golden Rule
provides the useful function of reminding us to understand the perspectives
of both.

05/06/2024 29
 The Self-Defeating Approach
 I cannot approve others doing the same kind of thing I have done
and thus universalizing one’s action would be self-defeating.

 A universalized action can be self-defeating in either of two ways:

 Sometimes the action itself cannot be performed if it is
universalized. Example: Not respecting promises.
 Sometimes the purpose I have in performing the action is
undermined if everyone else does what I do, even if I can perform
the action itself. Example: Cheating in exams to get better grades
than others.

 The idea of universalizability by itself does not generate the idea

of respect for persons; it says only that if some persons are to be
respected, then this must be extended to all.

05/06/2024
30
 A Self-Defeating Approach Example
 Engineer Maya decides to substitute an inferior and
cheaper part in a product she is designing for one of her
firm’s large customers. She assumes that the customer will
not check the product closely enough to detect the inferior
part or will not have enough technical knowledge to know
that the part is inferior.

 If everyone practiced this sort of deception and expected

others to practice it as well, then customers would be far
more inclined to have products carefully checked by
experts before they are purchased.

 This would make it much less likely that Maya’s deception

would be successful.
05/06/2024
31
 The Rights Approach
 Respecting the moral agency of others requires that we accord others the rights
necessary to exercise their agency and to pursue their well-being.

 A right may be understood as an entitlement to act or to have another individual act

in a certain way. It is a protective barrier that gives individuals immunity from
interference from others. For every right we have, others have corresponding duties
of noninterference.

 Just what rights people have and what they require from others can be controversial.

 Conflicting rights require prioritization, giving greater importance to some than to

others. A three-tiered hierarchy of rights may be identified:

 Basic rights such as life, physical integrity and mental health.

 Rights to maintain the level of purpose fulfillment an individual has already achieved
such as the right not to be deceived or cheated, the right to informed consent in medical
practice and experimentation and the right not to be defamed.
 Rights necessary to increase one’s level of purpose fulfillment, including the right to try
to acquire property.

05/06/2024 32
 Hierarchy of Rights Framework
1. Identify the basic obligations, values and interests at stake, noting
any conflicts.

2. Analyze the action or rule to determine what options are available

and what rights are at stake.

3. Determine the audience of the action or rule (those whose rights

would be affected).

4. Evaluate the seriousness of the rights infringements that would

occur with each option taking into account both the tier level of
rights and the number of violations or infringements involved.

5. Make a choice that seems likely to produce the least serious rights
infringements.
05/06/2024
33
 Line-Drawing Technique
 May be applied to the analysis of
concepts.

 Can be helpful both in clarifying the

basic meanings of concepts and in their
applications in particular circumstances.

 Can be used to try to determine the

rightness or wrongness of a course of
action.

 Cases may be classified as:

 Negative Paradigms: Cases that are uncontroversially wrong.
 Positive Paradigms: Cases that are uncontroversially acceptable.
05/06/2024  Problematic Paradigms: Cases that are in dispute. 34
 Line-Drawing Challenges
 The more ambiguous the case, the
more we must know about its
particular circumstances to determine
whether it is ethically acceptable or
wrong.

 Imposing a line of demarcation

between some of the cases in a series
involves an element of arbitrariness.

 Concentrating on only one feature will

usually be insufficient to determine
where on the line to place a given case.

 What one decides in one case serves as

05/06/2024 a precedent for similar cases as in 35
 Conflicting Values
 There are situations in which two or more moral rules or
duties seem to apply and in which they appear to imply
different and incompatible moral judgments.

 When one value clearly has a higher priority than the other, we
can call this an easy choice from a moral standpoint.
Example: Dinner vs. help.

 In engineering ethics, it may sometimes be difficult to do what

is right, but it is not difficult to know what is right. Example,
Ford Pinto case.

 When we are not able to honor some real and important values
in a way that we consider desirable, we can call this a difficult
choice.
05/06/2024
36
 Creative Middle Way Solutions
 Creative middle way between conflicting values is a resolution
in which all the conflicting demands are at least partially met.

 Instead of yielding to bribery or losing business, a ‘‘donation

strategy’’ according to which donations are given to a
community rather than to individuals may be adopted.

 Example: In the 1970s, Coca-Cola hired hundreds of Egyptians

to plant orange trees on thousands of acres of desert, creating
more goodwill than it would have generated by giving bribes to
individuals.

 Example: The gift-giving not being done in secret and its

satisfying something more than the self-interest of an individual.
05/06/2024
37
 Convergence & Divergence
 Convergence: When the utilitarian and respect for persons
standards lead to the same conclusions. This supports and
strengthens conclusions.

 Divergence: When these standards seem to lead to conflicting

conclusions. This creates doubt about what should be done in
those cases.

 Middle way solutions come in handy when we have

divergence. For example, consent for using corpses for auto
crash testing.

05/06/2024
38
Engineering and Technology
• Technology is embedded in a social context and both influences and
is influenced by the larger society.

• Engineers should take a critical attitude toward technology,

appreciating and taking pride in its benefits while being aware of the
problems it can create.

• Computer technology illustrates the benefits that technology can

confer as well as the social policy issues that one type of technology
can raise.

• Engineering design often raises social and ethical issues that

engineers must address and shows how engineering is a kind of social
experimentation.
* 40
 Thinking about Technology & Society
• Technology is best understood as a ‘‘system’’ composed of physical
objects and tools, knowledge, inventors, operators, repair people,
managers, government regulators, and others. That is, a social network.
• Technology both influences and is influenced by the larger society.
• Technological determinism holds that technological development has a
life of its own; an internal logic that cannot be controlled by individual
humans or even the whole society. Technology definition is
controversial.
• If technology is going to go on its merry way regardless of what we
might do, why assume responsibility for it? Why take responsibility for
what we cannot control? Technological determinism, then, raises
important issues that we must consider.
• Technology also presents a controversy between technological optimism
and technological pessimism.
* 41
 Technological Optimism
• Technological optimism is the view that
the effects of technology on human well-
being are almost altogether good.
• Technologies have vastly improved the
quality of our lives: Electrification, cars,
planes, water supply and distribution,
electronics, radio & television, agricultural
mechanization, computers,
communications, refrigeration, highways,
spacecraft, imaging, household appliances,
health …
• Most of us would probably consider the
effects of technology to be
overwhelmingly on the positive side due to
the positive role of technological
development on human life.
* 42
 Technological Pessimism
• Technology introduction carries some risk:
– Excessive pride in human power.
– Failure to acknowledge dependence on providence.
– Tendency to drop the pursuit of personal excellence
in favor of enjoying the luxuries that technology
brings.
– Tendency to confuse the ‘‘unreal’’ world of material
things with ultimate reality.

• Technology is associated with a controlling

frame of mind, obsessed with achieving ever
greater efficiency, that harms the environment
and obscures certain aspects of human
experience, especially the spiritual aspects.
• Technology tends to fragment human
experience and thus destroy the
meaningfulness of much of what we do.

* 43
 Computer Technology: Privacy & Social Policy
• Computing technology can violate:

– Informational Privacy: Serving as the means for the construction of

databases about our income, purchasing habits, and perhaps even more
intimate characteristics, such as political and religious affiliations.

– Physical Privacy: Such as unwanted telephone solicitations.

– Decisional Privacy: Freedom from governmental or other outside

interference to make decisions about such issues as one’s beliefs and
practices or general lifestyle. The use of computers to monitor the
activities of individuals can sometimes be used to intimidate them, by
the threat of being exposed, into repressing their true beliefs.

– Proprietary Privacy: The ability to control the use of one’s name,

likeness, or other aspects of one’s identity. Computers assist the
violation of proprietary privacy when they are used in ‘‘identity theft”.

* 44
 Privacy vs. Social Utility
• Understanding of utilitarianism & respect
for persons theories can help us anticipate
most of the major arguments regarding
social policy regarding computers and
privacy.
• Some of the strongest arguments for
limiting the ability of others to cross the
boundaries protecting our privacy come
from the tradition of respect for persons.
• Utilitarians argue that there is a great
value involved in collecting information
(Credit history, targeted marketing,
criminal records, etc…).

* 45
 Finding a Creative Middle Way
• People depend on credit cards and generally accept legitimate credit
checks. Same applies for cell phones…
• A creative middle way solution may include a set of guidelines for fair
information practices, such as:
1. The existence of data systems containing personal information should be
public knowledge.
2. Personal information should be collected for narrow, specific purposes and
only used in ways consistent with the primary purposes for its collection.
3. Personal information should be collected only with the informed consent of
the persons about whom the info is collected or their legal representatives.
– Personal information should not be shared with third parties without notice or
consent of those about whom the information is collected.
– To ensure accuracy, the time information can be stored should be limited, and
individuals should be permitted to review the information & correct errors.
1. Those who collect personal data should ensure the security and integrity of
personal data systems.
* 46
 Ownership of Computer Software & Public Policy

• What is the justification for granting similar

discretionary powers to software owners?

• A utilitarian justification is that it promotes the

progress of technology. But, granting legal
protection tends to increase the price and may
reduce the quality of software because
competition is impacted, thus reducing utility.

• Ethical justification based on respect for

persons stems from the labor theory of
ownership. If a person begins with basic ideas
of science and logic that are common property
& thus in a sense un-owned, and then adds to
them her intellectual labor so that she produces
a new computer program, then she may lay
claim to ownership of that program.
* 47
 How to Protect Software?
• Two principal options have been proposed for protecting intellectual
property: Copyrights and patents.
• The peculiar nature of software makes both of these options problematic.
A hybrid approach has been proposed but did not advance much due to
inability to enforce laws internationally.
• Copyrights Considerations:
– Originated with author.
– Functional and having some usefulness.
– Non-obvious.
– Alternate expressions: There must be several or many different ways of
expressing the idea.
• Patent Considerations:
– Useful.
– Novel.
– Non-obvious.
– The type of thing that is generally accorded patents (Processes, Machines …).

* 48
 Engineering Responsibility in Democratic
Deliberation on Technology Policy
• In a democracy, debates about public policy regarding science & technology
encounter what is referred to as the democratic dilemma.
• The public has the power of making the final decisions about science & technology,
but this same public has difficulty in understanding something as complex and
forbidding as science & technology and the simplifications necessary to get
understandable information across to the public may involve serious distortions.
• Engineers’ responsibilities with regard to the democratic dilemma can be
summarized in three words: Alert, inform and advise.
• Alert the public to the potential dangers from technology. Whistleblowing may be
needed.
• Inform the public of the issues on both sides of a debate. A new technology may
pose dangers, but it may also have great potential benefits.
• Engineers should in some instances offer advice and guidance on an issue,
especially when there is some degree of consensus in the engineering community.
• One explanation for the reluctance of engineering societies to involve themselves in
public debates regarding technology is the fact that the membership may be divided
on the correct course of action.

* 49
 The Social Interaction of Technology & Society

• Technology influences society, but society also

influences the development of technology.
• This two-way view gives us a picture of the social
embedded-ness of technology that is the true account
of the relationship of technology to society.
• The abolition of child labor stimulated the
development of technologies that do the jobs that
small bodies did.
• The abolition of slavery created a demand for labor-
saving agricultural machinery that was not needed
when there was sufficient supply of cheap labor.
* 50
 Science & Technology Studies (STS): Opening the Black
Box of Technology

• STS researchers criticize

traditional engineering ethics for
too often giving an externalist
account of a case and argue that,
in doing so, less is learned about
how to avoid the crisis situations.
• They promote internalist account
of a situation requiring ‘‘thick
descriptions”; extended
descriptions of cases that show
the entire process of development
up to the endpoint decision.

* 51
 Designing for the Environment & Human Community

• Technologies can be designed to stress sustainability, the

use of renewable resources, and minimal pollution.
• Technologies can also serve to promote human
community rather than fracture it.
• The advance of technology does not necessarily destroy
values that we consider of great importance, such as a
relationship to the natural world and focused human
activities. It does, however, change the forms and contexts
in which these activities take place.
• Thinking about these issues, as many engineers are
certainly doing, can lead to creative designs & a more
humanly satisfying life.
* 52
 Engineering as Social Experimentation
• In their textbook Ethics in Engineering, philosopher Mike
Martin & engineer Roland Schinzinger develop the idea of
engineering as social experimentation. They make the
following analogies between engineering & experimentation:
– First, engineering works have experimental subjects, like scientific
experiments. In engineering, however, the subjects are the public who
utilize the products of engineering.
– Second, as in any experiment, there is always an element of
uncertainty about the outcome. Yet, there is a necessity of gaining new
knowledge, which can only come by experimentation. Only by
innovation can technology advance.
– Third, like experimenters, engineers must assume responsibility for
their experiments. They must think about the possible consequences
(both good & bad) and attempt to eliminate as many bad
consequences as possible.
* 53
 Conclusions
• Engineers should recognize that technology is not socially neutral,
but rather embedded in a social network as both cause and effect.
• As the debate between technological optimism and pessimism
shows, technology has both conferred great goods on humankind
and raised problems and issues that demand solutions, many of
them from engineers. Therefore, engineers must adopt a critical
attitude toward technology.
• Engineers and engineering societies have a responsibility to alert
the public to the dangers and risks imposed by technology and to
inform and sometimes advise the public on policy issues regarding
technology.
• As the primary creators of technology, engineers have a
responsibility to design with consideration of the social and value
implications of their designs.
* 54