Ethics in Engineering
Thomas Taro Lennerfors
A Student!itteratur
r
The book is also available in Swedish: Etik for ingenjor,er, Studentlitteratur 2019.
COPYING PROHIBITED
This book is protected by the Swedish Copyright Act. Any copying is prohibited.
Anyone who violates t he Copyright Act may be prosecuted by a public
prosecutor and sentenced either to a fine or to imprisonment for up to 2 years
and may be liable to pay compensation to the author or to the rightsholder.
The contents of this e-book are an unaltered reproduction of those of the
print version of the book. Thee- book is a supplement to the print book in
accordance with chapter 1, parag ra ph 6 of the Swedish Freedom of the Press
Act.
Art. No 40007-SB
ISBN 978-91-44-16428-1
First ed ition
1:1
©The author and Studentlitteratur 2019
stude ntl itteratur.se
Studentlitteratur AB, Lund
Book design: Jesper Sjiistrand/Metamorf Design
Cover design: Jens Martin/Signalera
Cover illustration: Shutterstock.com
Contents
Preface 7
1 Introduction 9
The three domains of engineering practice 11
What is ethics? 13
The insufficiency of law 21
The structure of the book 22
2 Awareness 25
Working with technology 26
Working together with others 30
Ethics in your personal life 35
3 Responsibility
41
Freedom to - agent-specific aspects 43
Freedom from - context-specific aspects 46
Impact 47
The components of responsibility in practice 48
c,:
...
::,
<(
c,:
w
...
,-
Responsibilities of designers and users 50
Why take responsibility? 54
~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
"'
0
z
<(
4 Avoiding responsibility 57
We are determined 57
c,:
0
I
,-
::,
<(
w
...
I
0
No resources 58
Lack of time 60
Too many demands 60
Respect for authorities 61
Peer pressure 63
Division of labour 64
Rationalizations 65
5 Responsibilities of professional engineers 71
What is a profession? 71
The engineering profession 74
Responsibility of engineers and codes of ethics 77
Professional ethics in conflict with other values 81
6 Critical thinking 85
Emotions and reason 86
Six models for critical thinking 89
Discourse ethics 102
Casuistry 107
Strategic, biased, and reflective uses of the models 107
7 Consequentialist ethical theories 113
For whom? 115
What? 118
Rules and consequences 121
Total happiness or happiness for all? 121
Possibilities and risks 122
8 Duties and rights 129
Traditional deontological systems 129
Kantian duty ethics 133
Prima facie duties 136
cc
...
...
:,
<(
cc
w
...,
II-
z
Rights: patient-centred duty ethics 137
w
Cl
:,
,-
VI
Cl
z
<(
cc
0
I
...
:,
<(
w
..
I
I-
4
Con t en t s
9 Virtue ethics 743
Plato 143
Aristotle 146
Modern virtue ethics 149
Virtues or situations? 152
The Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path 154
1o Ethics of freedom 161
Nietzsche 162
Kierkegaard: the aesthetical and ethical way of life 165
Authenticity 766
Life and death 169
Libertarianism 170
Autonomy 170
11 Relational ethics 777
Ethics of care 179
Ethics in different relationships 183
Trust 186
12 Justice and fairness 793
Basic concepts of justice 794
Justice and its relation to other ethical claims 200
Unfairness and injustice 202
John Rawls 203
Robert Nozick 204
cc
:::,
,<(
cc
~
,,~
,-
z
13 Environmental ethics 21 1
A brief background to environmental ethics 212
~
0
:::,
Sustainable development and sustainability 214
C
The moral standing of animals and other things 217
,-
.,,
z
«
cc
0
I
Deep ecology 219
,:::,
«
Contents
5
14 Action and beyond 225
Ethical action following a judgement 225
Ethical action over time: a roadmap 227
Ideals and how to relate to them 228
The linear process becomes circular
229
15 Assignments and case studies 233
Awareness: assignment for chapters 1-2 233
The Kista construction accident: case study for chapters 3-5 233
GMO salmon: case study for chapter 6 236
Bribery: an exercise in casuistry (chapter 6) 236
Autonomous cars: case study for chapters 6-8 238
A robot to love: case study for chapters 9-11 240
Nuclear waste: case study for chapters 12-13 240
Interview study: assignment for chapters 1-13 242
"Just do it": assignment for chapter 14 243
Technical development project and thesis work 243
Notes 247
Image sources 253
References 255
Index of persons 261
Index of topics 263
"'::::,
I<(
"'
II~
1-
z
w
0
::::,
IV'>
Cl
z
<(
"'0
I
::::,
<(
w
I
I-
"
6
Content s
Preface
SINCE 2013, I HAVE BEEN TEACHING the course Engineering Ethics
cc
::,
....
<t
cc
w
>....
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
C
z
<t
at Uppsala University. Throughout the years, we have used a variety of
excerpts, chapters, and papers. In the autumn of 2017, I took the opportunity
to write this book, which is a kind of synthesis of the development of this
course. Therefore, I am indebted to many people for the contents of this
book, most of whom are not mentioned in these acknowledgements but in
the main text of the book.
An obvious source of inspiration has been Dan-Erik Andersson together
with whom I wrote the book Etik published in 2011. My colleagues Per Fors
and Peter Birch have been co-teaching the course, and I have learned a lot
discussing ethics with them. Peter has read and given useful comments
on the manuscript. Furthermore, I would like to thank the students of the
course, both those who have used and discussed other course literature
and the students in the spring of 2018 who read a draft version of this book.
Some of you really took the opportunity to contribute and I really appreciate
your commitment. I have also learned very much from and been truly
supported by Iordanis Kavathatzopoulos, and it is obvious that many basic
assumptions in the book and the synthetic model are heavily indebted to
Iordanis' thinking. Parts of this manuscript have been discussed at the TUR
ethics seminar on critical thinking and I thank all of the participants. Parts
have also been used in the PhD ethics courses (both basic and advanced
level) offered by the Faculty of Science and Technology. I have received very
good comments on the chapter on critical thinking models as well as other
good ideas from Anders Persson. And I also would like to thank Mikael
Laaksoharju who has taken the time to t ruly care about this book.
a:
0
:r:
....
::,
<t
w
:r:
....
"
UPPSALA, DECEMBER 2018
Thomas Taro Lennerfors
7
Chapter 1
Introduction
AN EP I SODE OF THE TV SERIES 24 is about a software engineer who is the
ac
::,
....
""w
c,:
>....
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>v'l
0
z
""
c,:
0
I
....
::,
""w
I
>-
"
only one able to program a bomb that some terrorists want to detonate in
the middle of a large city. They kidnap him on his way to work and they try
to persuade him to do what they want. He refuses. The terrorists threaten
him and push his head underwater, but he resists. Not until one of the
terrorists takes out an electric drill and threatens to use it on the engineer
does he yield and start programming the bomb. This brief, macabre
episode shows that the engineer was valuable to the terrorists since he had
knowledge - unique knowledge - about a particular technology. He didn't
want to use his knowledge for evil purposes but was forced to comply. Did
he do the right thing? Was he responsible for the consequences when the
bomb detonated?
Let us now turn to another example a long time ago in a galaxy far, far
away. If you have seen Star Wars IV A New Hope you probably remember
that the rebels could destroy the Death Star by dropping a bomb into a
duct leading all the way into the very core of the construction. And maybe
you, like engineers and others, wondered how one could design something
that senseless. If the evil imperial forces had the technical knowledge to
construct such a marvellously horrible death machine, how could they
have made such an error? We get the answer in the 2016 movie Rogue One,
where Galen Erso, an engineer forced to work for the Empire, designs
9
the Death Star with this flaw in order for the rebels to be able to destroy
it. He engaged in an act of insubordination. This is clearly an example
of ethics in engineering. Could the engineer have done otherwise? One
alternative would be to raise his voice against building the Death Star, but
most likely the Emperor, Darth Vader, and the others would have remained
unconvinced, and the consequences for the engineer would have been
fatal. For long, Galen Erso tried to avoid the imperial forces, hiding on
a desolate planet, but when he was apprehended and forced to carry out
the completion of the Death Star, he had no reasonable chance to quit his
job. The Empire is not just something you quit. Further, Galen could have
remained loyal to the Empire by designing the best Death Star possible,
truly following orders and pleasing his bosses, but that would have been
against his principles. So, was his choice correct?
cc
::,
....
s(
cc
....,
>-
>...,
>z
....,
0
::,
>-
Vl
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
...
::,
<(
....,
I
Darth Vader.
10
Chapter 1 Introduct ion
>-
"
These are two extreme examples of ethics in engineering. But also, away
from the extreme example of fictive terrorists and now, on our planet,
engineers and others who are developing, implementing, maintaining,
and using technology face ethical issues.
The three domains of engineering practice
As an engineer, you will work with technology, which is the first domain of
engineering practice. Technology - whether defined as artefacts, the skills
and knowledge to produce such artefacts, or as more intricately linked
technological systems - shapes our society by shaping our perceptions
and actions (see further chapter 2). Technology thus has an impact on
humans and nature.
BUILDING BRIDGES
The movie Dream Big features Avery Bang. When she was an engineering student,
she did not really know what to do with her life, but then she studied abroad in
Fiji. There, she rea lized how simple bridges could t ransform people's lives, and
t herefore she decided to dedicate her life to bui lding bridges. She is now the
president and CEO of Bridges to Prosperity, which contributes to community
development by providing footbridges over impassable rivers.
THE SLOPPY INSPECTOR
cc
...
::,
<(
0::
w
r-
...
~
r-
z
w
An eng ineer was hired by a construction company to inspect a facade on a
bui lding in Manhattan. In 2011, he filed a report stating t hat the facade was safe.
Four years later a part of the facade fell down and killed an infant. The engineer
admitted t hat he never inspected the site and t hat the report was completely fake.1
--------------------------■
0
::,
r-
"'
0
z
<(
0::
0
I
...
::,
<(
As a developer of tech nology, you could be the very mind behind the
technology, or the one improving and changing it. Your decisions affect
how people relate to the technology and thus you shape people's perceptions
and actions quite directly. You might also be the one who maintains the
technology, controlling it, inspecting it, and adapting it to the present
Chapter 1 Introd uction
11
needs. You could also be an implementer who decides which technologies
others should use. Examples of implementers are municipal buyers and
managers. Implementation may concern robotic process automation of
project management, robots in healthcare, the decision to adopt climate
change geoengineering, and so on. As both a professional and a private
individual, you are also a user of technology. You actively decide to use
a particular technology, such as a social media platform, how much you
want to use it and when. By using technology, you support it and indirectly
contribute to developing and spreading it.
All of these different roles have a different impact. While all people are
users of technology, engineers to a greater extent work with development,
implementation, and maintenance of technology. Engineers therefore
have a greater impact than other people when it comes to technology. If
engineers have such an impact on our perceptions and actions, how should
they use that power?
Given this power, a main idea in this book is that one ought to promote
ethical reflection about engineering practice. If more engineers were to
reflect upon their own impact and the positive and negative sides of the
technologies they develop, it is likely that they would develop technology
with a positive impact on humans and nature. But it is not easy to be a
reflecting engineer, particularly not when it comes to technology. In the
early 20th century, sociologist William Fielding Ogburn2 coined the
term cultural lag, which points out that societal reflection, thinking, and
discussion always lag behind technological innovations and changes.
Technology seems to outspeed ethics.
TWO-SIDED PRINTING
cc
...
:,
<(
3D printing has allowed engineers to create prototypes and products in a way
that used to be impossible. For example, there are already now people who have
managed to print semi-automatic guns. But. on the other hand, 3D printers may
also be used to print prosthetics.
cc
w
......
...z
-'
w
0
:,
...
v"I
0
z
<(
cc
0
...
I
:,
<(
w
I
...
G
12
Chapter 1 Int roduc tion
Apart from working with technology, engineers constantly work together
with others, which is the second domain of engineering practice. These
others can be stakeholders, such as customers, suppliers, and managers.
Here, issues such as workplace relationships, fair compensation, bribery,
and the handling of sensitive information come up. A third area is ethics
in your personal life, since this often has an impact or is impacted by your
engineering practice. It may relate to you as a consumer or family member.
What do you do if your job has a negative impact on your private life, or
vice versa? The book aims to cover these three domains.
What is ethics?
0::
::,
><(
0::
w
>>~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>v,
0
z
<(
0::
0
I
>::,
<(
In general, ethics is about how one should live one's life, what is good, what
is the right way to act, and what one should do. And in that sense, ethics
is everywhere. Philosopher Claes Gustafsson argues that a basic human
activity is that we moralize, which means that we constantly evaluate
other people's actions from an ethical perspective: 3 "She shouldn't have
lied in this situation." "When you make a business deal with this company,
count the number of fingers you have left after shaking hands with their
representatives." "A robot can never be human." "That dude bought a sex
robot - yuck!"
But moralizing is not enough. It is rather automatic and at times you only
end up reproducing what others are saying and thinking. But how about
you? What do you think? Perhaps you rely on your gut feeling. But is the gut
feeling correct? Did people in former days not have a gut feeling that slavery
was okay? Or that women were not allowed to vote? Furthermore, you might
face ethical dilemmas in your life which you cannot just moralize about. For
example, should you try to study two different master programmes at the
same time to learn more, or should you instead take care of your relationships
with your family, your friends, and your partner? Should you doublecheck
all the calculations made by your colleague or do you trust her competence?
Should you accept the offer to work at a company developing weapons systems
or not? In these dilemmas, you do not moralize, nor make judgements about
a certain ethical issue, because the dilemma concerns you directly. The aim
of this book is to support you to develop the skills to make judgements and
Chapter 1 Int roduct ion
13
navigate through dilemmas within the three domains of engineering practice.
This is important for your future working life, so important that it is required
in the Swedish Higher Education Ordinance for all bachelor's, master's, and
3-year and 5-year engineering programmes. A key concept for this is critical
thinking (see chapter 6).
To learn how to think critically about ethics, it is important to think
with others. Therefore, the book will guide you through ethical theory as
it is discussed in various academic fields, as well as some more popular
contexts. At the universities, ethics is often seen as a part of philosophy,
where philosophers have discussed what concepts such as "good", "evil",
and "right" mean. These philosophers have also proposed normative ethical
theories - what principles should guide us in our lives. However, ethics is
also a central concern in other fields, such as anthropology, psychology,
and sociology. In these fields, ethics is often more descriptive. In other
words, they study how ethical decision-making works, how we respond
to various moral dilemmas, the norms, values, and cultures in different
groups, what role trust plays in building a functioning society, and so on.
In short, it studies what ethics is to people, how it functions. Ethics is also
studied by historians ofphilosophy, who try to understand Immanuel Kant,
Mary Wollstonecraft, Friedrich Nietzsche, Hannah Arendt, and other
philosophers in new ways. Furthermore, ethics is discussed by practitioners
and academics from various more practical fields, such as engineering. In
this book, you will think together with all of these sources of inspiration.
Ethics is messy
Philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre described in the 1980s how the theoretical
discussion about ethics was fragmented and incomplete, and this also
applies to a great extent today. 4 He argued that when we talk about ethics,
both in practice and in academic debates, we use a wide range of concepts
that are all based on different theoretical foundations and which stem from
different historical contexts. Furthermore, sometimes we use the same
ethical concept to refer to different things. It is difficult to define ethical
concepts, and even if one manages to create a definition, it is not certain that
people will accept or use it. The ethical concepts are discursive constructs,
14
Chapter 1 Introduction
a:
::,
...
<(
a:
........w
_,
,_
z
w
0
::,
,_
V'>
C
z
<(
a:
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
which means that they are created as words, concepts, and sentences in
our social practices (in groups, in societies, and so on). This means that
it is difficult to be sure of the exact meaning of an ethical concept. One
cannot merely look it up in a dictionary, on Wikipedia, or in the Stanford
Encyclopedia ofPhilosophy. In these sources, we get a particular view of how
the concept is understood, or should be understood, but not the "objectively
true" way, because there is (probably) none.
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
V,
0
:z
<(
a:
0
:r:
,_
::,
<r
w
:r:
,_
"
In his late work, philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein claimed that it is not
easy to create precise definitions of a certain concept.5 He tried that in his
youth but gave up. For example, it is very difficult to define the essence of
the concept game, but all games share some characteristics of the concept,
such as chess, golf, badminton, soccer, and Monopoly. However, the same
features are not found in all of them. They have "family resemblances",
Wittgenstein said. The same goes for ethical concepts.
Take the example of the difference between ethics and morality. They
stem from the same word in two different languages - ancient Greek and
Latin. Seen from that light, they should mean the same thing. In everyday
speech, some use them to express the same thing, while others believe
that there is a difference. In philosophy, the concepts often mean different
things. However, academics distinguish between the concepts in different
ways, which leads to conceptual confusion, particularly since they are
sometimes not open to other ways oflooking upon the issue.
The most straightforward distinction, which may be found on
Wikipedia, is that morality represents the beliefs that people hold and how
they act within the sphere of doing good, right, and so on, while ethics
represents the systematic reflection about morality. So, ethics would be the
philosophy of morality or, in other words, moral philosophy.
This differs somewhat from existential philosophy (see chapter 10), where
morality represents the (often somewhat boring) norms of society. Ethics
for these existentialists concerns being true to yourself and not wasting
your life following the rules of others. As the Swedish band Broder Daniel
sings, "Why is it so we die just as copies/If it's so we're born originals."
There are other distinctions as well. Some say that ethics is the guidelines
provided by an external authority, such as codes of conduct or religious
principles, while morality is personal convictions and one's own principles
Chapter 1 Introd uct ion
15
about what is right and wrong. Another way of distinguishing between the
concepts is that morality is about what should or should not be done (for
example not to violate human rights), while ethics describes the process
of reaching a judgement about what to do. In this text, we use ethics and
morality synonymously, since there are more conceptual disadvantages
than advantages involved in distinguishing between the two.
So, how can we study this messy field? We could, on the one hand,
structure the chaos by providing clear definitions of concepts. This strategy
would probably still lead to not everyone accepting and using the concepts
in the way we intend. And if we have a strict definition and others use
another definition, it will limit our ability to communicate, which creates
frustration and conflict between us. On the other hand, and which is what
this book suggests, we could embrace the messiness, muddle through
ethics, and try to sketch a preliminary outline of how we generally use these
ethical concepts and how they relate to each other. In this way we can add
nuance to discussions, and we learn to think rather than slavishly follow
strict definitions. Additionally, it allows us to be flexible when new concepts
appear in the debate, which they will definitely do. This is also a way to use
the theories about ethics for our main purpose - to think critically.
In the next part, we make a first attempt to think critically about some
ethical concepts we face in our everyday lives.
Ethical concepts
We have already discussed the distinction between ethics and morality.
Another important concept sometimes used is norms. A norm is some kind
of rule of action that is normative - and normative means how we should
or ought to behave. If someone says that "it's not cricket" they mean that
the norms of fair play or decent behaviour are being broken. Norms specify
what is normal. Norms are not always good. Perhaps being heterosexual is
the norm if you are an engineer, and gay and lesbian engineers then have
to hide their sexuality to safeguard their careers.6 In engineering practice,
norms may also have a non-moral meaning, for example technical norms.
Rules are similar to norms, but in everyday speech they are not always as
embedded with value as norms. For example, there may be rules of soccer,
16
Chapter 1 Introduction
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
IV'>
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
cc
::,
><(
cc
~
>-
z
u.,
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
>-
::,
<(
u.,
:r:
><l>
which might not be related to ethics (but following them is an ethical
issue). Rules are frequently distinguished from principles, which are seen
as more directly stemming from some kind of ethical argumentation and
ethical values. Principles are also broader than rules. During the history of
ethics, there has been a lot of critique against rule-following. For example,
sociologist Zygmunt Bauman has argued that the Holocaust was not
based on evil but on rule-following. 7 Yes, perhaps there were genuinely
evil people around, but the main bulk of those carrying out the Holocaust
were people who just followed rules. And this is yet another argument for
the importance of critical thinking.
Another word related to ethics is values. One is often confronted by
questions about what one values in life, or which values one lives by. In many
companies, the "core values" of the company are described, for example
stating that the company should not only be profitable, but also care about
values such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) or sustainability.
Intrinsic or inherent value is often distinguished from extrinsic or
instrumental value - do we believe that something is valuable in itself
(intrinsic), or just as a means to something else (extrinsic/instrumental)?
For example, one might debate whether the environment has intrinsic or
instrumental value. If we want to preserve the environment for the sake
of human beings, then it has instrumental value. If we preserve it for its
own sake, we take it to have intrinsic value. There are also values that do
not relate to ethics, such as aesthetic values. You might think that a piece
of music is good, that it has aesthetic value, and that it has little to do with
ethics. We may also say that various business deals have economic value.
So, value is a broader concept than ethics.
Right is yet another word related to ethics. "She did the right thing" is
an expression that we often hear. The right thing may be linked to ethics
if it concerns the right choice in an ethical dilemma, but it may also be
disconnected from ethics if it concerns the right answer to a mathematical
problem. Sometimes one distinguishes between the right and the good,
where "the right" is more concerned with principles and "the good" with
outcomes. "The right" is more often linked to deontological, duty-based
theories (see chapter 8) while "the good" often is related to consequentialist
theories (see chapter 7). But sometimes we use them in other ways.
Chapter 1 Introd uct ion
17
r
Often we distinguish between the normative and the descriptive. The
descriptive is when we account for something as it is. It is more related to
facts. The normative, which is sometimes called prescriptive, concerns how
we want things to be. Others distinguish between prescriptive - something
that should be done - and proscriptive - something that should not be done
- which is somewhat similar to the distinction between maximalistic ethics
(reaching standards of ethical excellence) and minimalistic ethics (doing
only what is required of you).8 Returning to the distinction between the
descriptive and the normative, the 18th-century philosopher David Hume
has argued that there can never be normative conclusions stemming from
descriptive premises, something that is called the is/ought gap or Hume's
law.9 Imagine someone saying that human beings evolved as meat-eating
animals and therefore we should eat meat. Hume would say that although
it is a fact that human beings did evolve in this way, it does not follow that
we ought to eat meat. Rather, there is an implicit assumption that we ought
to do what we evolved to do. 10
Many ethical theories concern the normative - how we should live,
what we should do and so on, but theories may also be descriptions of how
we behave. Although Hume's law is sometimes called Hume's guillotine,
the distinction is not clear-cut. Remember the fact that many homosexual
engineers hide their sexuality at work. Within this descriptive statement,
there is also a more normative message - they should not have to do this.
Still, the distinction is useful for thinking about ethics.
DESCRIPTIVE AND NORMATIVE EGOISM
Psychological egoism is a descriptive theory saying that we are egoists - we think
about ourselves all the time. Ethical egoism is a normative theory (see chapter 7)
saying that we should be egoists.
a:
::,
.,,
I-
a:
w
....
I-
,_
~
z
w
Yet another concept is etiquette. While ethics is about "taking serious
things seriously", as philosopher Goran Collste11 writes in his Introduction
to Ethics, etiquette primarily concerns things that could be seen as less
serious than ethics. Sometimes we describe etiquette as manners. In Japan,
"manner mode" means silent mode on a mobile phone. Even though
18
Chapter 1 Introduction
c:,
::,
....
v"I
Q
.,,z
a:
0
I
1-
.,,
::,
w
I
,_
0
Image removed for copyright reasons.
Manner rules in
the Tokyo metro.
etiquette might seem irrelevant for ethics, our behaviour when it comes
to minor matters could raise awareness about larger issues. Look at the
Japanese manner rules in the figure above. If we realize that we cause harm
by being drunk and passed out on the train, litter, or open an umbrella so
that some people are exposed to water, we are likely better equipped to see
our impact in other, more important practices. So, the next time you hold
the door for someone, perhaps you learn something very deep.
Ethics as awareness, responsibility,
critical thinking, and action
a:
:::,
1-
<t
a:
w
II~
1-
z
w
Cl
::,
IV\
C
z
<t
a:
0
:r:
1-
:::,
<t
w
:r:
1,;,
In this book, a process is presented which sees ethics as consisting of four
steps: awareness, responsibility, critical thinking, and action.
Let us first discuss awareness. If we are not aware of ethical issues,
then it is of course difficult, if not impossible, for us to act ethically, to do
good. Therefore, a first step must be to become aware. This seems simple,
but it is not. We are often used to one way of seeing things. Ethical issues
may be hidden behind what Claes Gustafsson calls the wall of obviousness
- a psychological barrier limiting ou r perception of reality, 12 and more
specifically in this book, a barrier making us blind to ethical issues. This
wall is built by our expectations, and its bricks are our habits. Being able
to identify an issue as ethical is a first step. It is about making the practices
that you are part of an object of reflection, to become sensitized to ethics.
Chapter 1 Introduction
19
r
The wall of obviousness.
The second step is to make the ethical issue your own, in other words to
take responsibility for it. It is easy to say that this or that particular ethical
issue is not your concern, that somebody else should deal with it, that you
do not have the means to have an impact on it even if you tried. Certainly,
you do not have to carry all the burdens - some issues are the responsibility
of others to solve, but perhaps fewer than we regularly think. To make an
ethical issue your own, or to take responsibility, is thus the second step in
this ethical framework. But what is responsibility? And what are our usual
ways of avoiding it?
The third step of the ethical process is critical thinking. Critical thinking
does not mean to be "against something", to criticize, but to see an issue
from various perspectives, highlight the advantages and disadvantages,
the good and bad sides, and, based on this process, to reach a judgement
about the issue. Critical thinking is about thinking yourself, but is assisted
by thinking together with others. This does not mean that we can hide
behind others or behind ethical theories. Critical th inking demands that
ethics is more than political correctness. Even if a lot of people, including
your friends and family, even the entire society, thinks that some practice
is ethically good, critical thinking still requires us to think and reach our
own judgement, even though it is much easier to go with the flow.
20
Chapter 1 Introd uction
c,:
::,
I<(
c,:
w
II~
1-
z
w
C
=>
I-
v'>
C,
z
<(
""
0
I
I-
=>
<(
w
I
1(1
The fourth step is action. It is not sufficient to just judge what is right in a
particular situation, and then do something else. For example, perhaps you
know that you should not go by car to work because of the environmental
impact, but you do it anyway. Ethics can never be about only thought and
reflection. Ethics is intrinsically linked to action.
The various steps in this model will be explained in the book. But before
that, we need to turn to an argument that says that ethics is not needed at all.
The insufficiency of law
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>-
"'
C
z
<l'.
C£'.
0
I
>-
::,
<l'.
UJ
I
0
Think about all the laws that exist in the world, which allegedly are
based on what we believe to be ethically correct. For example, since we
value that everyone, irrespective of gender, ethnicity, religion, and so on
is treated the same way and has the same opportunities, there are laws
against discrimination. So why is ethics needed if such frameworks are
already in place? Why do we have to think about ethics rather than just
following the law?
First of all, we can never be sure that the rules, laws, and frameworks are
ethically correct. Throughout history, we have reformed law because our
values changed, or when the power structure of society made it possible for
us to change it. For example, voting rights were for a long time restricted
to men and slavery was permitted. While we might think that we are at the
"end ofhistory", the final state in which all laws are just and right, we should
probably think that some laws still need to be reformed. There might thus be
a potential conflict between ethics and law. Some claim that anti-piracy laws
are immoral since they just protect the interests of powerful corporations.
Others claim that a strong right to ownership (which is protected by law) is
immoral since it makes society unequal. This discrepancy between ethics
and law is one reason why following the law is simply not enough. What is
interesting, however, is that we often learn about morality through what is
legal and illegal. In other words, we might learn to think that something is
unethical because it is illegal.
Second, and in line with the preceding argument, it is important to
remember that laws and principles are socially and politically constructed,
which basically means that they seldom represent a potential objective
Chapter 1 Int roduction
21
truth, but rather emerge from social processes. The laws allowing slavery
were not created by the slaves, but by others. This might seem to open up
to too much arbitrariness, but it also gives us the insight that laws can
be changed by social processes. If there are laws we do not find ethically
correct, it is possible to change them.
Third, it is not entirely easy to follow a law. It is well-known that all laws
need to be interpreted to work in practice. There is also a need for judgments
about how the law should be applied in each particular case, which is the
reason why there are courts. In each case we need to think about what the
law means and how it should be applied. There is thus a need for a reflective,
critical attitude rather than one of pure submission. This is what we try to
promote by means of the ethical process.
Fourth, one needs to remember that not everyone always follows the
law. Perhaps you walk or cycle against a red light, which is illegal in many
countries. Imagine then what others might do.
The structure of the book
In chapter 2, awareness is discussed, and examples are provided from the
three domains of engineering practice: working with technology, working
together with others, and your private ethics. At the end of the chapter,
you will for the first time meet a case that you will follow throughout
the book: you are going to imagine that you are working at a company
which will develop a robot and think about the ethical issues you will face.
Chapters 3-5 concern responsibility. Chapter 3 is about the components of
cc
Responsibility
Chapters 3-5
::,
....
.,:
cc
w
....
_,
~
,-
z
w
Awareness
Chapter 2
0
::,
Critical thinking
Chapters 6-13
1v'I
0
2
.,:
cc
0
:r:
....
Action
Chapter 14
22
Chapter 1 Introduction
::,
.,:
w
:r:
The st ruct ure of the book.
I-
"
responsibility, what it means to be responsible, and when we can say that
we are responsible for something. Chapter 4 describes how we willingly or
unwillingly do not take responsibility. Chapter 5 concerns the particular
responsibilities that professional engineers have. Chapters 6-13 concern
critical thinking. In chapter 6, models of ethical judgment and decisionmaking are presented. The rest of the chapters concern thinking together
with others by studying ethical theory: consequentialism, duty ethics,
virtue ethics, ethics of freedom, relationships, justice, and environmental
ethics. All these theories are expected to contribute to the judgment and
decision-making model in order to create better and more reflective
decisions. Chapter 14 concerns action - the last step in the ethical process.
The book is concluded by a number of assignments and case studies.
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
What are the three domains of engineering practice?
4
What does it mean that ethics is messy?
In which academic fields is ethics studied and are there any
differences in how ethics is studied in these fields?
What does it mean that ethical concepts are discursive constructs
and how does that influence the meaning of ethical concepts?
What is the difference between ethics and morality? How do you use
the concepts?
5
6
7
:,
"'
...
<(
"'
w
......,>-
8
>-
z
w
0
:,
>v'1
9
0
z
<(
"'
0
...
I
:,
<(
w
Did the engineer in the TV series 24 who programmed the bomb do
the right thing?
Was Galen Erso from the movie Rogue One right not to
follow orders?
10
11
What are norms, rules, values, the right, the normative and
the descriptive?
What are the steps in the ethical process described in the chapter?
What do you think about that process?
How can we think critically by using ethical theory?
What are the differences and connections between ethics and law?
...
I
0
Chapter 1 Introduct ion
23
r
Chapter 2
Awareness
A FIR s T s TEP in the ethical process is to be aware of the ethical dimensions
of engineering practice. To do this, we need to go beyond the wall of
obviousness (see chapter 1), since we often speak of engineering practice as
being unrelated to ethics. The ethical aspects are fundamentally concerned
with impact. People and things, texts and images, shape our perceptions
regarding what is good and desirable, and they also shape our actions. The
impact may not be direct - often it is about many small things that change
us over time. It is important that you are aware of this impact that you are
subjected to. But you also have an impact on others through working with
a:
~
a:
:::
technology, working together with others, and in your private life. Through
your actions, you contribute to forming the perceptions and actions of
others. In this chapter, a number of examples are presented from the three
domains of engineering practice (technology, work together with others,
private life). The purpose of this wide range of examples is to increase
awareness and hopefully have an impact on the way you perceive the world.
w
:r:
~
G
25
THE STEREOTYPICAL ENGINEER
In media, the engineer is often depicted as a lone, male, creative genius. In the TV
series Prison Break, the construction engineer Michael Scofield tries to break out of
a prison with his brother. Scofield has idiosyncratic plans and an enormous sense of
detail. Even though this representation of engineers as "experts and lone wolves"
may be inspiring to some, it does not represent a general picture of how engineers
are and how they work. Instead, imagine all the collaborative engineering projects
where ideas are created in interaction between several individuals. How the media
portrays engineers generates images that have an impact on engineers and the
interest of younger generations to become engineers.1
Working with technology
As an engineer, you will develop, implement, or maintain technology. As in
the conclusion from our discussion about ethical concepts in chapter 1, there
is not one definition of technology which everybody agrees on. Technology
is often seen as material artefacts, in other words things (tools, machines,
housing, clothing, transportation, etc.) that have some function. For
example, the function of a knife is to cut. From a broader perspective,
technology is also the knowledge, processes, and skills necessary to develop
and use these material artefacts. French philosopher Jacques Ellul2 took
yet another step and saw technique as an instrumental worldview. He held
that technique constituted the rational methods and procedures aiming at
absolute efficiency. This worldview self-augments and spreads everywhere.
It becomes a milieu where human beings must live, and all must define
themselves in relation to it.
If we return to the basic definition, technology is seen simply as
a material artefact with a function. This has led many to conclude that
technology is value-neutral, in other words amoral (without relation to
ethics and morality). But some have argued that values are embedded
in technology. An example is Langdon Winner's3 discussion about the
overpasses over the road from New York to Long Island, designed by Robert
Moses in the 1930s. These overpasses were low, and the public buses were
too high to pass under them. This prevented the least well-off, including
minorities, from getting to Long Island Beach. Even though the historical
26
Chapter 2 Awareness
cc
::,
....
<(
cc
w
....
....
..,
....
z
w
Cl
::,
....
V'>
Cl
2
<(
cc
0
I
....
::,
<(
w
I
....
0
accuracy of the account is contested or even proven to be outright wrong
by later research, 4 one could conclude that it would have been possible to
design overpasses that affect society in this way. And even after the death
of the designer, the overpasses would continue to embody the designer's
values. The material artefacts have thus become the bearers of values and
cannot be said to be value-neutral.
Philosopher Slavoj Zizek5 describes how values are even built into
something as banal as toilets. In a German toilet, the outlet is in the front,
and in the back the excrement is laid out for us to inspect with our senses,
perhaps to see traces of illnesses. In a French toilet, the hole is at the back in
order to get rid of the excrement as quickly as possible when flushing. The
American (Anglo-Saxon) toilet is a synthesis: the excrement floats in it, but
not to be inspected. We could add the Japanese modern toilets, washlet, that
take care of our excrement in a high-tech manner. Zizek states that none of
these toilets may be accounted for in purely functional and rational terms.
Rather, each of the toilets mirrors an ideological perception, a normative
view, about how we should relate to our excrement. Also according to Zizek,
technology is not only about function but also concerns values.
More specifically one could say that technology shapes our perceptions
and actions. 6
w
:r:
~
Functional or ideological toilet?
Chapter 2 Awareness
27
Technology shapes perception
What is meant by technology shaping perception is that through technology,
we start to view things differently - we even start to think differently.
Technology shapes what we perceive through amplification and reduction.
It amplifies some aspects of reality and reduces others. By doing so, it shapes
what we see as "real" and "important". These structures are intertwined,
since the amplification of one dimension leads to the reduction of others.
German philosopher Martin Heidegger7 argued that technology in its
essence brings-forth, it reveals. This is captured in the saying: "if all you have
is a hammer, then everything starts to look like a nail." One of Heidegger's
examples concerns a river. Heidegger said that modern energy technology
brings forth this river as an energy deposit, rather than as an ecosystem
that furthers animal and human life.
On a thermometer you can read the temperature - a number that
amplifies one aspect of the local surroundings. We make decisions based
on this number (should I wear a jacket or not?), even though we know that
temperature in combination with other measures, for example humidity
and wind speed, gives a better notion of perceived heat or cold. TI1rough
media and communications technology, people far away can make ethical
demands on us. After a natural disaster, or during some conflicts, images of
suffering people and demands can reduce the moral distance, even though
the geographical distance is significant. Through such technologies, we get
closer to people across the globe, in both work and private life. But media
technologies also reduce parts of reality not covered by them.
Furthermore, consider the so-called trolley problem,8 in which a trolley
is moving at a high speed towards five workers who for some reason do
not notice it. The brakes have malfunctioned. You, a bystander, could
pull a lever redirecting the trolley onto another track, where there is just
one person standing (who also does not notice the trolley approaching).
Would you pull the lever? Many would, since they find it better that one
person dies than five. In another version of the trolley problem, a massive
guy stands on a walkway leading over the tracks. You stand behind him
and have the chance to push him so that he falls in front of the trolley.
Thereby, his massive body would stop the trolley and the five people on the
28
Chapter 2 Awareness
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
I-
1-
...,
1-
z
w
0
~
Iv'\
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
I-
~
<(
w
I
l-
o
track would be saved. Many would not do this. In both cases we kill one
person instead of five, so what is really the difference? Some would say that
pushing a man is more active than pulling a lever, but is that really the case?
Perhaps the man is "innocent" compared to the people on the track who
have either chosen to be there or have a higher salary due to occupational
risks. Another way to explain the difference is linked to how technology
shapes perception. Technology, in this case the lever, amplifies the distance
between us and the death of a person, making it easier for us to carry out the
action. Similarly, it might not feel as bad to kill people with drones, rather
than killing them with your own hands.
Technology shapes action
cc
::,
...
cc
......
......,z
<(
w
0
...
::,
"'
0
z
...
...
<(
0
I
::,
<(
w
Technology also shapes action, since artefacts have embedded norms,
which sociologist Madeleine Akrich9 refers to as scripts. The way in which
we ought to use technology is sometimes embedded in its very material
structure. The technology tells us how to act. A speed bump, for example,
means "Lower your driving speed". A hotel key with a large cumbersome
weight attached means "Hand me back when you leave the hotel". A door
opener that only opens if you press the button for two seconds means "Use
me, but only if you need me so much that you can press the button for two
seconds" or "Don't accidentally open me". A potato peeler says that "If you
use me it will be faster to peel the potatoes, but you will waste more potato
than if you are skilful with a knife".
The physical characteristics of the technology invite some actions, while
others are inhibited. These dimensions are also intertwined, like the abovementioned amplification and reduction. You can use a disposable coffee cup
once, twice, perhaps for an entire day, but not for a very long time. Some
printer drivers are designed, by default, to print double-sided documents,
which nudges the user into saving paper, which is good for the environment.
There are ecological shower heads that increase water pressure, making
it seem as if we use more water than we do. Pavements and traffic islands
tell drivers "Don't come here". Everywhere in society, there is technology
containing and expressing norms.
...
I
(I
Chapter 2 Awarene ss
29
SMARTPHONES AND ETHICS
Compared to a few decades ago, we now have very close access to video
cameras. How does this cha nge t he way we behave? This availability makes us
able to collect evidence of morally good and bad actions and share this with
others. What are the ethical implications of this? Does the increased abi lity to
collect evidence lead us to collect evidence rather than to interfere directly?
And how does the consta nt surveillance affect our behaviour?10
THE IT SYSTEM
An IT system developed by a third party was implemented at a workplace. Users
were informed that the data stored in the system cou ld be used for commercial
purposes and that some user data was stored on servers in another country. To
be able to work effectively within the company, the users had to accept these
conditions. Implementing a technological system, such as an IT system, has an
impact on the users.
W hen you work with technology, you are contributing to how it sh apes
perceptions and actions. You therefore have an impact on the world and
need to think about what kind of impact you would like to have.
Working together with others
Engineering work is carried out together with others at a workplace, whether
it is in the private, public, or other sectors. If "working with technology"
relates to technology, "working together with others" relates to interpersonal
relations. It fundamentally concerns that you as an engineer work together
with other people who are or are perceived to be different from you. Perhaps
they are older, younger, more or less educated, more or less knowledgeable
of technology, or have more or less work experience. Perhaps they are from a
different part of the country, from a different country or a different culture.
Perhaps you work with them face-to-face or through communications
technology. The relationships are also complicated by the fact that you
sometimes come from different organizations with different agendas.
30
Chapter 2 Awareness
a::
...
......
...z
::,
<(
a::
w
~
w
0
::,
...
v'\
0
z
<(
a::
0
...
:r
::,
<(
w
...
:r
0
Customers
Many ethical issues arise in relation to customers, both internal (in your
organization) and external (your organization's custom ers). You as an
engineer might for example have more knowledge about the technology you
sell than your customers. Are you obliged to be entirely open for example
about weaknesses in the technology? Moreover, perhaps the customer
does not really need the product you are offering. Not seldom, advanced
technology is installed in developing countries, where it is used for a few years
and then remains unused due to a lack of resources and knowledge. Should
you, as an engineer, give the customer what she n eeds or what she wants?
THE LYING ENGI NEER
Genera l Motors was criticized for knowing that the ignition system in some of
their cars was dangerous, but sti ll did not hing to solve t he problem. Suddenly
the engine could switch off, which disabled airbags, power steering, and braking.
A person was killed because of this problem, and the case was t ried in cou rt. The
chief engineer announced that he did not contribute t o the error. The prosecutor
argued that he lied and said that there is a cu lture of cover-up at General Motors.
The engineer is still employed by the company.11
------------------------■
HYPERNORMS AND MICRO NORMS
;....
<t
One ca n distinguish between the norms that are agreed by a sma ller community
(for example a family, a group, or a company) and the norms that are more
generally accepted. The former are ca lled micro norms and the latter hypernorms.
It is possible t hat micro norms - that it is acceptab le to lie to customers - deviate
from hypernorms - t hat it is unethical to lie. But if such ethically problemat ic
micro norms are exposed in public, an ethical scandal mig ht arise .
cc
,_
....
,_
~
z
UJ
<Cl
::,
,_
"'
C
z
<t
cc
0
I
,_
::,
<t
UJ
I
,_
G
Co-workers in your organization
Ethical issues also arise between co-workers. Perhaps you might experience
that someone is harassed, and need to t hink about what you should do and
whether you should interfere or let the harassed person defend herself. You
might also experience degrading ways of talking about foreigners, women,
Chapt er 2 Awareness
31
and others, and need to think about whether you have an obligation to
change the workplace culture.
Issues of fairness, for example how much people have contributed to a
certain project, will arise. It might be difficult to assess who has contributed
to some successful business deal as well as who and how many people have
contributed to some wrongdoing. Another issue related to fairness is equal
pay - it is not uncommon that two people who do exactly the same job have
different salaries due to some irrelevant factor. How can you handle that?
Perhaps you realize that your work hours are not sufficient for the work
you are expected to do or that you never work full-time but still cash out
a full-time salary. In the knowledge-based workplaces of today, it is not
as easy for managers to control the employees' work, and this poses new
ethical demands on employees and managers.
Suppliers
Suppliers want to have a good relationship with you and naturally want
you to continue being their customer. Sometimes they will give you a well-
meant gift and other times perhaps a bribe. It is not entirely clear where the
line between an acceptable gift, perhaps a keyring with the supplier's logo,
and a bribe, perhaps a briefcase full of cash, is to be found.
Perhaps a supplier has come up with an innovative idea to solve a certain
engineering problem that you face, but you already have a long-standing
relationship with another supplier. You might feel the urge to tell your
current supplier about the innovative idea, but you know that this would
not be ethically correct.
Yet another issue related to suppliers is that you have to be a competent
buyer of the services your suppliers are offering, in other words that you in
some way live up to the expertise you are expected to possess.
cc
::,
1-
<t:
cc
w
,I~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
Competitors
v'\
0
z
<t:
In many technology-based industries people know each other. Perhaps you
have a friend who works for a competing company. It is not unlikely that
you and your friend talk about various job-related matters, but of course
32
Chapter 2 Awareness
cc
0
:r:
1-
::,
<t:
w
:r:
l-
o
r
you try to avoid leaking information or asking for sensitive information.
But in some industries, information tends to spread. This sharing of
information, which in a way is similar to cartel-like collaboration, leads
to increased short-term profitability for the company winning the bid but
is illegal under anti-trust regulations. In some countries, it is forbidden to
meet with competitors informally. Your work can thus have a negative effect
on your personal relations.
Codes of conduct
When you work in an organization you have to follow written or unwritten
codes of conduct. When you are employed, perhaps you need to sign a
statement saying that you have read and understood the rules. But the code
might be impossible to follow, for example if your direct supervisor tells
you to do something that is not allowed by the code. And sometimes your
colleagues might talk about the code as some nonsense invented by head
office - those who know nothing about how to do business. You might
also reflect upon which kinds of deviations from the code are acceptable
and when you should report them. Do you have a responsibility that your
co-workers follow the code or is it up to each individual?
Management
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
........
....z
~
w
0
::,
....
V,
0
z
<t:
If you become a manager, you have more impact on others, and with this,
responsibility follows. Your job might be to motivate your co-workers, but
at the same time you cannot make promises you are unable to fulfil. How
do you make sure that your co-workers do not waste time and energy on
irrelevant things? You also might reflect upon how you could control that
they act according to codes of conduct. You know that one alternative
is trust and another one is control. The technological development has
ment that the means of controlling others are more developed today
than in the past.
a::
0
I
....
::,
<t:
w
....
I
"
Chapter 2 Awareness
33
As a student
Even as a student, there are ethical dilemmas related to working together
with others. You might wonder whether you should just focus on yourself
or help others achieve their goals. Do you have particular responsibilities if
you are very knowledgeable? This dilemma is common enough to be sung
about in a Swedish children's song:
You who are so good at maths will you explain to me
who is not so clever?
Or do you use your hand to cover so that nobody will see
how far you have come in your book?12
Imagine a co-student who is generally committed to her studies but who has
some personal issues and therefore cannot finish an assignment on time.
You want to help this person although university policy forbids you to do
so. Or imagine that you find out that this person bought an essay online.
Do you report this or is it unethical to be a "snitch"?
Most have experienced the problem of having a "free-rider" in the
group, but how do we deal with it? And how do you assess how much
each student has contributed to a group project if you as a student need to
recommend individual grades for your group report? How do we measure
such contributions?
In the classroom, particularly in today's society where traditional
lecturing has lost its status, it is important that students contribute to the
teaching. Being a good student, you are of course contributing to the class,
but are you also obliged to help other students contribute by involving them,
asking them questions, and asking them to tell about their experiences?
What if someone talks too much in class, taking time from others? This
does not seem fair either.
a:
::::,
....
<(
a:
....
I~
1-
z
w
0
::::,
I-
v>
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::::,
<(
w
I
I-
Q
34
Chapter 2 Awareness
Ethics in your personal life
Ethical issues are also present in various parts of your private life.
Consumption
When you buy food, there is an abundance of choices you can make and
many are related to ethics. One example is ethical meat, which is produced
from animals that are raised with care at all stages of their lives. But still
you feel that meat cannot be ethical, because animals are raised for the
specific purpose of slaughter. With technological advances, artificial meat
that grows almost like a plant is being developed. Is this ethical? Does this
not nurture dreams and visions about eating "real meat"?
As a consumer, you often need to choose between a more expensive,
environmentally friendly product and a cheaper, less environmentally
friendly product. It is an ethical choice whether to buy one or the other.
By choosing, you make an impact on the world. By drinking a can of soda,
~
>-
z
u.,
0
;:,
>-
"'
0
z
«
a::
0
:r:
>-
::,
«
u.,
:r:
~
What product is the most ethical?
Chapter 2 Awareness
35
perhaps you support a beverage company with huge pay differences between
the CEO and the average worker. When you buy a computer or a mobile
phone, perhaps you support harsh working conditions in mines and corrupt
governments that benefit from the income from these valuable minerals.
In today's capitalist society, we talk a lot about the power of consumers
and that we should "vote with our dollars". An example of this increased
consumer power is the change of the slogan for the Swedish candy Ahlgren's
Cars from "The most sold car in Sweden" to "The most bought car in
Sweden", which represents a shift from a production focus (cars are sold by
producers) to a consumption focus (cars are bought by consumers).
Perhaps the capitalist system shapes us to think first and foremost as
consumers in various aspects of life. When we travel we consume places,
rather than relating to the local inhabitants. And maybe you are a consumer
of education, rather than a student.
The choices you make as a consumer might affect the other domains of
engineering practice. For example, perhaps you only buy vegan food for the
participants of a working lunch. Or you lobby for your company to only
buy Fairtrade coffee. Or the fact that your organization supports charities
makes you do the same as a private individual.
Family matters
In family life, perhaps in a relationship with a partner, there are constant
negotiations about values. One example may concern honesty and
faithfulness. Can one have secrets in a relationship and what kind of secrets?
How should one raise one's children? Should one influence their values or
let them be fully free to develop their own? Discussions about fairness often
come up in the family context. Children exclaim "this is not fair!" regarding
what time they have to come home, what time they have to go to bed, or how
much candy they are allowed to eat. A commercial from a Swedish candy
company shows a grown-up man sitting on a train, in a suit. He opens his
briefcase, where he has a bag of candies and he takes a few pieces. A child
sees him and asks her mother "What day is it today?" Children in Sweden
usually get candy on Saturdays. The commercial's slogan: being a grown-up
has its advantages.
36
Chapter 2 Awareness
...""
....,
""
.......
::,
<(
....z
~
w
0
....::,
v'>
0
z
<(
cc
0
...
I
::,
<(
w
....
I
"
The ethics we learn in a family context can be transferred to our
workplaces. For example, we can learn about interesting practices from school
that may be applicable to the workplace. Likewise, there is a transfer from
the workplace to home. We can teach our children how one behaves at work
and which values work life is based on. Some even use methodologies from
the workplace, such as project management tools, to manage their family life.
On the street
When walking on the street, you have perhaps met people who ask you
for change. Should you help them, or should someone else take care of
them? Or should we as a society not take care of them at all? A retired
school teacher saw that a Roma family was living in a car. He saw that the
daughter sat in the car, watching movies on the phone and eating candies.
He decided to intervene and let the family live in his house. Could you have
done the same thing?
When you want to cross the street at a pedestrian crossing without
traffic lights, in many countries the cars are forced by law to let you cross.
Perhaps without reflecting, you thank them by raising your hand or nodding.
However, when you cross the street and the light is green, you probably
seldom thank the drivers who let you cross. Thanking others, or treating
others with respect, at times seems to be quite ritualistic - and rituals may
also be seen as part of ethics, understood as the norms of society. Perhaps
this is related to etiquette?
Free time
QC
::,
....
<(
QC
w
....
....
-'
....
""
w
D
::,
>-
V\
D
:z
<(
QC
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
w
:r:
....,;,
In your free time, you might practise some sport, or be engaged in politics,
and so on. Let us take sports as an example. Imagine a football game where
you are the only player to see that a goal was scored by the opposing team - the
ball crossed the goal line, but the referee did not see it. Should you have told
the referee? In lower level badminton tournaments, the players are themselves
the line judges, which at times leads to conflicts. In higher level competitions,
there are line judges. They are not supposed to be biased, but they might not
always rule correctly. You could even imagine that they are corrupt. To solve
Chapter 2 Awareness
37
the issue, hawk-eye technology has been introduced. Players can challenge the
calls by the human line judges and let the technology decide. But it happens
once in a while that the hawk-eye is wrong. Technology could be a way to
avoid ethical discussions, but what if it does not work as expected?
Popular culture
From our infancy, we read stories and sing songs, and some of these have a
moral message, for example "Itsy Bitsy Spider", which says something like:
"Keep fighting despite the fact that it might seem difficult and pointless". In
these songs and stories, we learn about heroes, villains, and how to behave.
There are ethical messages in movies, lyrics, literature, art, and so on. Ethics
is also expressed in various sayings. Even in our work life, we hear stories
about good and bad behaviour, about heroes and villains.
The purpose of this chapter was to show the ethical dimensions in the three
domains of engineering practice by means of examples. A way to increase
your awareness is to try to reflect upon things that you have previously not
reflected about. The things you are doing - what do they say about you? The
laws you follow - what is the ethics of them? The work that you are carrying
out - what is it about? The songs you are singing - what is their message?
Fostering awareness is a matter of practice. To increase awareness we must
tune in to the right wavelength, we must put on a pair of ethical glasses
through which we perceive the world. By using our imagination, we might
see beyond the wall of obviousness.
a:
::,
I-
«
a:
w
I-
I-
STUDY QUESTIONS
_,
1-
z
w
Ll
::,
Iv'\
3
4
Why is it important to be aware of ethical issues?
What does Ellul mean by technique?
Are Moses' overpasses unethical?
What are the lessons one may draw from Zizek's example of toilets?
38
Chapter 2 Awa re ness
1
2
Ll
z
«
a:
0
I
1-
::,
«
w
I
I-
"
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
V,
0
:z
<(
a:
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
..
20
What does it mean that technology shapes perception and action?
Give three examples.
How does technology affect your life? Give examples. Does
technology shape your perceptions and actions?
What is the essence of technology, according to Heidegger?
How do energy technology, thermometers, and the lever in the
trolley problem shape perception?
What is a script?
What ethical issues may arise in your relationships to customers,
co-workers, suppliers, and competitors?
What is a code of conduct and how can you relate to it?
In what way is your ethics affected by you becoming a manager?
Which ethical dilemmas might you face as a student?
How do you view your responsibility as a consumer?
Which ethical issues do you encounter in your family relationships?
If you engage in any leisurely activities, analyse the ethical rules
involved in these (for example in sports, music, or club activities).
Analyse the ethical message of some stories you read as a child.
Think about a movie or TV series you have seen recently - which
ethical values does it, or the various characters in it, reflect?
What is the moral message of these sayings?
Swedish author Vilhelm Moberg: "Take care of your life!
Because now it's your time on earth."
Mahatma Gandhi: "'An eye for an eye' will make the whole
world blind."
Shipping magnate Aristotle Onassis: "The best way to succeed in
life is to always step on toes, other people's toes."
Benjamin Franklin: "When you're good towards others, you're
good towards yourself."
The Japanese saying: "Fall seven times, get up eight."
Ralph W. Sockman: "The test of courage comes when we are in the
minority. The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority."
Write a brief reflection about some ethical issue you have
experienced recently (working with technology, working with
others, or as a private individual).
Chapter 2 Awareness
39
r
THE LIFE PARTNER AND YOU: AWARENESS IN PRACTICE
For some time you have been part of a design team in a mechatronics company. Like
any for- profit company, you want to expand into new areas, and during a meeting the
idea of developing humanoid care robots comes up. The employees in t he company are
really excited about the idea. Given your proprietary technology in mechatronics, you
are convinced that you cou ld develop a humanoid care robot that could revo lutionize
the market. At present, no such products exist.
You also discussed the possibility of combining this with a new form of artificial
intelligence, which has been developed by a division within your company. This could
enhance interactions between robots and humans. You start to fantasize about how
the care robot could be used for a variety of purposes, both related to the more
physical aspects of caring and the interactions. The robot could for example be
engaged in meaningfu l conversations with the care recipient. since it is constantly
connected t o and learning from the Internet. Hmm ... Wouldn't the "Life Partner" be
a good name for the robot?
You are currently taking a course on eth ics in engineeri ng and have just studied
the chapt er on awareness. At first, you think that this is just a development project
concerning technology, but you have learned that there are ethical issues related
to working with technology. You remember that technology shapes perceptions and
actions. There seem to be ethical issues after all. How will this robot shape perception
and action? How will it have an impact on others?
a:
::,
...
......
<(
a:
w
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
v'I
C
z
<(
a:
0
:,:
,_
::,
<(
w
:,:
,_
"
40
Chapter 2 Awa rene ss
r
Chapter 3
Responsibility
IN THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER, we discussed awareness. It is fundamentally
"'
~
"'
::
related to how we are affected and the impact we have regarding ethical
issues. As soon as we are aware, we can decide what to do with this
awareness. Should we take responsibility for the issues we are aware
of? In other words, are they our concern? This chapter concerns what
responsibility is - a crucial notion in ethics.
A good illustration of responsibility is the song "Vern dodade Carlos?"
(Who killed Carlos?), composed by Bjorn Afzelius, a Swedish singersongwriter, and inspired by the death of Osmo Vallo in 1995.1 After listening
to the song, we discuss the components of responsibility, namely freedom
to, freedom from, and impact. We have already talked about impact in the
previous chapter, but here we go deeper. Then we apply these concepts
to two people in the song about Carlos in order to answer the question
"Who killed Carlos?" After that, we return to engineering practice and ask
ourselves: who is responsible for the (mis)use of technology?
~
>--
z
w
0
::,
>--
"'
0
z
«
cc:
0
I
>--
::,
«
w
I
>I)
41
WHO KILLED CARLOS?
Carlos was messy, drunk and stupid
He was not let in because he was drunk
When the door guard asked him to go without
complaining
But the mother who fled from a dictatorship
She knew everything about police torture
She answered: "Here there will be nothing done
Until I know how my only son died"
Carlos hit the guard
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened[...]
The guard was worn out. stressed and hot
And fed up by the disco's damned noise
And tired of constantly being called a pig
So, he call ed the police
The police in Stockholm a late Saturday night
Have other things to do than help a guard
There is assault. manslaughter and robbery out
there
At a rate beyond the control of the cops
But they went to the club and did their duty
And laying Carlos down was done in an instant
He became numb from the inhuman pressure
When the cops stepped on his back
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened
At dawn he lay there cold in his cell
They found no blood and found no wounds
A death that no one understands
The police doctor wrote a brief note
About Carlos who died in police custody
It was assumed that the youngster choked himself
When he slept in his solitary cell
For the record, an autopsy was done
It consisted of nothing being done
They approved what the police doctor said
And Carlos was now just a file
They called Carlos' mother in Siidermalm
And asked her urgently to take ca re
Of the son who had a tag around his foot
In the mortuary fridge underground
Kristina from Kungsholmen sat in her kitchen
With half-lu kewarm coffee and home-rolled
smoke
And thought of what she witnessed yesterday
At the club where she used to go
She saw in her mind how Carlos was beaten down
Hands tied behind his back and then how the
police stepped
On his back until one heard a crunch
When something in the boy broke
She had to know that everything ended well
So, she at last called the custody officers
And when it became clear that it went like she
thought
She asked where Carlos had lived
She went home to his mother and told it as it was
That Carlos was kil led when his back broke
Together they decided to help each other
For this truth must be revealed
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened[...]
But someone has begun to understand
When a complaint against a police officer is fi led
It is t reated as if it does not exist
An immigrant woman who sued a policeman
Will have to wait until someone has t ime
""
:::,
,_
""
w
,-.
<(
,_
~
,-.
z
w
0
:::,
,-.
The court process took a quarter of an hour
And the court ruled what the doctors said
"'
0
Kristina was one, but the policemen two
And there were no more testimonies
a'.
z
<(
0
:r:
,_
:::,
<(
w
,_
:r:
0
42
Chapter 3 Responsibi lity
Kristina and the mother decided to find
The people who had been at the scene
So, Carlos had to stay in the mort uary fridge
Because time was now of the essence
When the doorman heard what had happened
Then he told about others who had been at the
scene
And soon there were severa l who could testify
About what they all had seen
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened[.,.]
Is it the police doctor in custody, or the
guards there?
Or the coroner who avoided trouble?
Is it the district court that trusted the
doctors' words?
Or was it a collective murder?
When Swedes are murdered everything is
investigated
But when darkies die you take it cool
And with Carlos t he :ruth was known
When people started to help each other
But many have begun to understand
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened[..]
But finally all can understand
The Court of Appea l demanded a new autopsy
And Carlos fina lly came up above ground
And soon it was clear how he lost his life
And the mother found some peace
Carlos is dead, no one knows what happened[...]
But everyone can still understand
But who shou ld one judge, who carries the blame?
Is it Carlos who fought when he was drunk?
Is it the doorman or a violent policeman
Or the guests who stood beside?
[Translated by Thomas Taro Lennerfors]
At the end of the song, many relevant questions are posed. But to understand
who is responsible for the death of Carlos, and who is responsible for other
issues that are more relevant for engineers, we need to have some concepts
to think with. In this book, we discuss three components of responsibility:
freedom to,freedom from, and impact.
Sometimes we distinguish between forward-looking responsibility what we should do - and backward-looking - who was responsible for
something that happened (also called accountability) - but here we take a
broader view of responsibility including both perspectives.
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
V,
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
"
Freedom to - agent-specific aspects
Freedom to is about agent-specific aspects (that is, related to the person
who acts). We contrast freedom to and freedom from, where the former
concerns agent-specific aspects, while the latter focuses on external aspects,
Chapter 3 Responsibil ity
43
for example the availability of resources as well as social factors. Here we
focus on two dimensions of freedom to, namely the ability of the agent to
make a choice and her knowledge.
To make a choice, one needs a cognitive ability to think about different
alternative actions and choose one of them. Here we see the adult, mentally
sane human as the epitome of a person with the ability to choose.
From this epitome, we may deviate to other agents who are held to a more
limited ability to make choices. For example, there is a discussion whether
children of certain ages can be held morally responsible for their actions,
which is dependent on whether they can make active choices. The fact that
their cognitive abilities are under development, which has an impact on
their ability to make choices, implies that children are not entirely free to
take responsibility. The ability to make choices does not go away with (old)
age, unless you get ill. Psychological disorders naturally have an impact
on an agent's ability to make a choice. It is therefore not surprising that
mentally ill criminals are handled differently than sane ones.
Can animals other than humans take responsibility or be held morally
responsible for their actions? If a pet dog attacks someone, it is likely
that the people who own the animal are seen as morally responsible. But
how would one see it if monkeys steal cameras, mobile phones, and hats
from tourists? Are these animals morally responsible? Surely animals can
make choices (depending on which animal we are talking about), but how
motivated and reasoned are these choices? Some have argued that even
plants make choices. Pea plants seem to make choices about how to grow
based on an assessment of risk. 2 Given that animals and plants are often not
the central concern in people's discussions about forward- or backwardlooking responsibility, we often neglect them. But they can, of course, still
be stakeholders in ethical problems.
It is also debatable whether non-biological entities, both natural and
artificial, have the ability to make choices. It seems quite obvious that
natural objects, such as stones or meteors, are not able to take responsibility
due to their inability to make a choice. But artificial non-biological agents,
such as machines, are sometimes held r-esponsible for their actions. Let us
return to this issue later in the chapter.
The second dimension in freedom to concerns knowledge. Knowledge can
44
Chapter 3 Responsibi lit y
c,:
:,
....
<t:
c,:
w
....
....
-'
,_
z
w
0
....::,
V'I
Q
z
<t:
a:
0
....I
::,
<t:
w
I
,_
"
r
"'
::,
....
<t:
cc
....z
~
w
0
::,
....
"'
0
z
<t:
cc
0
:r:
....
::,
<t:
w
:r:
....0
mean both awareness and competence or ability. As we mentioned already
in the previous chapter, it is unlikely that you will have a responsibility
to influence something that you are unaware of. So, a basic awareness is
necessary. Competence is knowledge about how to make a desired impact
in a certain situation. For example, imagine that you are on the proverbial
flight where someone cries out "Is there a doctor on this plane?'' If you
are a medical doctor, you have the competence to make a difference. This
knowledge is an agent-specific aspect that is important for taking and
ascribing responsibility. Imagine that you work in a company that gets an
order to manufacture a beam that is. definitely too weak for its purpose.
Since you have the knowledge of this, you are more responsible to blow the
whistle than someone who does not have this competence. Imagine that you
see someone who has fallen into a river. If you do not know how to swim,
you will not be able to help the person directly. If you know how to swim,
you have more responsibility than those who do not know how to swim.
But even if you do not have the specific competence, you can of course do
something, for example, go and find someone who knows how to swim. This
is the basis for the idea that with knowledge comes responsibility, which is a
fundamental notion in engineering ethics.
Both aspects (awareness and competence) are descriptive and normative
(see chapter 1). We have mostly discussed the descriptive dimension. The
normative dimension means that we ought to be aware and competent. That
is, say that we completely miss out on something ethically important that
happens close to us since we are watching the latest episode of our favourite
series, then perhaps we can normatively say that we should have been more
attentive to our surroundings. And, if we become aware of something that
does not feel right, perhaps we ought to learn more about this. There is
also a normative component regarding competence - that we ought to
be competent in order to take responsibility. But surely we cannot know
everything, can we? What are we expected to know?
Freedom to is both about forward-looking responsibility (Can the
person make a choice? Is she aware of what she is doing? Does she have the
competence to take responsibility?) and backward-looking responsibility
(Could the person make a choice? Was she aware of what she was doing?
Did she have the competence to take responsibility?) .
Chapter 3 Responsibility
45
Freedom from - context-specific aspects
The next component concerns freedom from, which means that the agent
is free to make a choice without external influences. This obviously only
applies to agents with an ability to choose (in freedom to). Freedom from
qualifies the first component, asking how free the choice was. In the
introductory chapter, an engineer was convinced by means of an electric
drill to program a bomb. This was not a free choice, since he was under
severe external pressure. Therefore, one could argue that he was not
responsible for the explosion. Others would argue that we always have a
choice. The engineer could have become a martyr by being drilled to death,
and then the bomb would (perhaps) not have exploded. But how much may
we reasonably demand of a person? Related to the dimension of freedom
from, the core idea is that with more external pressure, it is more difficult
to take responsibility or be held responsible.
There are various types of pressure that limit our freedom. They range
from explicit threats to implicit norms that influence our actions. For
example, physical threats can limit the freedom of the agent. The physical
threats can be less apparent than an electric drill, for example "If you
don't do this, then you'll see!" or even an unspoken threat, a certain look,
something said between the lines.
Sometimes, limiting the freedom is related to means and resources. For
example, related to planned obsolescence, an engineer could hear that "If
you don't introduce this function making this device unusable within a
year, I will lower your salary / not promote your career / give others the
chance to do it." It is not a physical threat, but can still limit your freedom.
Another limiting factor could be that you belong to an organizational
structure where you are expected to fulfil a role and should act according to
this role. You could, for example, claim that you are not free to act because
you should be loyal to your employer, and therefore do not report some
ethically problematic action the company is involved in. But how much are
the employment contract and the related informal norms really limiting
your freedom? The boss is not really physically forcing you to comply, so
you might perhaps still be held morally responsible for paying a bribe or not
blowing the whistle, despite the fact that you follow orders.
46
Chapter 3 Responsibil it y
...""
""
........_,
::,
<(
w
.....
z
w
C
=>
.....
V"I
C,
z
<(
""
C
...=>
I
<(
w
I
.....
g
Are travellers the future?
"'
::,
><lC
""
w
Social norms may also limit our freedom to act. Some argue that the norms
of society make it more difficult to take responsibility, for example related
to climate change. It is socially difficult to lead a simple life, grow your own
food, not go far away on vacations, and consume as little as possible. There
are many social norms embedded in commercials, such as the motto of an
airline saying "Travellers are the future." Both in forward- and backwardlooking responsibility, the criteria offreedom from is important. We return
to the various factors limiting our freedom in chapter 4.
>-
>...,
>-
z
w
0
::,
>v,
0
z
<lC
""
0
:r:
>::,
<lC
w
:r:
>-
"
Impact
The last component concerns impact. If someone is to blame for an action
(backward-looking responsibility), it is necessary to see if she has had an
impact on it, if she has caused it. If there is no causal relationship between
the person and the action, it is likely that she is not responsible. The first
Chapter 3 Responsibi lity
47
step is thus to see whether or not there is a causal relationship. This causality
does not need to be direct ("A caused B"). It may also concern implicit
impact; for example, if you support a culture of sexist jokes at work, it is
possible that this leads to other types of sexual harassment. But how direct
must the impact be for one to be responsible? For example, before a Nazi
attack in southern Stockholm a few years ago, a group of Nazis entered
a supermarket. They wanted to buy soda in glass bottles, not in plastic
bottles. If the shop assistants had sold the bottles that were later thrown
at an anti-Nazi demonstration, would they have been responsible? Indeed,
there is some kind of connection between selling the glass bottles and the
harm caused by the Nazis. But the connection is more than weak, not least
because other objects could have been used to cause similar damage, for
example stones or glass bottles taken from a recycling station.
In forward-looking responsibility, we must be able to make an impact in
order to take responsibility. Once again, there might be those who can impact
more directly than others. For example, if you witness sexual harassment
in your workplace, you can have a direct impact by talking to the people
involved, but you can also have an indirect impact by trying to support a
culture where sexual harassment is not permitted. Or you might not do
anything, which leads you to indirectly accept these practices, and this is also
an impact. But there are probably many practices upon which you are unable
to have any impact, for example how income from minerals goes to corrupt
regimes in a country far away. Or maybe, you could have an indirect impact
by buying computer equipment free from conflict minerals. The question
of impact is central throughout the rest of the book (particularly chapters
6-13), since critical thinking about ethics is about discussing different kinds
of impact which follow from different alternative actions.
cc
::,
I<(
cc
w
The components of responsibility in practice
II-
,_
~
z
w
The different components should not be interpreted as binary conditions
but rather as a matter of degree. In some cases, we might have more
responsibility, in some less. We seldom bear the full responsibility, and
we seldom have no responsibility. Let us take two examples from the song
about Carlos. The policemen who stepped on Carlos' back obviously broke
48
Chapter 3 Responsibility
0
::,
fv"I
0
z
<(
a'.
0
I
1-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
a:
::,
...
......
...z
<(
a:
w
~
w
0
::,
r-
"'
0
z
<(
a:
0
...:r:
::,
<(
w
.....
:r:
vital organs. Freedom to: Given that they are adult humans with no known
mental disorders, they fulfil the first part of freedom to. Most likely, they
had knowledge that there is a significant risk of damage if one steps on
another person's back. However, it is not clear if they heard that something
in Carlos' body broke when they stepped on him. If they had heard it and
did not take Carlos to the hospital, they should be even more directly held
responsible for his death. Freedom from: Based on the lyrics, the policemen
were not forced in any way to step on Carlos' back. Given the absence of
coercion, the policemen should be held as highly responsible from this
perspective. Impact: given what happened later in the cell it is obvious that
the policemen were the ones causing the damage that killed Carlos, so the
responsibility is high.
Kristina woke up and remembered what had happened the night before
when Carlos was beaten down. She could have gone about her life, but she
wanted to see that everything was okay with Carlos. When she heard that
Carlos was dead, she could have once again just let it all go. But she was
unable to. She visited the mother, rallied support, and eventually directly
contributed to the policemen being held responsible. Let us think about
this as forward-looking responsibility. Freedom to: Kristina is an adult
human being and therefore had the ability to decide whether or not to take
responsibility. She had witnessed the crime, was aware of the crunch that
was heard, and she had sufficient knowledge to know who to contact to find
out what happened to Carlos. Since she had this awareness and knowledge,
she felt that she had the moral responsibility to do something. What she did
was to try to find out more about what happened to Carlos - to increase her
knowledge. Freedom from: Kristina was not coerced to do anything. She
was also not hindered from doing anything, for example, if the police had
said: "Don't say a word about this to anyone, or else ..." Impact: With small
actions she found out more about Carlos, found out where his mother lived,
and did many other things. So, although she might have initially thought
that she could not have an impact, she could. The impact is obviously not
to undo the death of Carlos, but that the policemen were convicted. In this
case, one would most likely not have judged Kristina had she not done
anything, but she decided that she could make a difference.
The studied components make the difference between individual
Chapter 3 Responsibility
49
responsibility and collective responsibility less clear-cut. We see that there
are at least two issues at stake in the song about Carlos. On the one hand, the
death of Carlos and, on the other, that the truth about his death was covered
up. If we read the lyrics closely with these components in mind, there are
probably more actors than the police who were responsible for Carlos'
death, and more than one party who was responsible for the cover-up.
A good way to think about different actors' responsibility is therefore to
think using these components. It is likely that we are always collectively
responsible for many things, although our relation to the practices may be
more or less direct.
LEGAL AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY
There is a difference between moral and legal responsibility (compare with the
discussion in chapter 1). In law, one ascribes legal responsibi lity given the existing
laws. These may coincide with how we view moral responsibility, as described
above, but there is also a possibility that they diverge from it. Sometimes those in
weaker chains of causa lity (for example, where several people could have stopped
a particular wrongdoing} are not punished in the legal system, while they may
sti ll be held morally responsible.
---------------■
Responsibilities of designers and users
In chapter 2, we discussed "working with technology" as one of the major
domains of engineering practice where engineers face ethical issues. Now,
when we have discussed the concept of responsibility, we can return to the
issue of the responsibility of the designer of technology.
Apart from designers of technology, there are users. And, as we know, a
hammer could be used to hit a nail or kill a person - or even be seen as an
art object, as philosopher Don Ihde3 said. So, ifyou design a hammer, what
are your responsibilities? We may here disregard freedom from (since we
expect the designer not to be forced into designing a hammer) and focus
on freedom to and impact. Freedom to partly concerns knowledge, and the
designer is most probably aware of the varying uses of the hammer. If she
knows about the potential misuses of the hammer and still designs it, she is
50
Chapter 3 Responsibilit y
cc
...
......
_,
::,
<(
cc
w
...z
...
w
0
::,
v'>
0
z
<(
cc
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
...
0
r
a:
::)
....
<t
a:
w
r....
_,
r-
z
w
0
::,
r-
v,
0
z
<t
er
0
I
....
::,
<t
more responsible than someone with no knowledge about such use (but the
latter person should have such knowledge). Related to impact, the designer
is causally linked to the hammers out there, and if a hammer is used to kill
a person, the designer is somewhere in the chain of responsibility. However,
similarly to the conclusion of the discussion about the Nazi attack above,
there are several means that could cause similar damage. A hammer could
easily be replaced with some other tool, which significantly weakens the
responsibility of the designer.
Furthermore, one should not underestimate the creativity of users to
redefine, enlarge, and change the technology's area of application, and
modify the technology in various ways. The values and moral implications
of technology are thus redefined. One could, for example, disassemble a
table and use a table leg to cause the same damage as a hammer. To have
knowledge of the potential misuses of a technology and try to counteract
these could be seen as a responsibility of the designer of technology.
One should keep in mind that the designer of technology never exists in
a vacuum, and this relates to freedom from. In theories about technological
development, there is a distinction between how technology is "pushed
out" into the market and how it is "pulled" by demands of the customers.
When thinking about it, push and pull go hand in hand. A technology that
is pushed out will fail if there is no way of mobilizing a latent "pull" for
the technology. And desires and ideas regarding "pull" are often formed
by what is technologically imaginable, thus presupposing some level of
technology. The designer is therefore dependent on which technology
already exists, and much technology is just a development of an already
existing technological system. For example, the fact that there is already a
large infrastructure of roads and railways makes it more natural to design
vehicles that are suited for this infrastructure. When one wants to make
infrastructural innovations, for example to electrify roads, one needs to
consider this pre-existing infrastructure. This is also related to Ellul's idea
of technique as a milieu to which we must relate (see chapter 2). Since the
design of technology is shaped by others (freedom from is decreased), the
responsibility of the designer decreases.
Consider a drill rig designed for operating in harsh conditions, for
example high waves, extreme cold, or very deep waters. If an oil company
Chapter 3 Responsibility
51
uses the rig to drill in environmentally sensitive areas, is the developer of
the rig ethically responsible? Yes, the company designed, developed, and
ordered the rig from a shipyard, which means that they had a direct impact
in terms of creating the rig. The shipyard also had an effect in terms of
creating the rig, but only because they got an order from the developer.
This is the way the market economy works. According to the knowledge
dimension offreedom to the developer was probably aware of the fact that
the rig could be used for drilling in sensitive areas. But if that were the case,
the rig was also intended to drill very safely, perhaps more safely than a rig
from another company. Furthermore, the designer did not create the rig
just for fun, but because the company anticipated a high oil price, which
would make it lucrative to drill for oil in these areas. They also thought that
"If we don't do it, someone efae will". How about the oil company? They
are responsible since they operate the rig. They would not have done so had
the rig not been available in the market. Furthermore, they could claim
that there is a high demand for oil in the world and that the oil company
just satisfies this market, which actually consists of you and me (who go by
::,
"'
I<(
w
"'
fI~
f-
z
w
0
::,
,-
v,
0
z
<(
a::
0
I
1-
::,
<(
Offshore oil rig.
52
Chapter 3 Responsibility
bus and car and buy products that are transported by truck and ship). So,
the designer is responsible to some extent, but the oil company and we as
consumers are also responsible. When we think about responsibility using
our components, we can get a more nuanced way of understanding the
responsibilities of designers and users.
Today, with the possibilities of more autonomous technologies, there
are new ethical demands. To what extent is the developer responsible for
such technology?
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SEARCH ENGINES
THAT LEARN FROM USERS?
Internet search engines learn from users what they want. Machine learning
algorithms can pick up on frequent discriminatory stereotypes, for examp le that
men of a certain ethnicity are criminals or t hat women of a particular ethnicity
are linked to pornography. In this way, the algorithm mimics the stereotypes
of the users and transfers these to other users. On a translation webpage an
algorit hm can suggest stereot ypical translations (for examp le, that an engineer
becomes a "he") even from languages with on ly gender-neutra l pronouns. Who is
responsible for these types of search resu lts, when the designer of the algorithm
wants the algorithm to be as good as possible by learning from all users?
a::
::,
><(
a::
~
>-
z
u.,
0
::,
>.,.,
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
>-
::,
<(
u.,
I
><l>
What can we say about implementers of technology? Those who implement
technology on a larger scale must think about the consequences of such
technologies for the end-user, both because they have a great impact on
the end-users and because they probably have more knowledge than the
end-users about how the technology works (freedom to). An example of this
difference between users and implementers is when a municipality decides
to introduce a system for night surveillance of elderly people using home
care. Because of this there is no need for care-givers to make home visits,
which leads to reduced travel and reduced cost, and it additionally solves
the problem of there not being enough care-givers. Thus, this has a positive
impact on the implementers. However, such technology could compromise
the right to privacy. The ones who decide to implement technology, whether
it is a night surveillance system, a new IT system, or any other technology,
have a great impact on the end-users.
Chapter 3 Responsibility
53
Why take responsibility?
We have now reviewed three components of responsibility, but why should
we take responsibility in the first place? Why should we try to do good?
There are several reasons.
A first reason might be religion. For some Buddhists, responsibility is
linked to karma - if you do good things, good things will come to you.
And vice versa. If you do bad things your entire life, you might be reborn
as a lesser being, a rat or a cockroach. In some periods and places, there
have been very strong images of heaven and hell in Christianity. Perhaps
those who did not like the prospects of burning in hell for eternity tried to
take responsibility and behave well. Furthermore, in some forms of Islam,
there is also a judgement day, where all our good and bad actions will be
up for scrutiny. This religious argument could perhaps convince some, but
if we do not believe in heaven and hell, why should we take responsibility?
If God is dead, is not everything permitted? (See the section on Nietzsche
in chapter 10.)
A second reason would be that we should take responsibility and be
moral because of prudence; to avoid punishment. You never know what
will happen if someone catches you doing bad things. This could lead to
various forms of punishment, both legal and social. You might feel shame
and be excluded from your social networks. Risk management could be an
appropriate term for this attitude, which is fundamentally about taking
responsibility in order to avoid risk.
You could also take responsibility for instrumental purposes, to achieve
something else. For example, you might want to take responsibility to seem
good, since that might help you in your career and in your life. It can be
a career advantage to seem altruistic. This could also apply to businesses
that might want to promote corporate social responsibility for achieving
long-term profitability. Furthermore, taking responsibility could lead to a
sense of fulfilment and meaning in this world. You could also do it in order
to construct a society you want to live in. You could, for example, claim that
if you live a responsible life others will do the same, and thereby a good
society for all of us is created.
Moreover, you could take responsibility because of your personal
54
Chapter 3 Responsi bility
cc
::,
I<(
cc
w
,I~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
V'\
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
I-
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
r
conviction. To be able to live with yourself, you take responsibility. You have
ethical standards and integrity - you will not sacrifice them for anything.
Taking responsibility is here an end in itself; you do it out of duty even, and
no other explanations are necessary.
In this chapter, we have discussed three components of the concept of
responsibility, which are important to think about both when we want
to know who was responsible for something that went wrong and why we
should or should not take responsibility for something in the future. In
the next chapter, we will discuss how we avoid or can avoid responsibility.
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
cr
::,
....
<(
cr
w
....
....
...,
....z
w
0
::,
r-
V,
7
Who was responsible for the death of Carlos and the cover-up?
Think about this using the components of responsibility.
Did Bjorn Afzelius take responsibility by writing the song
about Carlos?
Explain the components of responsibility. What do you think
about them? Do you agree? Is some dimension irrelevant?
Is some dimension lacking?
Who was responsible for the use of a particular technology
(the Atom bomb, the combustion engine, and so on)?
Who is responsible: the designer or the user of technology?
Which different types of users are there? In what way are they
responsible for the ethical aspects of technology?
Why should we take responsibility? Which arguments do you think
are reasonable? Are there other arguments for why we should take
responsibility?
0
z
<(
er
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
w
:r:
~
Chapter 3 Responsibility
55
THE LIFE PARTNER AND YOU: RESPONSIBILITY IN PRACTICE
The work with the robot project continues and so does your course in ethics. You
have now learned that responsibil ity can be discussed by means of the components
freedom to, freedom from, and impact. You realize that the humanoid care robot
would have an impact on people. You as an engineer would also have a quite direct
impact since this technology would not exist unless you develop it. You also think
that you have freedom to. You are a thinking human being who is able to make
choices and you know the possibi lities and !limits of the technology. Thinking about
freedom from, you of course know that you work in a for-profit company, and you
feel that there is always a pressure to earn more money. But on t he other hand, you
have more knowledge than the managers and could possibly find argument s for
why the humanoid care robot would not be a suitab le option technological ly. After
this analysis, you real ize that you have responsibility for this issue - it is yours to be
concerned about.
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,-.
V'>
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
.....
0
56
Chapter 3 Responsibility
Chapter 4
Avoiding responsibility
1 N c HAP TE R 3, we described what responsibility is, and in this chapter we
will discuss the factors which make it possible for us to not take responsibility
or to explain away our responsibility. The simplest way of pushing away
responsibility is to blame others, but there are also other ways we often use.
The reason why we discuss this topic is for you to be aware of such factors.
When you hear yourself (or other people) explaining that you are not
responsible for something, the concepts presented in this chapter might help
you think more deeply about whether you are in fact not responsible.
We are determined
If we are not in any way free to make a reasoned choice, we have no
a:
C
I
>--
responsibility. For ethics to make any sense, we need to be able to control
our behaviour (discussed under freedom to in the previous chapter).
However, some people claim that we are not free but determined.
There are various ways in which we might be determined. Social
determination might come from our upbringing; for example, that we were
born into a particular family, in a particular social class, in a certain area,
in a city, in a country. The social heritage of addicts is widely discussed and
similarly that some kids can get a kickstart by growing up in a family with
socially legitimate (and socially functional) values. We are also shaped by our
57
r
psychological characteristics, our drives and desires. Psychoanalyst Sigmund
Freud argued that the conscious part of our psyche is only the tip of the
iceberg and that much of our personality stems from unconscious processes
in the Id, in other words our bodily desires, sexuality, aggression, and so on. 1
If that is the case, can we really ask ourselves to deliberate on ethical matters?
There are, of course, other psychologists who ascribe much more agency to us.
There are those who maintain that in the end we are made up of physical
matter following the laws ofnature. Sometimes we say that we tell our body
to do this or that. Who is then the agent, really? Perhaps we say that it is the
brain, but why would the brain be "outside" the physical processes? It also
follows laws of nature, doesn't it? Some people who have argued that we
are not determined say that we instead are more random (which is called
indeterminism). For them the future is not determined but unpredictable.
It is still not influenced by our choices, but by chance.
Do we have arguments for the existence of a more or less free will? First
of all, most of us have very strong experiences from our everyday life that we
actually can make decisions, and that we could have made other decisions
than the ones we made. Second, our lives make much more sense if we
believe that we have a free will. This belief is thus good for our well-being.
But this resembles a psychological trick for increased well-being, so one
wonders if this is a good argument. And maybe it is not a good strategy after
all, since the fact that we have to choose leads to a lot of anxiety. Third, if
at some point in time evidenc,e conclusively shows that we actually do have
free will, we would have wanted to act as if we had free will. From a practical
perspective, it would thus make sens,e to believe in some kind of free will.
In any case, perhaps it is inevitable to believe in it. 2
In chapter 3, we discussed freedom from arguing that various forms of
coercion limit our possibility to take responsibility. In the following, we
deepen the discussion regarding resources.
a:
....::,
""a:w
ti~
>--
z
w
0
::,
,-
No resources
A frequent way not to take responsibility is to say that we do not have
resources. German author Bertold Brecht wrote in The Threepenny Opera
that "erst kommt das Fressen, dann kommt die Moral". First we need to
58
Chapter 4 Avoiding responsibility
v,
0
z
""a:
0
I
>--
::,
""w
I
>--
(I
How much can we afford to give?
oc
::,
,_
<(
oc
,_
~
,_
...,
,_
z
~
D
::,
,_
"'
D
z
<(
oc
0
I
,_
::,
<(
think about eating, then about morality. But how much do we really need?
Some say that we exactly need the amount of our salary every month (and
perhaps more). Some say that we only need very simple but nutritious foods
and cheap clothing, separating needs (what is necessary) from wants (what is
unnecessary). What is necessary or not is obviously a very complicated issue.
For example, imagine a person who every month uses her entire income
on herself. She reads the work of philosopher Peter Singer, who argues that
all people in the rich part of the world and the richer tiers in a poor country
should give a substantial amount (10%, 20%, 30%) of their income every
month to the poor.3 However, her bank account is empty. But she realizes
that a part of her income is spent on wants rather than needs, and this could
be used for helping others. Also, imagine a student who says that it is too
expensive to buy organic food and take responsibility for environmental
issues. As in the previous example, it might be possible for the student to
actually buy organic food if she were willing to relinquish something else.
Rather than saying that one has no means, one could perhaps revisit one's
means and the way they are allocated.
Another way to avoid responsibility is to say that you do not feel well
enough to do good. You are just exhausted, you do not have the physical
resources. Indeed, sometimes you are. But, as was written on a wall in
Stockholm: "Don't forget to love, even though you're fucked up." Another
aspect concerns whether the resources are available at the moment. Perhaps
Chapter 4 Avoidi ng re sponsibility
59
we have some money to spare but not when someone asks us for change.
Sometimes we see someone asking for money in the subway, and people
around us check their pockets as if to say: "Oh, they're empty, but if I had
coins I would have given them to you."
Lack of time
Often we think that we do not have the time to take responsibility. Lack of
time could go into the category "no resources", but we discuss it separately
here since it is an important way of avoiding responsibility. For example,
we are so stressed and busy with the things we have to do that we cannot
engage in helping newly arrived migrant kids with their homework. At the
same time, we spend five, six, or seven weeks a year on vacation, so we might
not be that busy after all. And we just work eight hours a day. Additionally:
are all the things we do always necessary?
Another aspect of "lack of time" is that we do not have time to make a
reasoned decision. Sometimes we really have to make decisions quickly and
might therefore not have the time to consider the ethical implications - for
example in the football example or in the trolley problem mentioned in
chapter 2. Furthermore, in some employment processes, there is a need to
employ someone quickly. In normal cases, we might consider all relevant
factors for the job, including non-discrimination, but when we are under
severe stress, we might bend the rules and employ a white male. Creating
more time might be a strategy to help us take responsibility. At the same
time, it is important not to purposefully create stress in order to avoid
thinking about ethics.
Time can also be used in another way to avoid responsibility:
procrastination, something we all know well. Often, we postpone
responsibility claiming that we will soon take responsibility, but not now.
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
...,
,_
z
w
0
::,
Too many demands
I-
v>
0
2
<(
4
Philosopher Simon Critchley describes how ethics poses infinite demands
on us, demands that we cannot fulfil. We would be crushed if we even
tried. Some time ago, a Swedish company discussed its sustainability work
60
Chapter 4 Avoidi ng responsibi lity
cc
0
I
,_
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
as a never-ending list of sustainability challenges. But after a while, the
personnel thought that the idea of infinite demands was depressing, so the
list was removed.
Facing the infinitely demanding world is not easy (we return to this
in chapter 14). For some people it might be motivating, but for many it
creates a feeling of impotence which makes us do nothing at all - "If I can't
do everything, I can't do anything." A better attitude might be to focus on
what you can do rather than on what you cannot. Another related issue is
that these demands are not only infinite but also conflicting. You are, for
example, expected to be both a good family member and a good employee,
and perhaps it feels impossible to be both. These conflicting demands will
not go away when we engage in critical thinking, but it will be clearer what
the conflicting demands and the core issues at stake are.
Respect for authorities
=
....
:::,
<I:
cc
~
,-
....
Another factor limiting our possibilities to take responsibility is (too
much) respect for authorities. Sometimes we simply do things because
some authority told us to do so, or because we want to please some
authority figure. Sometimes these authorities are experts of various
kinds. An important and well-known example of this is Stanley
Milgram's psychological experiments from the 1960s. 5 Milgram, like
many others, was interested in how the Holocaust could happen. He
envisaged, similarly to Zygmunt Bauman (see chapter 1), that it was the
result of obedience rather than evil. To test this, he set up an experiment
where research subjects were invited to try a new form of educational
method, namely that learning could be promoted if one provided electric
shocks when wrong answers were given. The research subject would
read questions to a person (played by an actor behind a screen) and if
he answered incorrectly, the subject would distribute an electric shock.
The voltage increased for every wrong answer. A scientist in a white lab
coat was urging the experiment to go on. Many of the test subjects, who
were all psychologically sane Americans, administered shocks until the
actor "died". This showed that regular people could perpetrate horrible
deeds if they were urged by an authority. Scientists could be one kind of
Chapter 4 Avoid ing responsibility
61
authority. But perhaps the research subject adapted to the demands not
of the scientists, but of science as such.6
Political and religious leaders can also be authorities. Even your closest
manager could be an authority figure you would like to please. For example,
imagine that you are working in a store which has a certain product on sale.
The price is set below the purchasing cost with the intention that people
should be drawn to the store to buy other products as well. People are indeed
corning but they do not buy anything other than the cheap product. Your
manager then tells you to inform the customers that the stock has run out
of such products to minimize losses. Would you comply?
Indeed, too much trust in authorities limits our possibilities to judge
a situation and act in it. However, this does not mean that one should
never listen to authorities. For example, sometimes you hear about those
questioning everything medical doctors say. They think of doctors as
corrupt - that kickbacks from the pharmaceutical industry make them
prescribe unnecessary drugs - and try to solve their medical problems by
themselves. Sometimes we need to trust experts.
THE PROJECT MANAGER AND THE KICKBACK
An engineer and project manager have just completed a large project. Both the
project team and the group from the client company head to the dining room
for a lunch. After the lunch, the client takes the project manager aside for a
few private words. The client insinuates that he wants a "cash gift" for having
"facilitated" this project and alludes to future contract possibilities if they have a
good relationsh ip. The project manager avoids responding by saying that another
appointment is pressing but says that she will get back to the client. The project
manager phones the vice president at the head office to discuss the situation,
as it sounds like a demand for a kickback. The vice president seems uninterested
in discussing the issue and cuts the conversation short by telling the project
manager that this is an important client and to "handle it". The project manager
interprets this as if the vice president wants her to satisfy the client, calls the
client and arranges to meet the next day to hand over several thousand dollars in
cash from the project account.
Was the project manager right in payiing the kickback? Was she responsible for
paying t he kickback? 7
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
...,
,_
z
w
0
=>
I-
v>
0
z
<(
cc
0
I
,_
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
62
Chapter 4 Avoiding responsi bility
THE CONFESSIONS OF A SOFTWARE ENGINEER
On the Internet, a software engineer confessed: "I work with software
development. As a software engineer, I'm often under pressure from management
to perform incomplete, untested, slightly misleadi111g work under a t ight budget.
And, this is how ethically bad stuff happens."
Peer pressure
cc
::,
>-
<(
cc
w
>>-'
>-
z
w
c:,
::,
>.,.,
c:,
z
<(
cc
c:,
::,:
>-
::,
<(
w
::,:
>-
"
Peer pressure is similar to being influenced by an authority, but here the
group is the authority. One example of this is to say: "But everybody else
is doing it."
One such mechanism is conformism, which basically states that we
should act like the others in the group. There are psychological experiments
showing that we surrender to peer pressure even in very simple matters,
such as Solomon Asch 's 8 conformity experiments in the 1950s. In those
experiments, a test subject was to judge if a line was longer or shorter than
another. There were other people in the room (actors) who were said to
be test subjects. They said that a longer line was shorter and vice versa,
and even though the test subjects really made a correct judgement they
surrendered to peer pressure and agreed with the others.
Sometimes when we witness something unethical in a group, we think
that others should be taking the responsibility to solve the matter. This
happened when Kitty Genovese was murdered in the 1960s. It was argued
that over 30 people were all looking when she was stabbed and also saw
that others were witnessing the same situation. Later, it was established that
much of this story was fake, but it is likely that there is a "bystander effect"
where one watches rather than taking responsibility.
Regarding conformism on the social level (a really big group), we are
often taught how to live our lives by ideals shared by societies or cultures.
These ideals, concerning having a proper job, owning one's own house,
and having a family (or as some say "build a house, plant a tree, and have
a child"), may sometimes impede us from taking responsibility and really
reflecting upon our way oflife. By doing the same as others, we feel as if we
do things the right way.
Chapter 4 Avoiding respons ibi lity
63
In the film The Square by Ruben Ostlund, there is a scene where a group
of people are having dinner in a very nice setting. They have invited an
artist who acts like an animal, who "becomes" an animal. He walks around,
provokes persons, destroys, and the atmosphere in the room becomes very
tense. But they do not interfere. This is not reality but art. But how long
can we collectively witness something that is wrong? It is not until the
animal drags a woman onto the floor and starts abusing her that someone
stands up and interferes. Quickly, more people join and it all ends up with
a collective beating of the animal. And from the point of view of the artist,
this interference was perhaps the true artistic event.
Division of labour
Division oflabour has proven to be an effective way to organize work - the
work is divided and each person performs her work tasks. Each person
is thus responsible for her own work, which is why one should focus on
just dealing with one's own job. You do not meddle with other people's
work because it is not your responsibility. A rash conclusion from the
above is that we are not morally responsible for that which we are not
formally responsible. The same goes for division of responsibility between
companies. Given the responsibility that the developer has for the existence
of a technology it is unreasonable to think that the developer has no
responsibility for how the customer uses the technology. Remember the
oil rig mentioned in chapter 3.
One can generalize the discussion about division oflabour to other areas
than formal division oflabour. In the song about Carlos there are many who
witness the maltreatment but still do not interfere. Perhaps this is because
they adopt a role as customers in a bar who are supposed to relax and enjoy
the weekend after a hard week at work full of responsibility. Perhaps it is
also because they should not interfere in police matters according to the
principle of division of labour - in the end, it is the job of the police to
maintain public order.
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
C
::,
,_
v'>
C
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
0
64
Chapter 4 Avoiding respo nsib ility
Rationalizations
The concept of rationalizations describes how we can convince ourselves
that a bad action is good.9 A rationalization is thus an excuse for doing
something we should not be doing. This concept, as it is used in this book,
originates in David Sykes and Gresham Matza's idea about techniques of
neutralization. 10 According to Sykes and Matza criminals use different
kinds of psychological methods - techniques of neutralization - to make
them perceive that they act in a legitimate way although they do not follow
the moral rules that members of society ought to follow.
We will discuss various forms of rationalization, where the first five are
Sykes and Matza's techniques of neutralization. As an illustration we use
the example of Volkswagen's defeat devices, which made sure that emissions
were at an acceptable level during tests even though they were higher
during regular operation. That Volkswagen in this way tried to mislead
authorities, customers, and other stakeholders was revealed in 2015 and
led to a major scandal.
QC
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
-'
,_
z
w
D
::,
,_
V,
D
:z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
:::,
<(
w
:r:
~
Volkswagen diesel engine.
Chapter 4 Avoidi ng responsibil ity
65
The first rationalization is denial of responsibility. The offender might
say that she is a victim of circumstance or was forced to commit the
wrongdoing. The chief executive officer of Volkswagen claimed that there
were a few engineers who created and installed the defeat device without
the knowledge of the upper management.
The second type of rationalization is denial of injury. Volkswagen
might according to this form of rationalization admit that the level of
emissions was a bit higher than the test result, but that this would not cause
any significant harm, since it only concerned a fraction of all cars sold.
Furthermore, they could have claimed that it was not a severe problem with
the potential for direct damage, as in the General Motors case (see the box
about "the lying engineer" in chapter 2).
The third type is denial ofvictim, which means that the victim deserved
what happened to her. Perhaps a rationalization of this kind in the
Volkswagen case could mean that the company said that environmental
protection agencies, environmental organizations, and customers should
have known that this was coming - they were making impossible demands
on car manufacturers so they got what they deserved.
The fourth type is condemnation of the condemners, which means
that the offender questions the legitimacy of the person or organization
saying that she did wrong. Volkswagen could have said that other car
manufacturers, who also blamed Volkswagen, do the same thing (or
something even worse). Volkswagen became the scapegoat for a widespread
practice, and that is unfair.
The fifth rationalization is appeal to higher loyalties - that the action
promotes some other, more important value. For example, Volkswagen's
upper management could have argued that they had to cheat to protect
profitability and thus all the jobs at the company. Had they not done so,
many would have lost their jobs, which would have led to significant social
problems.
Other researchers have added more forms of rationalizations. A sixth
form of rationalization is legality - that because something is legal, it cannot
be unethical. Volkswagen used this form of rationalization: In 2016, a
spokesperson of the company said that the software is not unlawful under
European law.11
66
Chapter 4 Avoid ing responsibilit y
cc
::,
.....
<(
cc
w
.....
.....
.....
~
z
w
0
::,
Iv'\
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
.....
::,
<(
w
:r:
.....
0
A seventh form of rationalization is to refocus attention to something
that the offender has done well. In the Volkswagen case, the company
mentioned that they had appointed a person, indeed a woman, to be
responsible for ethics issues.
An eighth form of rationalization is the metaphor of the ledger, which
means that there will always be good and bad things happening and the
balance of those is what matters, not one particular act. For example,
Volkswagen could have claimed that their cars had other environmental
benefits, so in total, despite the defeat device, the car is good for society and
the environment.
"'
~
"'
::::
In this chapter, we have discussed a number of ways in which we avoid
taking responsibility as well as a series of rationalizations. The main takeaway from the chapter is that when we refer to factors that reduce our ability
or willingness to take responsibility, or when we use rationalizations, this
should trigger our thought, spurring questions: "Is it really the case that I
have to obey authorities? Is it really the case that I do not have time to do
this? Is it really the case that I do not have the necessary resources? Yes,
everybody in my company talks in this way, but do I have to follow the peer
pressure?" It is not evident that the answer to all of these questions will be
"no", but the point has been to enumerate a range of factors that may serve
as "alarm clocks" to make us wake up and think again.
Of course, we have to open up to the possibility that we do not try
to avoid responsibility or rationalize our bad behaviour. Sometimes we
might actually lack time and resources. One could also see these strategies
of avoidance as extenuating circumstances. In other words, given these
conditions, we indeed are less responsible.
>-
z
w
<Cl
::,
>-
"'
C
z
<(
a:
0
:,:
>-
::,
<(
w
:,:
>G
Chapter 4 Avoiding responsibility
67
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Do we have a free will? What are the arguments for having a
free will? How free or determined are you? In what ways are you
determined? If we do not have a free will, what are the implications
in terms of taking responsibility?
Resources. What does Brecht mean? How can we separate between
needs and wants? What do you need and what do you want? What
percentage of your income could you afford to give to charity?
Time. How does time impact how we take responsibility? Give
some examples. Do you ever think that you do not have time to take
responsibility?
Too big demands. What does it mean that ethics poses infinite
demands on us? How could we relate to these demands?
Authorities. Explain how reliance on authorities is a way of avoiding
responsibility. Give some examples. When should we listen to
authorities and when should we not? What is a good ethical attitude
in relation to authorities?
Peer pressure. What is conformism? How does it affect whether we
take responsibility? What kinds of groups do you conform with?
Division of labour. How does division of labour affect responsibility?
Give some examples of division oflabour and discuss the impact on
taking responsibility.
Describe the eight different forms of rationalization. Discuss how an
ethical issue is rationalized by someone.
What is the distinction between reasons/arguments and
rationalizations?
Why do we study rationalizations and different ways of avoiding
responsibility?
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
I-
,~
t-
z
w
0
::,
tv"I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
1-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
68
Chapter 4 Avoiding responsibility
THE LIFE PARTNER AND YOU : AVOIDING
RESPONSIBILITY IN PRACTICE
In your ethics course, you have now studied various ways of avoid ing responsibi lity,
and indeed you heard some of your co lleagues at the mechatronics company using
t hese arguments. They have said that they are just developing technology and that it
is up to the user to decide if they want to implement it. They have also said that there
are too many ethical demands in societ y. "We cannot think about everything like that,
so let us just design the product." Furthermore, they have said that since there are
alreaidy some robots implemented in health care, such as shower robots, then robots
cannot be ethical ly problematic - if everybody is doing it, then it cannot be wrong.
" Let's just do it! And we need to be quick - others might be working on competing
ideas. There is no time to reflect." You are stil l not convinced by their ways of avoiding
responsibi lity. You think that at least you ought to spend some time thinking th is
issue through.
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
"'
0
:c
>::,
«
w
:c
..
>-
Chapter 4 Avoidi ng responsibilit y
69
Chapter 5
Responsibilities of
professional engineers
w E HAv E Now DI s cuss ED the concept of responsibility as well as various
ways of avoiding it. Now it is time to relate the discussions of responsibility
to notions of the professional engineer. In this chapter, we discuss what
a profession is and the role of ethics in it. We focus on the engineering
profession and its code of ethics.
What is a profession?
~
,-
z
w
0
=,
,-
"'
0
z
<(
a:
0
:i::
,=,
<(
A profession differs from a mere job. A profession brings along higher status
and requires competence. A profession brings along advantages such as
access to a particular job market and the exclusion of others from that same
job market. In some roles, there is a need for a professional engineer, and
these roles are thus exclusive for such professionals. In other roles, being a
professional engineer might represent a very substantial advantage.
In theory it is perhaps not that difficult to understand the difference
between a profession and a job. But in practice, what is a mere job? In an
office there may be roles or tasks requiring less competence, for example
copying papers. The people doing this work would hardly be called
professionals. But secretaries, who take care of advanced office work, are
sometimes seen as a profession. Driving a taxi could at first sight be seen as
a simple job, for which a driver's licence is enough to perform the job. But on
71
the other hand, the taxi driver needs geographical knowledge, at least before
the Global Positioning System was implemented, social skills, perhaps
additional training, and perhaps other requirements that are beyond what
is required by a private individual who drives a car.
To find something that can be seen as a mere job is not easy (but
please try!). Perhaps it is not only the work tasks that determine what is a
profession. Rather, the creation of a profession is an act of identification,
a collective proclamation: "We exist, we know this, we do these things,
and we act according to these values." Indeed "to profess" means to claim
one's allegiance to a set of values. This is an issue of identity. Identity is
often not something you have by nature. Instead, you actively identify with
something, and this leads to you having a certain identity. The professional
identity, like any identity, is both inclusive and exclusive. It includes
everyone who is qualified to be part of the profession, but it excludes
everyone else.
Usually, the profession is seen as being defined by a few factors. First,
there is a need for a particular set of competencies - that the professionals
know things others do not, and that they can do things others cannot.
Usually, this competence is operationalized, as having a common education,
which is refined during work life. Sometimes the identification works in
another way - that it is the education rather than the competences that
makes the professional. In other words, perhaps you cannot be an engineer
if you do not have an engineering education, even though you know as
much as or more than a person who is a schooled engineer. Second, the
profession is defined on the basis of what the professionals do. A profession
does something that is important. Managers manage people and things
(which in turn creates jobs, economic value, happiness, and so on), dentists
take care of teeth (which in turn creates happiness, health, well-being,
and so on). Third, the profession is often defined by an articulated set of
values and norms, with a particular purpose to serve the public. This is the
so-called professional ethics, and that ethics is often described in a code of
conduct. A reason for these codes is to create trust in the profession. The
professional ethics implies autonomy from external influence (freedom
from). For example, if a dentist is told by her manager to ruin the patients'
teeth to make them come back more often (thus leading to more profits
72
Chapter 5 Responsibi lit ies of profess ional engineers
""
::,
...
......""
<(
~
~
1-
z
w
o
::,
I-
v'>
o
z
<(
""0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
I-
"
for the dental clinic), this would not be acceptable from the perspective of
professional eth ics.
The most well-known, and probably the oldest, professional ethics is that
of physicians - the Hippocratic oath. 1 This prescribes what is required of
physicians, such as to avoid harm, help the sick, and not divulge any secrets.
■
THE ANGEL OF DEATH AND THE NAZI ENGINEER
The Nazi doctor Josef Mengele was competent, had a medical education, and
worked wit h medical research. However, he acted against t he Hippocratic oat h
and can therefore not be seen as a prof essional physician . He subjected people,
particularly Jews, to pain, suffering, and death in his medical experiments.
An engineer who supported the Nazi regime was Ferdinand Porsche, who
today is more known for the sports car brand. He got his breakthrough wit h the
development of military vehicles, such as tugs. Porsche won a design competition
for "the people's car" with the well- known Volkswagen beetle j ust before the
Second World War. After that, Porsche continued t o support t he Nazi regime wit h
various innovative military vehicles.
KAFER
25
The people's car.
UJ
I
~
"
Chapter 5 Responsibi liti es of professional engineers
73
There are several other professions which at some point in time have
proclaimed an identity and at the same time developed a professional
ethics, such as nursing ethics, journalist ethics, ethics oflegal professionals,
management ethics, and project management ethics. However, if people
stop identifying with the profession, even though they might engage in the
same work practices, the professional identity might through time diminish
in importance.
The engineering profession
First, engineers have a set of skills that are often based on a common
education. Second, they perform work tasks that are shared and important
and, third, they share ethical standards, often articulated as a code of
conduct. In this part, we discuss the first and second factors, while we
discuss the third in the next part.
A HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION OF ENGINEERING
Herbert Hoover, president of the United States 1929-1933, was a mining
engineer, and, like many others at that time, he viewed engineers as professionals:
It is a great profession. There is the fascination of watching a figment of the
imagination emerge through the aid of science to a plan on paper. Then it moves
to realization in stone or metal or energy. Then it brings jobs and homes to men.
Then it elevates the standards of living and adds to the comforts of life. That is
the engineer's high privilege.
The great liabi lity of t he engineer compared to men of other professions is that
his works are out in the open where all can see them. His acts, step by step, are
in hard substance. He cannot bury his mistakes in the grave li ke the doctors. He
cannot argue them into thin air or bla me the j udge li ke the lawyers. He cannot,
like the architects, cover his failu res wi:h trees and vines. He cannot, like the
politicians, screen his shortcomings by blaming his opponents and hope the
people wil l forget. The eng ineer simply cannot deny he did it. If his works do
not work, he is damned. [...]
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
V'>
0
z
On the other hand, un like the doctor his is not a life among the weak. Unlike the
soldier, destruction is not his purpose. Unlike the lawyer, quarrels are not his
dai ly bread. To the engineer falls the job of clothing the bare bones of science
with life, comfort, and hope. No doubt as years go by the people forget which
74
Chapter 5 Responsibil it ies of prof essional engineers
<(
a:
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
0
engineer did it, even if they ever knew. [...] But the engineer himself looks
back at the unending stream of goodness which flows from his successes
with satisfact ions that few professions may know. And the verdict of his
fellow professionals is all the accolade he wants. 2
What do you think about Hoover's description? Is it still relevant today? Do you
think it was descriptive or normative in his days?
:::,
"'
><t:
cc
f-
>-
_,
f-
z
UJ
c:,
:::,
f-
"'c:,
z
<t:
cc
0
I
>:::,
<t:
UJ
I
><)
First, let us turn to the skill set of the engineer. Ingeniare in Latin
means to devise and invent and ingenium in the same language means
talent, smartness, and cleverness. These are the concepts that form the
etymological roots of engineering. In short, engineering is often seen as
problem-solving related to technology. The engineer solves these problems
by means of knowledge in mathematics, science, and technical problemsolving. The engineer is often held to be curious.
To acquire this mindset, there is a common education. It consists of
the study of mathematics and science, and applications of this knowledge
to practical problems. The engineering education cannot be arbitrary but
often follows a quite specific pattern. A student who studies only science
and mathematics is rarely called an engineer. Also, it is unlikely that an
engineering education will contain only philosophy and arts. Every time a
new engineering programme is created, the content is carefully examined
both by those creating the programme and by public authorities wanting
to maintain some kind of predictability of what an engineer is.
In the movie Dream Big a much more daring image of engineering is
proposed. Engineering is portrayed in the movie as an exciting, creative,
heroic realm, where optimists create life-saving, world-changing marvels
that create a safer, more connected, more equal, and awe-inspiring
tomorrow. Engineering thus goes far beyond the idea of problem-solving
but is something that truly creates the future. If that is descriptively true
or normatively desirable, what should an engineering education look like?
Would it be the same as today?
In Sweden, we think that you become an engineer by finishing an
engineering education. You do not need to actively and explicitly identify
as an engineer, but this is something that follows from your education.
Therefore you do not have to profess an adherence to the profession's values.
Chapter 5 Responsibi lities of prof essional engineers
75
It is a more active decision for those who wish to distance themselves from
their educational identity. They might say "I graduated as an engineer",
rather than 'Tm an engineer."
Let us now discuss the important work performed by engineers.
Engineers in the most general description work with the development,
implementation, and maintenance of technology. They often work with
problem-solving in technological domains. They may work with social
processes but often with the mindset of engineering, relying on scientific
principles, often quite significantly leaning towards the mathematical,
such as Frederick W. Taylor's scientific management. 3 The problem-solving
dimension, as well as the more daring, heroic dimension of engineering,
are visible in the definition of engineering of Ingenjorsvagen.se, a Swedish
website about the engineering profession developed by the employer
association Teknikforetagen:
The first and most important thing is that as an engineer, you are trained
to solve problems in your specific area. It may range from developing
applications for mobiles or building environmentally friendly homes,
planning roads in disaster areas or designing scissors. It may also mean
wondering how tiny robots inside a body can save lives or stop fires from
developing in a chemical plant. The list may be long, but all engineers are
somehow building a society. It requires both knowledge, creativity, and
collaborative skills.
ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS
Engineers Without Borders is a non-governmental organization working to
provide engineering so lutions for disadvantaged communities. As an engineer,
there are various ways in which you can use your competence; working in
international development projects is one of them. There are local chapters in
various countries. This is a description of what they do, which comes from their
British website:
a:
::,
....
<(
a:
....>-w
....z__,
w
People, everywhere deserve a world where they can achieve their potential and
live hea lt hy, happy lives. The rea lity today is fa r from this and many of us still
lack access to basic services. All of us are at risk from resource constra ints, t he
effects of climate change, increasing urbanisation and a global population that
is rapid ly expanding.
76
Chapter 5 Responsi bilit ies of professiona l engineers
a
::,
....
VI
a
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::,
<(
We know that engineering is t he solution. We know that engineering is capable
of addressing global challenges and enabling sustainable human development.
Engineers Without Borders UK is using engineering as the catalyst for the
change t hat the world needs.
We are leading a growing movement for change and we need you r support. This
strategy serves as a ca ll to action for eng ineers, for t he engineering community
and for the whole of society.~
Engineers Without Borders is an organization where engineers can really make
a difference. But, as we have discussed, do not engineers always contribute to
society, by changing perceptions and actions through technology? The question,
however, is in which ways you as an engineer want to use your competence.
Responsibility of engineers and codes of ethics
Engineers work with technology and together with other people. They have
a particular set of skills, as identified above, which may concern problemsolving but which may also be about imaginatively creating a desirable
future through technology. With that knowledge comes power, and with
power comes responsibility. This is a well-known saying that has been
cc
::,
~
cr:
w
,-..
,-..
-'
,-..
z
w
C,
::,
,-..
"'0
2
<(
a'.
0
I
,-..
::,
<(
w
I
o
With great power comes great responsibility.
Chapter 5 Responsibi lities of professional engineers
77
proclaimed by great thinkers and other popular figures, such as SpiderMan, who said: "With great power comes great responsibility." It is also
represented in the aspect offreedom to that we studied in chapter 3. Given
that engineers solve technological problems and thereby create the future,
they have an impact. Then there are certainly constraints that could have a
negative effect on freedom from (see chapters 3-4).
There are narratives, discourses, talk about engineering; for example,
an owner of a large family enterprise said that engineers do not lie. Apart
from such anecdotes and stories, like the stories, songs, and sayings that
were reviewed in chapter 2, the most tangible and visible way in which the
ethics of professional engineers is manifested is in codes of conduct. There
are a number of professional organizations, international and national,
that have codes of conduct. Some codes are quite lengthy and detailed,
such as the one developed by the Accreditation Board of Engineering and
Technology (ABET), which is about eight pages long. Others are shorter,
such as the IEEE code of ethics (see box below).
IEEE CODE OF ETHICS
We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our
technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in
accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and the
communities we serve, do hereby comm it ourselves to the highest ethica l and
professional conduct and agree
to hold paramount the safety, hea lth, and welfare of the public, to strive to
comply with ethica l design and sustainable development practices, and to
disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment
2 to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible, and to disclose
them to affected parties when t hey do exist
3 to be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on available data
4 to reject bribery in all its forms
5 to improve the understanding by individuals and society of the capabilities and
societal implications of conventional and emerging technologies, including
intelligent systems
6 to maintain and improve our technical competence and to undertake
cc
::,
r<t:
cc
=
,-
,_
~
,-
z
=
0
::,
,-
v'\
0
z
<(
cc
0
technologica l tasks for others on ly if qua lified by training or experience, or after
full disclosure of pertinent limitations
78
Chapter 5 Responsibil ities o f prof essional engineers
:r:
,_
::,
<(
7 to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and
correct errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others
8 to treat fairly all persons and to not engage in acts of discrimination based on
race, religion, gender, disability, age, national origin, sexual orientation, gender
identity, or gender expression
9 to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or
malicious action
10 to assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to
support them in following this code of ethics. 5
-----------------------■
An example of a national engineering code of ethics is the one created by the
union and interest organization Sveriges Ingenjorer (The Swedish Association
of Graduate Engineers). To support the argument that all professions and
their codes of conduct are formed by historical processes, it is here briefly
described how the code came into being.6 In the early 20th century, the status
of the engineering profession underwent substantial changes. In 1915, the title
of "civil engineer" (civilingenjor) was introduced, which was a sign of trained
engineers with a particular status. The engineering profession was from now
on also related more to science, a relation that was much more indirect earlier
in history. In 1927, the possibility to earn a technological PhD was introduced
- another way to link the engineering profession to science and to profit
from the legitimacy of the higher educational system. Another part of this
professionalization process was to discuss what an engineer was, what his
work tasks were, and how he should interact with the surrounding society.
In 1926, a committee was assigned the task of developing such a document.
Already in 1912, the American Institute of Electrical Engineers had adopted
its "Code of Principles of Professional Conduct", and Sweden followed in
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>.,.,
C
z
.,:
a:
0
:r:
>::,
.,:
w
those footsteps. The Swedish code was adopted in 1929. It was a symbol of a
cadre ofprofessionals who had a strong self-awareness and awareness of their
position in society. With their scientific education, they had an obvious role as
experts in the development of modern society. In the 1980s, discussions about
ethics intensified again. The codex was seen as old-fashioned. There were
discussions about Chernobyl and large technological systems. A new codex
was developed in the 1980s, where the relationship to society was emphasized
and where the engineer was seen as someone competing in the job market.
:r:
>-
"
Chapter 5 Responsibilit ies of professional engineers
79
CODE OF HONOUR OF THE SWEDISH ASSOCIATION OF
GRADUATE ENGINEERS
Technology and science are powerful tools that serve humanity, for better or
for worse. They have essentially completely transformed our society and wil l
continue to have a profound effect on humanity even in the future.
Engineers are holders and trustees of technological knowledge. This entails a
specia l responsibility to ensure that technology is used for the good of society
and humanity and that it is passed onto future generations in an improved form.
The Ten Principles of the Code of Honour
■ Engineers in their professional capacity ought to feel personally responsible
for technology being used in a manner that benefits humanity, the
environment and society.
■
Engineers ought to strive to improve technology and technological knowledge
so as to achieve more efficient use of resources without harmful effects.
■ Engineers ought to offer their knowledge in both public and private contexts
so as to ensure the best possible basis for decisions and to illuminate both the
opportunities and the risks associated with technology.
■ Engineers ought not to work for or cooperate with companies and organizations
of a questionable nature or with objectives that conflict with personal bel iefs.
■ Engineers ought to show complete loya lty to employers and colleagues.
Difficulties in this respect ought to be raised in open discussions, in the first
instance at the workplace.
■ Engineers must not use inappropriate methods when competing for
employment, assignments or orders, and nor should they attempt to damage
the reputation of colleagues with unfounded allegations.
■ Engineers ought to respect entrusted information of a confidential nature and
others' rights to ideas, inventions, studies, plans and blueprints.
■ Engineers must not favour vested interests and ought to openly report
financial and other interests that could impair confidence in their impartiality
and judgement.
a:
::,
...
......
__,
<(
■ Engineers ought to both publicly and privately, in writing and rhetoric,
strive for factua l presentations and avoid erroneous, misleading or
exaggerated statements.
■ Engineers ought to actively support colleagues who encounter difficulties as
a resu lt of acting in accordance with these principles and, to the best of their
belief, avert criminal actions against them.7
a:
w
....
z
w
0
::,
....
v'\
0
z
<(
a:
0
...
I
::,
<(
w
I
Q
80
Chapter 5 Responsibil ities of profe ssio na l engi neers
Professional ethics in conflict
with other values
Professional ethics introduces a set of values engineers adhere to or should
ad here to if they are part of the engineering profession and thereby reap
the benefits of calling themselves engineers (for example, getting access
to an important part of the job market). Such ethics may be in contrast
to organizational hierarchies - a way in which we can try to avoid
responsibility (see chapter 4 on avoiding responsibility).
The well-known accident when the space shuttle Challenger exploded
not long after take-off in 1986 is a prime example of this.8 Robert Lund, the
vice-president of engineering at Morton Thiokol, had just returned from a
meeting with the engineers, who unanimously recommended against the
launch. TI1e reason was that there were some potentially very substantial
problems with the O-rings sealing the booster segments. They could wear
out rapidly, particularly in cold weather. The evidence was sketchy, but it
...""<
......
...z
...
::,
a:
w
~
w
C
::,
V\
C
z
<
""
0
:,:
....
::,
<
w
:,:
~
The Challenger accident.
Chapter 5 Responsibilities of professional engineers
81
r
still existed. The day the shuttle was going to be launched was colder than
any day on which trials had been conducted. The engineers opted for safety
first and recommended, as said above, against the launch.
Lund informed his boss, Jerald Mason, about this, and when the news
reached the heads of the Space Center, they were appalled. They wanted to
launch since the shuttle programme was falling behind schedule, but they did
not want to launch without Morton Thiokol's approval and urged them to
reconsider. Mason reviewed the material and decided that the space shuttle
could be launched, but only if Lund also approved. If Lund had abided by a
professional ethics of engineers, he would have kept recommending against
the launch. But had he done so, a conflict would have ensued between the
manager role and the engineering role. In this sense, the professional values
would have conflicted with the project's goals. Seen in another way, the goals
of the manager and the engineer were similar, since the manager definitely
did not want the shuttle to explode. However, the political goals of getting
the shuttle launched as soon as possible gained the upper hand, and Mason
wanted to please his customers, the US government.
Lund repeated his objections. But then Mason asked him to rethink.
Mason asked Lund to think like a manager rather than an engineer, saying
something like: "Take off your engineering hat and put on your management
hat." Lund changed hats and the shuttle exploded because of a failed O-ring.
Professional ethics of engineers could also conflict with a sales mentality
that may exist in companies. Imagine a company promoting their products
as state of the art. In negotiations with a prospective customer, an engineer
is invited to answer any questions related to technology. The customer
asks the engineer whether the product can carry out a certain procedure.
The engineer knows that this is impossible and is going to say so when the
salesperson kicks him on the leg under the table. The engineer remains silent
and the sales negotiations proceed. Talking truthfully about technology is
an imperative of the professional ethics of engineer.
Professional ethics for engineers thus provide a set of standards that
sometimes contradict rule-following and obedience. Indeed, as we have
seen, many evils are perpetrated not because of evil intent, but because
people follow orders. Rather than making this a personal standpoint,
the engineer sees herself as a professional acting in accordance with the
82
Chapter 5 Responsib ilities of profession al engineers
,_
~
z
w
c:,
::,
,-
v"I
Q
z
<(
a:
0
I
,_
::,
<(
w
I
,_
0
principles of professional ethics. The engineer can thus reject a certain
action "because she is an engineer".
As a final note, one might ask oneself: What happens if a person breaches
professional ethics? If the action breaches the law, the case would be tried in
court. Tf it is not illegal, hut deeply unethical, it could lead to exclusion from
the engineering association, such as The Swedish Association of Graduate
Engineers, or a ruined professional reputation.
In this chapter, we have discussed the engineering profession, the ethical
values that come with it, and why such ethical values are needed. We
have argued that the basis is a collective proclamation, which also implies
that engineers can get support for making tough choices by approving or
rejecting a certain action as an engineer.
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
a:
7
::,
,_
<{
a:
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
8
0
::,
,_
V,
0
z
<{
a:
0
I
,_
::,
<{
w
I
,_
"
9
10
What is a profession and what is a job?
Which factors define a profession?
What is the role of autonomy for professional ethics?
What are the differences between the medical profession and the
engineering profession given the different dimension of a profession?
Is engineering a profession? Why/ why not?
Do you identify as an engineer?
What are the similarities and differences between the IEEE
code and the code of honour of The Swedish Association of
Graduate Engineers?
What do you think about the code of honour of The Swedish
Association of Graduate Engineers? Do you have objections to it?
Suggestions for amendments?
Is a code of conduct for engineers necessary?
What can we learn about the ethics of professional engineers from
the Challenger case?
Chapter 5 Responsibilities of professional enginee rs
83
THE LIFE PARTNER AND YOU: PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ACTION
This is actua lly the first time you started to reflect upon what an engineer real ly
is. Throughout your engineering education, you had been told that engineers solve
problems in their techno logica l domain, but now you start to think a bit more deeply
and realize that engineers build society. Perhaps it sounds a bit pompous, but you have
realized that you actually have a pretty big impact as a professional engineer. You
have read and understood the Swedish honour code and the first, second, and fourth
items feel particu larly relevant to you in this case. You should develop technology that
benefits humanity and also strive for no harmful effects. The fourth item tells you not
to work with objectives that conflict with persona l beliefs, but a problem is that you
are not really sure what you think about th is particular technology you wil l develop.
In any case you are even more convinced that you have responsibility, but you are not
sure how to judge the situation and how to decide what to do.
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
V'>
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
,_
:r:
0
84
Chapter 5 Responsibilities of professional engin eers
r
Chapter 6
Critical thinking
Now SURVEYED the first two steps in our ethical process,
awareness and responsibility, and now it is time to turn to the third step,
critical thinking. The central questions asked are:
WE HAVE
• How do you judge whether or not something is ethically acceptable?
• How do you make a decision about how to act?
cc
::,
...
......
...z
...
<(
cc
~
w
0
::,
V,
0
z
<(
cc
0
...
:c
::,
<(
w
.....
:c
These two issues are connected. According to the ethical process, you first
make a judgment about some particular practice, situation, or dilemma, and
then you decide what to do. Judgement does not mean being judgemental.
Rather, it is about "using your judgement", in other words thinking critically.
Critical thinking means thinking about the various aspects, both good and
bad sides, of an issue. Critical thinking is not about finding arguments to
support your gut feeling about what is right. It is about trying to think as
openly as possible about a situation, even if you run the risk of questioning
your own moral values .
The ethical process is based on pluralism - the presupposition that there
are a number of values, principles, norms, codes, and so on, that all have
to be taken into account when thinking critically about ethical issues. The
pluralistic assumptions imply that there is no obvious hierarchy between
the values. The opposite, monism, would presuppose a tree structure where
85
r
one main principle (the stem) leads to rules of action (the branches), which
lead to actions (the leaves). For example, a monist would say that one value,
for example freedom, is the most important. If there are any value conflicts
(in other words that different values clash), freedom should always go first.
By presupposing that one value, in all situations, is more important than
others, the ethical judgement and decision-making process becomes easier.
In a pluralistic framework, "the moral space", similarly to what Alasdair
MacIntyre argued (in chapter 1), contains a diverse set of principles, values,
norms, and so on, which sometimes cohere with each other and sometimes
conflict. In such a framework, there is no simple way of deciding whether
rights, duties, consequences, relationships, fairness, freedom, or virtues
should be the fundamental value in all situations. Indeed, our view of
critical thinking allows for monism as well but considers pluralism more
related to our view of critical thinking.
Emotions and reason
Apart from the pluralistic assumption, the model presented here is based
on a quite rationalistic, cognitive approach. As we saw in chapter 4, this
ideal way of making decisions is hampered by a myriad of factors, from
conformism to time pressure. Still, here we hold that this is an ideal worth
striving for. It is worth mentioning that the approach is not rationalistic in
the sense that it is cold and calculative, or that it neglects things we hold
dear, such as personal relationships and friendship. But it is rationalistic in
the sense that we do not take things for granted and that we need to provide
reasons and arguments when making a judgement about a situation and
deciding how to act in it.
But what about emotions? Are emotions not relevant for ethics? Often,
we hear that people are passionate for a cause, in their fight for human
rights for example. For them, emotions seem to be a fundamental part of
ethics. Indeed, the models for critical thinking presented in this part all
have emotions in the background. Sometimes emotions are what triggers
ethical reflection, they tell us about our own moral values. For example,
a feeling of disgust. The 19th-century anthropologist William G. Sumner
talks about a chief of a tribe in the Amazon who was baffled about how
86
Chapter 6 Critical thi nking
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
,_
I-
_,
,_
z
w
0
::,
,_
V'I
Q
z
<(
a:
0
I
1-
::,
<(
w
...
I
(I
Europeans regard cannibalism. He said: "It is all a matter of habit. When
I have killed an enemy, it is better to eat him than to let him go to waste.
[...] The bad thing is not being eaten, but death."1 To convince most readers
of this book about ethics in engineering, we do not need to argue against
cannibalism - the feeling of disgust is enough. Two other well-known
examples2 in ethics go like this:
• A man goes to the supermarket once a week and buys a dead
chicken. But before cooking the chicken, he has sexual intercourse
with it. Then he thoroughly cooks it and eats it.
• A family dog was killed by a car in front of the house. The family had
heard that dog meat was delicious and cut up, cooked, and ate the
dog for dinner.
This evokes feelings of disgust, perhaps enough to condemn the persons
ethically. However, when we think critically we must discuss and analyse
even things such as cannibalism, sex with dead chickens, or eating your
run-over dog. The very strong gut feeling is not enough. But the gut feeling
can help us identify that something we care deeply about is at stake.
cc
::,
....<
cc
~
>....
-'
>-
z
~
c:,
::,
>-
"'
c:,
z
<
cc
0
:r:
....
::,
<
Q
Shou ld you go with your gut feeling?
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
87
r
There is another way in which emotions contribute to critical thinking.
Through our emotions we get access to other people's suffering and joy.
Sympathy means feeling with the other, and if we see an animal (or
perhaps a humanoid robot) being beaten, for example, we feel the animal's
suffering even though we know nothing of what it is like to be an animal (or
something non-human). We can understand the consequences of actions
through our emotions.
But in our ethical process, particularly in the step of critical thinking,
emotions need to be transitional. What is a t ransitional emotion? In her
texts about anger, philosopher Martha Nussbaum,3 a well-known proponent
of virtue ethics, argues that anger is an emotion linked to pay-back. For
example, if your friend has been wronged and you get angry, you want
to pay back and punish the wrongdoer. But Nussbaum argues that any
punishment will be insufficient to help the victim - the action cannot be
undone. Rather, Nussbaum argues, anger should be seen as transitional
- an ger makes a person aware of a certain issue, but then gives way to
a constructive assessment of what can be done for the victim. Similarly,
feelings of disgust, sympathy with the other, or passion and anger for a
cause are seen as transitional. They reveal that something is important to us,
but that we need to go beyond them in order to engage in critical thinking.
Indeed, there are those who claim that ethics is all about finding
justifications that support our emotional responses regarding right and
wrong. While this might be descriptively true, it should probably not be
seen as a normative imperative. Indeed, emotions sometimes represent
an unstable basis for judgements about ethics, since they are most likely
learned. Throughout our life, we learn how to feel, which means that
emotional responses are shaped by the societies we live in. However, critical
<re
thinking may also function as a critique of society. By thinking critically
we dare ask the question: What if our gut feeling is wron g?
In this section, we have problematized the function of emotions in
critical thinking. However, when it comes to ethical action (the next step
in the ethical process) - there is most likely a need for emotional support.
Let us return to that in t he last chapter.
....::,
<(
<re
,-
....
-'
t--
z
w
0
::,
,-
"'
0
2
<(
o=
0
....I
::,
<(
w
I
....
(ij
88
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
Six models for critical thinking
We have now explained the underlying assumptions of critical thinking.
We now turn to practice. In this section five models for critical thinking
followed by a synthetic model are presented. In the chapter we will also
discuss discourse ethics and casuistics as methods for reaching ethically
sound judgements.
Model 1: Collste's decision-making process
The first model, developed by Goran Collste,4 shows how ethical decisionmaking is very similar to decision-making concerning any issue. The model
has nine steps:
4
Problem formulation
Information gathering
Formulation of alternatives
Consequence and action assessment
5
Probability assessment
6
Valuation
Decision
Action
Reflection
1
2
3
7
8
9
..."'
......
...z
...
::,
<(
The first step is to formulate the problem - what is the ethical problem?
Maybe we need to decide whether to grant a permit to a company which
wants to breed genetically modified organisms, perhaps salmon (see the
case study "GMO Salmon" in chapter 15). Maybe we need to know what
to do when we hear about a safety issue in our latest product. The second
step concerns information gathering. Critical thinking about ethics is not
cc
w
--'
w
<Cl
::,
V,
<Cl
z
<(
cc
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
.....
:r:
detached from knowledge and facts about the world. We need to know
certain things in order to make a reasoned decision. Many ethical conflicts
are indeed conflicts of facts. The third step is to formulate alternatives.
Which alternative courses of actions are there? Often we think of too few
alternatives and sometimes we say that there is no alternative whatsoever.
In this step, we should really think broadly to find as many alternatives
as possible. It is important to try to be ingenious (see chapter 5) when we
Chapter 6 Critical thin king
89
r
think about alternatives. The fourth step concerns an assessment of the
consequences and the nature of the actions. What a re t he consequences of
the different options and/or what kind of action do the alternatives entail
(such as breaking a promise or lying)? W ho are the stakeholders and how
are they affected? The fifth step concerns a probability assessment. In many
books on ethics, the world is seen as deterministic, in other words that we
know which consequences follow from an action (see further chapter 7 on
risks and possibilities). Collste's model is more probabilistic since we need
to assess how likely it is that something will happen. These probabilities may
be expressed as LL (very low), L (low), M (medium), H (high), HH (very
high), or in percentages, or in other ways. The sixth step is valuation. How
do I assess the various possible consequences and types of actions? Are they
consistent with reasonable ethical principles, norms, and values? Does the
action contradict any reasonable ethical duty, such as to keep promises or
speak the truth? The seventh step concerns making the decision. The eighth
step is action and the ninth is to reflect upon the impact of the action. To
illustrate the practical relevance of Collste's model and other decisionmaking models we will follow Nina a nd how she uses the models to think
critically about a concrete ethical dilemma in her engineering practice.
NINA AND THE SOLAR PANEL POWER STATION
Nina has been working as a project engineer for an energy technology firm for a
few years. She has been put in charge of managing the company's charity projects
and determining which projects should be funded. Nina is not sure about one of
the projects. The project's mission is to provide a solar panel power station for an
East African community, but the project data suggests that it is more practical to
just install solar-powered lighting inside the homes, a technology Nina's company
cannot provide. Nina wonders whether to discuss her doubts with her boss. Based
on the company's research on the community, the communit y desires better
lighting system for their homes, and the solar panel power station would be an
expensive and high-maintenance project. Also, there was a similar previous project
where equipment was stolen from the same region. Nina understands that their
c,:
::,
I-
..:
c,:
w
....
I....
z
~
w
0
::,
....
V)
Cl
local sponsor, the non-governmental organization that has proposed installing a
z
..:
solar panel power station, would benefit from the project. However, Nina feels that
er
it is her responsibility to provide the community with a simpler and more efficient
1-
solution to its problem. How would Nina approach this issue using Col lste's model?
90
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
0
I
::,
..:
Problem formulation. Nina thinks that a reasonable problem formulation is:
What should I do when my company is in favour of a solution that does not
benefit the community?
2 Information gathering. Nina has access to the information that was presented
above, but is here reminded that she needs to collect more information to
better understand the situation. She is interested in how the equipment was
stolen and if this is likely to happen again. She also would like to take a closer
look at the company's research about the community to get a deeper understanding. But just then she gets an invitation to a meeting about this project,
and to be able to prepare she needs to proceed quickly to the next step.
3 Formulation of alternatives. Nina formulates three different alternatives:
to support the project, to bring up her doubts with her manager suggesting
a solution based on better lighting, or to dismantle the project without
discussing with her manager.
4 Consequence and action assessment. The first alternative, to support the
project, would be beneficial for Nina's company, since their sales would
increase. Potential negative aspects, such as theft, would be a pity for the
community, but perhaps not the company's concern. Nina t hinks that she
would be seen as an actor who supports a high-profile project and thus would
get status, at least within the company, if she supports the decision. The
second alternative could have various consequences. Nina assumes that the
manager is under pressure to produce profitability for the company, and in
that case, bringing up the issue with the manager would probably not lead to
a different end-result. But Nina also thinks that the manager could be open
and willing to fi nance other project s t hat would also lead to increased sales,
so perhaps a discussion would be a good way to go. The third alternative, to
dismantle the project without consulting the manager, could lead to problems
with the non-governmental organization and that Nina's company gets a
reputation of suddenly pulling out. The community might perhaps not get the
technology that it needs. Nina's position at the company is jeopardized.
cr.
:::,
.....
""er.w
.....
.....
...,
.....
z
u.,
(Cl
:::,
.....
.,.,
(Cl
z
""cr.
0
I
.....
:::,
""
u.,
I
.....
"
5 Probability assessment.
- For the first alternative: The sales would definitely go up (HH). There is
(Nina assumes) a medium chance of theft (M), and the community wou ld
perhaps not benefit from the new technology (M). Nina's status would
increase (M), but she would not feel happy about it (HH) .
- For the second alternative, to consu It with the manager and suggest
an option based on better lighting, it is possible that the end- result is
unchanged (M). Nina would feel better if she did it (HH), but her feelings
would depend on the fina l outcome. If the non-governmental organization
has already decided to install the solar panels, they will most likely
approach another company if Nina's company declines (H).
- For the third alternative, there is a risk that there will be problems with t he
Chapter 6 Critical thinking
91
non-governmental organization (H), and risk that the reputation spreads
that Nina's company suddenly pulled out (H). The communit y perhaps
will not get the technology that it needs (L), and Nina's position will most
certainly be compromised (H).
6 Valuation. Nina has three options, and she has many reasons not to choose
the first alternative. The third alternative is brave but ,could possibly be too
risky. Can Nina really decide upon not granting money to the project? Could
this decision not be revoked at a later stage? Perhaps the best way would be
alternative 2?
7 Even though Nina thinks that discussing this issue with her manager is a bit
awkward, she decides to do so (decision).
8 She does it (action).
9 After the fact, Nina reflects on what happened.5
-------------------------■
Model 2: The ethical cycle
Philosophers Ibo van de Poel and Lambert Royakkers 6 have developed the
ethical cycle, which is similar to Collste's framework but less linear and
more recursive (each step is connected to the others).
Moral
problem
statement
!
.,
Problem
analysis
Options for
actions
•
...
Ethical
judgement
Reflection
Ethically
• acceptable
action
•
The ethical cycle.
The first step is the moral problem statement. What characterizes the moral
problem is that there are conflicting values, norms, principles, or outcomes.
Here we need to specify what the moral problem is, for whom it is a problem,
and why it is a moral problem, since many problems are not moral. The
second phase is the problem analysis. Here we need to specify the stakeholders
and their interests, the moral values that are relevant in the situation, and
a:
=>
....
<(
a:
,_
....
,_
z
UI
C
=>
,_
VI
the relevant facts. The third phase concerns thinking about alternatives. The
fourth phase is ethical judgement, which concerns thinking about how the
various options cohere with or break various ethical theories (see chapters
7- 13). The fifth step concerns a reflection upon the previous steps.
92
Chapter 6 Critical thinking
Cl
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
=>
<(
UI
I
,_
0
Van de Poel and Royakkers propose a method for the decision based on
"reflective equilibrium" (inspired by John Rawls, see chapter 12), where one
goes back and forth, modifies the courses of action in light of the ethical
theories and frameworks, to finally find an equilibrium, which is balanced
and adapted to all relevant ethical claims.
NINA AND THE ETHICAL CYCLE
When Nina goes through Collste's framework, she will probably come up with
new ideas about previous steps when she is already "finished" with them.
A purpose of the ethical cycle is to encourage this recursive thinking. Nina could,
for example, redefine the problem - that this is not really a moral problem for
herself, but rather one for the company. Nina's feelings are in this light seen as
less important. It will ultimately be the reputation of the company that is at
stake when deciding to go ahead or not. Also, will this project be in line with
the purpose of the company, which at least to some extent would go beyond
profitability? If the "customer is right" and the community is the end customer,
the project should perhaps be stopped. Going back and forth will undoubtedly
lead to more reflection and a deeper understanding of the issues. Also, Nina
might find out that there are more options - for example, to make the solar panel
power station safer against theft in some way, or that the charity project should
include life-long maintenance and replacement in case of theft.
Model 3: The autonomy matrix
cc
::,
t-
<!
cc
w
tt-
--'
t-
z
w
c::,
::,
t--
v,
c::,
A third model is the autonomy matrix developed by philosopher Iordanis
Kavathatzopoulos. The main idea is to promote critical thinking. As
the name suggests, the model is visualized as a matrix. On one axis, we
write down all the potential alternatives for action, and on the other
axis all relevant consequences, duties, rights, feelings, and so on for
various stakeholders. In each of the boxes within the matrix, we specify
the possibilities (pros) and risks (cons) that could arise given a certain
alternative. One could utilize the following 7-step list for support:7
z
<!
cc
0
:r:
t-
::,
<r
w
:r:
..
t-
1
Will there be any ethical problems or conflicts in the context, in the
organization, or in the group where your decision will be applied or
your solution will be used (for example your research findings)?
Chapter 6 Critical thi nking
93
2
Will your decision or solution cause any ethical problems
or conflicts?
3
Are there any alternatives to your solution?
4
Which groups, individuals, organizations, etc. will in any way be
affected by or have a stake in the development, use, application, or
mere existence of your decision and solution (including society at
large and the environment)?
5
Which values, interests, duties, standpoints, and attitudes are
involved in the use of your solution and the possible alternatives?
6
What effects will your solution (and the alternatives) have on each
of these values? Which are the strengths/possibilities and the
weaknesses/risks of each solution to each value? Will these solutions
fit certain values and conflict with others? Which values and how?
7
What will you do to make sure that the use of the solution will
be optimal with regard to ethical aspects? For instance, adapt the
design of the product, use research methods, cooperation with
industry, information to stakeholders, etc.? How, exactly, are you
going to succeed with this?
The model differs slightly from the other models. Here, it is almost assumed
that we have a solution in mind from the beginning, something that is
indeed quite plausible given our bias. But rather than jumping to this
conclusion, the autonomy matrix urges us to think about alternatives.
Like the other models, the autonomy matrix is very open, urging us to
think about values, interests, duties, standpoints, and attitudes. Another
advantage of the model is the aspect of visualization - that the outcome of
the analysis is visualized in a matrix, which makes it easy to get an overview.
The autonomy matrix tells us that there are a variety of options, all of
which have good and bad aspects. The model does not tell us how to choose
but reminds us of performing the analysis of pros and cons before making
a decision. It also reminds us of the aporia - an irresolvable contradiction
- here meaning the impossibility of finding a best solution.
Nina could sketch the results from our example into a simplified
autonomy matrix (see next page).
94
Chapter 6 Crit ical t hinki ng
"'
::,
I<(
w
"'
,-.
I~
,-.
z
w
C,
::,
,-.
v'\
C,
z
<(
"'
0
:r
1-
::,
<(
The consequences
for Nina's company
The consequences
for the community
Possibilities: Increased
profitabi Iity
Possibilities: Cou Id be
a good energy solution
Risks: Be related to
a failed development
project
Risks: High
maintenance costs,
risk of theft
Possibilities: Act
according to personal
convictions and data
Possibilities: To
market this as truly
customer-centred
Possibilities: Solves
the community's
immediate problem
Risks: Be seen as
anti-corporate, being
scared of punishment
Risks: Less profitability
from t his project
Risks: Does not solve
the commun ity's
possible need for
an energy source
for things other
than lighting
Possibilities: Act
according to personal
convictions and data
Possibilities: Not be
related to a failed
charity project. Be
customer-focused.
Possibilities: Depends
on what the
non-governmental
organization does
Risks: Lower
profitabi Iity
Risks: Status quo
-
Nina's feelings
Provide
the solar
panels
Possibilities: Feel
happy for providing a
high-tech solut ion (if
it suits the community)
Risks: Feel bad
for delivering an
unsuitable technology
Discuss
with the
manager,
suggesting
better
lighting
Dismantle
the
project
-
Risks: Maverick action,
going against the
will of the company
-
Nina's aut onomy mat rix.
Visualization could be used for other two-dimensional models, for example,
to have the various alternatives on one axis and the stakeholders on the other,
or to have the alternatives on one axis and ethical theories on the other.
Model 4: Ethical technology development
~
>--
z
w
0
::,
Van de Poel and Royakkers 8 h ave also developed a model for ethical
technology development which consists of five steps. Even though this
model specifically concerns technology development, it follows the basic
structure of the already reviewed models.
>-v"\
Q
z
<(
a:
0
I
>-::,
<(
w
I
1
The formulation ofgoals, design criteria, and requirements and
their operationalization. The formulations of goals and how the
new technology will be designed may include ethical issues. What
>--
"
Chapter 6 Cri t ical t hinki ng
95
is the problem to be solved? What are the restrictions? How can
we operationalize them clearly? These questions correspond to the
problem formulation stage of the other models. When the Ford Pinto
was designed in the 1970s, Ford wanted to create a small car, and the
price was to be less than 2,000 dollars. The fuel tank was vulnerable;
if the car was hit from behind, it could burst into flames. It was later
revealed that Ford calculated the cost of installing a rubber sheet
around the tank, which would make the car safer, but thought that
this would not be economically defensible. This led to the death of
many and was contrary to Ford's original intention - a cheap, small
car that would leave you with "that warm feeling". One of the factors
leading to this was how the goals were formulated.
2
The choice of alternatives to be investigated during a design process
and the selection among those alternatives at a later stage in the
process. In a technology development process, there are inevitably
several alternatives to pursue. As with the other models, it is
important to think creatively in the technology development
process. However, all alternatives may not be considered during a
design process. This would simply take too much time and effort.
To exclude alternatives early on in the design process might have
ethical consequences. The conclusion is that you should make a first
assessment of the ethical consequences early in the design process.
3
The assessment of trade-offs between design criteria and decisions
regarding the acceptability ofparticular trade-offs. When we
consider various design alternatives, there will inevitably be tradeoffs between various values. Some of those values concern ethics;
perhaps a conflict between safety and environmental issues. Others
may concern trade-offs between ethical and non-ethical values, such
as safety against cost. These trade-offs need to be reflected upon and
their acceptability needs to be explained and argued.
cc
::,
....
<(
cc
w
,-
....
~
,-
z
w
0
::,
Iv'\
4
96
The assessment of risks and secondary effects and decisions regarding
their acceptability. This step concerns the indirect effects of the
technology. For example: Right now the technology might be used
in this particular way, but what do we know about future use? Think
Chapter 6 Critica l t hi nkin g
0
z
<(
cc
0
....
:,:
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
about the surveillance systems that are in place all over society. They
are currently used to prevent crime and get information, but what if
they were to be used by an artificial intelligence in the future to track
down particular individuals with diverging political opinions? What
if we use nano-materials that later turn into nano-waste which is
difficult to take care of and has a negative environmental impact?
5
The assessment ofscripts and political and social visions that
are (implicitly) inherent in a design and decisions regarding the
desirability of these scripts. In this step, we take a macro level view
of the technology we are developing. For example, Facebook might
embody the script (see chapter 2) "relate to your friends through
Facebook", which could possibly increase the contact time between
friends on Facebook but reduce the contact time IRL or with people
who are not on Facebook. A dating app where you quickly swipe
men and women to the left or right, depending on how attractive you
find them, is based on a script that it is the first visual impression
that is crucial. A rice cooker, as Mikael Laaksoharju9 describes,
could be seen to contain a script that says "You don't need to
know how to cook rice, just push the button and I take care of it",
implying that technology also reduces our need for particular kinds
of knowledge. And what happens if we forget some knowledge we
will truly need?
As we can see, this process of developing new technology is quite similar to
a:
::,
><(
a:
w
>,-
_,
>-
z
w
0
the models we have surveyed above. The first two steps are almost identical
to those in the other models. The third, fourth, and fifth steps concern
strengths and weaknesses of one alternative over others, considering
consequences, risks, and macro-level consequences. The similarities are
not unexpected. Indeed, technology development is in a way about solving
a problem, where there are a variety of perspectives, ethics included.
::,
>-
"'
0
z
<(
er
0
:r:
,-
::,
<(
Chapter 6 Cri t ical t hinki ng
97
r
Model 5: EVIL - exit, voice, insubordination, loyalty
The last of the five models for critical thinking is the well-known model
developed by the economist Albert Hirschman 10 and used by sociologist
Boel Berner11 to discuss ethics for engineers. These concepts of the model
- exit, voice, loyalty - may be read as different responses to something
ethically problematic at one's work, family, studies, or another setting.
In this book, the model has been supplemented with a fourth concept insubordination.
One type of action is exit - to quit one's job or to leave the context
where one is. Many people say: "If it is acceptable to do these things in my
workplace, I cannot keep working here." Imagine if friends you hang out
with in a bar start to speak in a racist way that you do not agree with at
all. An exit strategy would be that you go to the restroom, go out to have
some fresh air, go home, or perhaps stop being friends with them. What
are the consequences of exit? In the context of work, for yourself exit will
mean that you will not keep this job. W hether you can find another job
depends on skills, contacts, the need for employees in various workplaces,
and certainly luck. It would probably be much easier to stay at the job. You
might also have someone you need to support financially. The impact of an
exit strategy on the company engaged in the wrongdoing might be slight.
However, if several people quit their jobs, it might lead to lbad consequences
for the company. People might wonder why so many are quitting their jobs,
and there is a reputational risk for the company. But often, quitting one's
job will not necessarily change the practices at the company. A related
strategy is avoidance, where you try to stay away from ethically problematic
situations. Remember Galen Erso (chapter 1), who hid from the Empire
until he was tracked down.
Another response is voice. It means to state loud and clear that the
unethical practices are not acceptable. This is called whistleblowing, and
the whistle can be blown to various stakeholders: to the people directly
engaging in the action, to their managers, to upper managers, and external
bodies, such as the media, police, and so on. When your friends start to
express themselves in a racist way at the bar, you can protest and say that
it is unacceptable to express oneself in that way. In a workplace setting,
98
Chapter 6 Critical thi nki ng
a:
::,
....
«
a:
w
,-
I-
-'
,-
z
w
0
::,
I-
v'\
0
2
«
a:
0
I
....::,
«
w
I
....
9
this strategy could lead to a change of practices. However, by blowing the
whistle you might end up in a precarious situation. Some might think that
you lack loyalty to the company, while others might think that you did the
right thing. Similarly, in the job market, you might be seen as an ethical
hero, but you could also be seen as a troublemaker.
Yet another, less discussed and probably more legally and otherwise
risky choice is insubordination. Insubordination means that you stay in the
organization but refuse to do what is asked of you. A very famous example
this is the person who refused to salute Hitler.
Image removed for copyright reasons.
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
Image removed for copyrig ht reasons.
....
z
~
~
"'....
::,
V,
"'z<t:
a:
0
I
....
::,
<t:
Two cases of insubordi nation. The person ref using to do the Nazi sal ute.
A superhero in the film The lncredibles refuses to follow orders.
Chapter 6 Cri tical t hinking
99
A less well-known example is in the movie The Incredibles, where one
of the superheroes works in an insurance company. His manager does not
want him to let the customers know how they can receive compensation for
harm, in order to maximize profits for the company. The superhero agrees
but between the lines he tells exactly how a client should get compensation,
by saying: "Listen closely. I'd like to help you but I can't. I'd like to tell
you to take a copy of your policy to Norma Wilcox on ... Norma Wilcox,
W-I-L-C-O-X, on the third floor, but I can't. I also do not advise you to fill
out and file a WS2475 form with our legal department on the second floor"
and so on. Imagine what insubordination would look like around the bar
table. In a political setting, this strategy is often called civil disobedience.
The last response is loyalty, which basically means that you accept the
wrongdoing. In the bar, you join in with the racist jargon of your friends,
perhaps you even make one or two racist jokes yourself.
EVIL could help us think about various alternative actions when making
a decision about ethics. However, it is a more limited model than Collste's,
the ethical cycle, and the autonomy matrix, since it is basically a heuristic
for thinking about alternative actions.
A synthetic model for critical thinking
A combination of the five reviewed ethical frameworks is proposed here (see
figure below). It is based on Collste's model, while adding the recursivity of
the ethical cycle and the visualization of the autonomy matrix. Implicitly,
it includes the aspects reviewed in the model of ethical technology
development and EVIL.
This model can be used in all three dimensions of engineering practice:
working with technology, working together with others, and your
personal life.
Just like all the presented models, the synthetic model also has a
drawback. All the alternatives reviewed will most probably come with
various pros and cons. How can we decide which alternative to pursue?
There is no simple answer to this. Rather, one should be aware of the pros
and cons of all alternatives when one makes a choice.
There are, however, some ways we can think about making the
100
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
cc
::,
...
...
<(
cc
w
,~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
V'\
0
z
<(
a::
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
r
Formulate the problem and who is the owner of the problem.
2 Information gathering. Find relevant information.
3 Alternatives. What are the alternatives?
4 Think about the alternatives using ethical theory.
- What impacts will the action produce (Chapter 7)?
>....
- Have I considered relevant duties and rights (Chapter 8)?
>
- What is the impact on me as a virtuous agent (Chapter 9)?
V'I
- What is the impact on the freedom of me and others (Chapter 10)?
::::,
- What is the impact on my relationships to others and their
a::
u
w
a::
relationships (Chapter 11)?
- Is my solution fair (Chapter 12)?
- Is my solution taking environmental issues into account (Chapter 13)?
- Are there any other ethical aspects that I have not taken
into account?
5 Judgement/decision. Based on understanding the pros and cons of
every alternative.
Visualize in a matrix with alternatives on one axis and various forms
of impact on the other.
A synthetic model for critical t hinking about et hics.
cc
::,
....
<
cc
"-'
>....
-'
>-
z
"-'
0
::,
>-
v,
0
z
<
er
0
:c
....
::,
<
decision.12 The first is to make all consequences measurable according to
some common measure (for example dollars). This is the strategy adopted
by some consequentialist theories that are presented in the next chapter.
However, it is an ethical decision iln itself to monetize or express all
consequences in terms of utility. The advantage of this way of making a
decision is that it gives an impression of exactness. But behind the numbers,
there are probably many unfounded assumptions.
The second way is to perform a multi-criteria analysis where you
compare different options with different measures, such as cost, safety,
and sustainability. This means that you cannot boil down all the values
into a single value, as in the first alternative. Likewise, it becomes difficult
to measure how various options compare when it comes to, for example,
sustainability (how do you measure it?), but it is definitely easier than to boil
down all variables into one measure. However, it is a challenge to weigh all
Chapter 6 Crit ical thinking
101
the aspects together. If there is a clear "conversion rate", such as 1 unit of
cost equals 2 units of sustainability, then we are in practice back at the first
option. If not, then it will be difficult to make a well-grounded decision.
A third possibility is that you decide a threshold for each dimension (for
example safety, environment, cost, health) that an alternative needs to be
below or above to be acceptable. By deciding thresholds, you can see what the
minimum requirements are and adapt your solution to them. One problem
may be that the thresholds are too liberal, that they are too easy to fulfil. Even
ifyou satisfy them, maybe you could have made an even more ethical choice.
A fourth, perhaps less legitimate option, is to make a random selection
between a few alternatives that are better than the others. A fifth solution
is to keep the matrix in all its complexity and discuss the various pros and
cons of each alternative and reason oneself into reaching a conclusion.
What has been a tacit assumption in all the reviewed models is that there is
an individual agent performing the analysis. However, we often make these
judgements and decisions in groups and there is nothing stopping a group
from working together with any of the proposed models to reach a good
decision. However, the above-mentioned models do not tell us explicitly to
involve stakeholders in a good discussion - this is the message of discourse
ethics, which will be presented now.
Discourse ethics
Sigmund Freud allegedly said that "civilization began the first time an angry
person cast a word instead of a rock". This is in line with the discourse ethics
of the German 20th-century philosopher Jurgen Habermas. Habermas, who
works in a Kantian tradition (see chapter 8), has argued that it is difficult to
find an ethically acceptable solution from an individual's perspective. 13 The
validity of a moral norm must be shaped intersubjectively (in the interaction
between people). In other words, a good solution emerges when we involve
all relevant stakeholders in the discussion. The good decision is what comes
out of a good conversation.
102
Chapter 6 Critical thinking
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
I1-
...,
1-
z
w
0
::,
Iv'\
0
z
<(
a:
0
:r
1-
::,
<(
w
:r
I-
"
Robots engaged in a good conversation7
a::
::,
....
<(
a::
w
>....
...,
Habermas formulates two principles - the principle of universalization
and the principle of discourse ethics - which are the essence of his theory.
The principle of universalization says that everyone affected by a norm's
general observance should be able to accept its anticipated consequences
and side effects. This basically means that a norm that may be accepted by
all affected stakeholders is a sound norm. For our purposes, we can say
that a solution to a problem that may be accepted by all stakeholders is a
good solution. However, sometimes we accept things just because we are
fooled, stressed, or misinformed. The second principle, the principle of
discourse ethics, says that norms are only valid if everybody affected accepts
them as participants in a practical discourse. But what does it mean to be
a participant in a practical discourse? A practical discourse can be seen
as a good conversation. To help us understand what a good conversation
is and how to cultivate one, the ethicist Frederick Bird14 has developed a
checklist (see box).
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'0
z
<(
a::
0
I
>::,
<(
w
:r:
0
GOOD CONVERSATIONS ACCORDING TO FREDERICK BIRD
Features of good conversations
■ Good conversations are recognizable. Don't whisper. Don't speak indirectly. Say
what you mean.
■ Speakers are attentive, they listen and care about what others say.
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
103
■ Conversations move forward reciprocal ly, interactively. Participants engage in a
give-and-take fashion.
■ Communications are rational - intelligible, re<1sonable, thought- provoking,
can be debated.
■ Communications are honest. Don't lie, don't overstate ...
■ Speakers keep the promises they make.
■ The exchanges remain civil.
Ways of cultivating good conversations
■
Encourage people to speak up because it matters and makes a difference.
■ De-professionalize moral discussions and decision-making.
■ Allow and encourage organizational dissent.
■ Help people develop their abilities to hear and be attentive.
■ Allow conversations to develop: avoid premature closure.
Let us for the last time return to Nina and now think about how she could
make use of discourse ethics for thinking critically.
■
NINA AND DISCOURSE ETHICS
Nina thinks that discourse ethics has already been used in the preliminary
investigation leading to data showing that the community needed better
lighting - Nina's company asked the community what they wanted. The obvious
recommendation wou ld thus be to go for better lighting. Or wouldn't I? She
th inks aga in and wonders whether the representatives of the community were
perhaps not rational participants in the conversation - did they real ly consider
the difference between short-term and long-term consequences, between
lighting issues and energy issues? How did the interview unfold? Was it a good
conversation? Was it shaped by some veiled interests? Furthermore, a good
conversation would also include a true meeting between the company and the
stakeholders, not mere data collection concerning people in the community by
some consu ltants. A better way, according to discourse ethics, wou ld have been
to invite all relevant stakeholders to a discussion and fi nd a reasonable way
forward based on that discussion. Such a discussion is ca lled a constructive
technology assessment.
cc
::,
...
......
<(
cc
w
,_
~
z
w
C
::,
...
v"\
-------------------------■
C
z
<(
cc
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
...
:r:
0
104
Chapter 6 Crit ical t hinki ng
CONSTRUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
The basic aim of ethical technology assessment {eTA} is to promote ethical
reflection concerning new technology. A form of eTA is constructive technology
assessment (CTA}, which is directly linked to discourse eth ics and the good
conversation.15 In CTA, a range of stakeholders are invited to contribute to
the design of the technology. These might be consumers, citizens, employees,
companies, and non-governmental organizations. By involving stakeholders in
a CTA, three different aspects will hopefully materialize.
■ Anticipation. If we include more people with varying perspectives in the design
process, it is likely that we wil l get a fuller picture of the issue and also be able
to anticipate potential problems and benefits with the technology.
■ Reflexivity. Furthermore, the technologica I development process becomes
more reflexive, since underlying values wi ll be discussed. The inclusion of other
actors can help us surpass the "wall of obviousness" (see chapter 1).
■ Social learning. CTA can lead to social learning processes where one learns
not only about the technology one wants to develop, but also about one's own
values as a designer.
Obstacles to good conversations:
master suppression techniques
As we know, sometimes good conversations are hampered by power
differences, a will to please authorities, lack of time, and many other factors
that we have surveyed in chapter 4.
The concept of master suppression techniques was coined in 1945 but
was later popularized by social psychologist Berit As16 . They are often
:::,
"'
....
<t:
"'
>-
....
described as techniques that men use to oppress women but may also be
used to understand other forms of dominance, often within a conversation.
The master oppression techniques, according to As, are:
>z
w
<Cl
:::,
>-
"'
C
z
<t:
a:
0
:,:
....
:::,
<t:
• Making invisible. To silence or by other means marginalize a person
by ignoring her.
• Ridicule. In a manipulative way portray the arguments of the
opponent in a ridiculous fashion .
w
:,:
>-
G
Chapter 6 Crit ical t hinki ng
105
r
•
Withhold information. To exclude a person from the decisionmaking process, or knowingly not passing on information to the
person to make the person less able to make an informed choice.
• Double bind. To punish or belittle the actions of a person, regardless
of how she acts.
• Heap blame/put to shame: To embarrass someone and claim that the
wronged person is to blame.
• Objectification. To discuss the appearance of a person despite the
fact that it is irrelevant.
• Force or threat offorce. To threaten a person physically to get one's
point across.
Furthermore, logical fallacies are also an obstacle to good conversations,
since they could fool us into believing that an argument which is invalid is
valid. There are many logical fallacies, some of which are listed here:
• Hasty generalization. Generalizations from too few cases.
• Red herring. Diverting the argument to unrelated issues to disturb
the argumentation.
• Ad hominem. Attacking someone's character rather than
her arguments.
• Ad populum. Assuming that everyone agrees.
• Non sequitur. Making jumps in logic.
• Post hoc ergo propter hoc. That A followed B does not mean
that B caused A.
• Straw man. To simplify the opponent's argument and attack them.
• Circular argument. A is used to support B while B is used
to support A.
a:
::,
I<(
a:
II-
,_
~
• Either/or. Oversimplification of a complex matter into two
alternatives.
z
w
C
::,
1v"I
C,
z
<(
a:
0
I
1-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
106
Chapter 6 Critica l t hi nking
Casuistry
Another way to judge ethical acceptability is to use casuistry. This method
is old and goes back to classical times. It is also central in the common law
tradition, where one judges a case by comparing it to other cases treated in
the past. Comparing your own situation with the way you or others have
dealt with similar situations could be a relevant and good way to think
critically. Analogies are made between current and previous cases.
Another way in which casuistry may be used is to vary a scenario to find
out where you think that the limit between the acceptable and unacceptable
is. To insinuate a sexual invite to your uninterested colleague is a case of
sexual harassment, while an insinuation to the person you are married to
might not be. By varying a scenario, we can finetune our capacity for ethical
judgment (see "Bribery: an exercise in casuistry" in chapter 15).
However, casuistry has its limits. It has been used to codify in great
detail what is acceptable or not, thus leaving no autonomy or personal
responsibility to the person making the ethical decision. This goes against
the philosophy in this text, where critical thinking is important. However,
used in a more open way, casuistry may assist our thinking about ethics.
Strategic, biased, and reflective uses
of the models
u.,
I
>-
"
There are at least three different ways in which models for critical thinking
can be used.
Ifwe use the models strategically, we already know what we think about a
particular issue and know how we would like to act. We know, for example,
that we want to build a factory in a certain area and need to find arguments
for it and disarm arguments against it. By using the models in this way it
is likely that one will get stronger, more coherent, arguments based on the
models. However, this can hardly be called an ethical use of the models.
Often, we are biased towards an alternative we already believe in. In
contrast to the strategic use, we try to be open, but we are unconsciously
biased. One exercise to counteract these tendencies is to force oneselfto create
good arguments for all different alternative actions. For example, if you are
for the introduction of companion robots in your country (see ''A robot to
Chapter 6 Critical thin king
107
r
love: case study for chapters 10-12" in chapter 15), try to argue against this.
This bias towards one particular way of solving the problem is common when
it comes to working with technology, one of the domains of engineering
practice. Sometimes engineers are so enthusiastic about a technology that
they almost forget that this is just one possible solution to a problem. Like
other feelings, even enthusiasm must be transitional in critical thinking.
Sometimes technology, particularly advanced technology, is seen as
a sign of progress and development. For example, today there are many
smart functions in new buildings, such as automatic temperature control,
lights that go off when no one is in the room, and so on. Such technology
can of course be seen as functional and focused on utility: "Since people
forget to turn off the lights, it is good to have such technology in place."
However, sometimes the smart technology is not smart enough. Imagine
that you are reading a book about ethics in engineering in your office
and the lights switch off since there is no motion in the room. We might
naturally think that to solve this problem, we would need to construct even
smarter systems. The fact that we are creating sophisticated technological
solutions to simple problems (people forget to turn off the light when they
leave the office) indicates that the function and utility of the technology
are not the only things that matter. Technology can also be ideologically
driven (value driven). If we use such advanced technology, we think that
we are advanced and successful. We might say that we are biased towards
high-tech solutions. In the 1970s, Ernst Friedrich Schumacher17 wrote the
book Small is Beautiful where he criticized the introduction of advanced
technological systems in developing countries. He noticed that such systems
perhaps worked well for a period of time, but then degenerated due to a lack
of competence, repair equipment, and spare parts. Rather, it is better to
focus on what he calls appropriate technology that is robust and resilient,
easy to repair and cheap, but which can still fulfil its purpose well enough.
In the same way that we should not be biased towards one particular
course of action before considering its pros and cons, we should not
necessarily opt for a high-tech, even a technological, solution to a problem
before considering possible alternatives. Rather than being a potential
solution, a particular technology could be seen as something that is an end
in itself (see next page about Tomonobu Imamichi).
108
Chapter 6 Critical thi nking
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
...
I~
1--
z
w
C
::>
1--
V'I
C
z
<t:
a:
0
I
....::,
<t:
w
I
>-
(I
TOMONOBU IMAMICHI AND THE REVERSAL
OF THE PRACTICAL SYLLOGISM
Japanese philosopher Tomonobu lmamichi18 discusses how the technologically
med iated environment (our present age) changes our way of thinking. He takes
the practical syllogism as an example. He argues that we traditiona lly have a goal
we want to fu lfi l (premise), a number of means that we can use to reach the goal
(premise), and from the premises we reach a conclusion (using one of the means
to achieve the goa l). But in the technolog ically mediated environment, we do
not have a certain goal but a certain technology (premise) and various problems
that technology can solve (premise). Then we choose one of these solutions
(conclusion). The basic message is that rather than being seen as a means,
technology is now seen as an end in itself. This is similar to Jacques Ellul's ideas
(see chapter 2).
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'0
z
«
"'0
:c
The more reflective use is to be open to what may come out of the process,
trying to avoid biases. Maybe we have a clear view of what we think would
be the preferred course of action, but when working through the models, we
realize that this is not so. In that case, we should be open to the suggestions
emerging from the models.
The models are simple in their form and do not differ a lot from regular
ways of making judgements in our everyday life. However, the difference is
that all these models need to be supplemented by ethical theory. There are
various conflicting ethical theories that all take a different view of what is
good, for example, by considering the consequences that follow from an
action, which duties are followed or breached, which rights are protected
or breached, or if the actions weaken or strengthen certain relationships.
There are also ethical frameworks in particular contexts (micro norms,
see chapter 2), such as corporate codes of conduct and engineering codes
of conduct, which one must pay heed to. There could also be claims from
social, cultural, or religious norms. All of these theories, norms, and
frameworks are relevant for the ethical judgement process. The models
that were presented in this chapter are just the tip of the iceberg, and to use
them accurately, we must be aware of various ways to think about ethics.
>::,
«
w
:c
..
>-
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
109
In this chapter we have discussed critical thinking, both the theoretical
foundations and different models and methods to promote critical thinking.
Based on already existing models a synthetic model for critical thinking
has been developed. Finally, different uses of the models were surveyed, of
which the reflective use supports critical thinking about ethics.
STUDY QUESTIONS
6
What is critical thinking?
What is the difference between pluralism and monism?
What is the role of emotion and reason in critical thinking?
How should we approach feelings of disgust and anger when we
make ethical judgements?
Describe Collste's decision-making model, the ethical cycle, the
autonomy matrix, the model for ethical technology development,
and the EVIL model. Compare them. What are the pros and cons
of each model?
What is the synthetic model?
7
How can we go from judgement to decision?
8
What is the good conversation? How does the good conversation
differ from the other ways of making judgements?
It has been argued that !CT-mediated discussions can be a way to
anonymize the identity of the discussants and thereby promote a
good conversation. What do you think about this?
What is CTA? What are the connections between discourse
ethics and CTA?
What are master suppression techniques? How do they breach
principles of the good conversation? Give examples.
What is casuistry? What are the pros and cons of casuistry?
Explain the difference between strategic, biased, and reflective use
of the models.
What is appropriate technology according to Schumacher?
What is the reversal of the practical syllogism?
1
2
3
4
5
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
I1-
...,
1-
z
w
Ll
::,
,-
v>
Ll
2
<(
a::
0
I
,-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
110
Chapter 6 Critical t hink in g
THE LIFE PARTNER AND YOU: THE SYNTHETIC
MODEL IN PRACTICE
In your et hics course, you have familiarized yourself with some tools to think critically.
You use the synthetic model and define your design team as the problem owner and
the prob lem as whether you should try to develop this product or not. This is indeed
what the discussions within your company have been about. But then you think
again and see the humanoid care robot as one alternative solution in a technology
development process - but to what problem? You start to fear that you are almost
uncritically biased towards the humanoid care robot with socia l functiona lity.
You start to consider the problem and search for information on the Internet. The
population is getting older and there are simply not enough care-givers to take care
of them. Furthermore, the public healthcare budgets are shrinking. Due to this, some
of the elders feel isolated and think that healthcare personnel rush in and out without
having the time to real ly care.
Well, this is something you already knew, and the humanoid social robot is
t he perfect solution, or is it? Given the means of your company - mechatronics
competence and Al - are there any other technological alternatives? You start to
envision another robot, which is not humanoid and does not have socializing skills but
that could assist care-givers with the physical aspects of their jobs (lifting, assisting
elders to wa lk, shower, and so on). This would be a cheaper robot. It could be ca lled
the Helper. A third alternative is of course to do nothing.
You decide that you should use the synthetic critical thinking model as a
framework, but given that you have not read about ethical theory in the book you
do not start the analysis yet. You identify three stakeholders: your own company, the
users, and the care- givers. You feel that there are some stakeholders missing, but you
start in this way.
Own company
Users
Care-givers
Develop the Life Partner
Develop the Helper
Not develop either
Chapter 6 Critical t hinking
111
r
Chapter 7
Conseq uentia Iist
ethical theories
CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICAL THEORIES are called that since they hold
that the goodness of an action depends on the consequences resulting from
it. In everyday life, we talk about this as an outcome orientation, rather
than a process orientation. It is often said that what matters is the outcome.
The choice of the term consequentialist is somewhat unfortunate, since
breaking a duty, violating a right, engaging in virtuous or vicious behaviour,
compromising a relationship, and engaging in discrimination could also be
:::,
"'
><t:
cc
f-
>-
_,
f-
z
UJ
c:,
:::,
f-
"'
c:,
z
<t:
cc
0
I
>-
:::,
<t:
UJ
:r:
><)
seen as consequences. However, the main point is that one tries to separate
the action itself from the consequences of the action. In contrast to duty
ethics, which is presented in the next chapter, it may be justified according
to consequentialist ethics to violate traditionally inherited action rules, such
as the Ten Commandments. It might be justified to violate the engineering
code of conduct if the consequences are good. It may be justified to steal if
the consequences are good. And so on.
Everywhere in society there are lies, or modifications of the truth, for
example in marketing. A particular beer brand is marketing its beer as
"brewed with passion using the finest ingredients". The price of the beer is
reasonable. ls the beer really brewed with passion? This company is producing
beer industrially, and can an industrial process really be passionate? And isn't
it unlikely that the beer is made with the finest ingredients? Surely it is not
the worst ingredients either, but some quite good ingredients. The purpose of
113
these superlatiives is probably to sell more of the beer and not least make the
people who buy the beer happy. Who would want to buy something "brewed
industrially using quite good ingredients"?
•
FAKE MOTOR SOUND
When you step on the gas in a particular brand of a pickup, you hear a muscular
engine sound. But it is phony. What you really hear is a synthetic sound playing
through your car's speakers. And the car manufacturers are not really will ing to admit
that they use fake sound to boost the feeling of a gas guzzler, even though the pickup
might have a lean, environmentally friendly engine. ls this lie morally acceptable?1
Fake masculinity?
------------------------■
SEXUAL HARASSMENT
""
::,
,<(
"I've told the guys that I've booked a double room for you so they can pay you
a visit." This was said to a female engineer before a Christmas retreat. Another
example: After a person was physically harassed by a colleague the first night
on a project abroad, the manager said: "It's just two weeks, you are a tough girl,
you can manage." These are real episodes and real quotes showing that sexual
harassment also exists within engineering. Consider the harm and negative
consequences following from this harassment.
""
w
,,~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
V'\
0
z
<(
""
0
...
::,:
::,
<(
w
::,:
I-
Q
114
Chapter 7 Consequent ialis t ethi cal t heories
r
There are different consequentialist theories and to understand them we
can ask two questions. The first one is "for whom?" and the second "what?"
For whom?
a:
::,
....
<t:
cc
r....
r-
z
UJ
C
::,
r-
We need to ask ourselves for whom an action should have good
consequences. An answer to that question is "for me". This theory, called
ethical egoism, holds that I ought to maximize the consequences for myself.
The theory is in line with our experiences that we often tend to think about
ourselves. Ethical egoism, this normative theory, in that sense corresponds
to the descriptive theory of how we are (see chapter 1 on the difference
between psychological and ethical egoism). But a counterargument is that
it does not fit all our moral experiences - can you really boil down all of
your actions to egoism? Another argument for ethical egoism is that we all
know what we want ourselves and it would therefore be more efficient if
we focused on this rather than trying to do what is right for other people
(as in other consequentialist theories). In the 18th-century philosopher
Adam Smith's2 theories of the invisible hand there is a similar reasoning.
If everyone pursues their own self-interest, the market will, like an invisible
hand, produce the greatest happiness for the entire population. One
obviously wonders what would happen if there was no invisible hand to take
care of us, or if the invisible hand was somewhat deficient. A similar form of
reasoning is behind the famous statement by economist Milton Friedman3
that "the social responsibility of business is to maximize its profits".
Another answer to the question "for whom?" is "for you". This theory,
whiich is called ethical altruism, means that you focus on others and try to
produce the best consequences for these persons. It is the opposite of ethical
egoism - here we put ourselves at the very bottom of the hierarchy. Those
for whom we want to maximize good consequences could be our children,
parents, partner, or just everybody else. One thing we are certain of if we
live by this theory is that we will not be selfish.
"'
C
z
<t:
cc
0
:c
....
::,
<t:
UJ
:c
....
"
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical theories
115
THE ALTRUIST ENGINEER
Software engineer Jeff Kaufman started donating half his income in 2009 and
was one of those who created the movement called effective altruism . Effective
altruism, which is also supported by Peter Singer (see chapter 4 and further on
in this chapter), means that you shou ld use your resources in an altruistic and
effective way, where effective means that the resources you give should have
the biggest possib le impact.4
Yet another answer to the question is "for us". This theory, called ethical
particularism, says that we ought to maximize the good consequences for
a community, big or small. Indeed, one could say that ethical egoism and
ethical altruism are special cases of ethical particularism. A community
is a limited set of entities - it does not include everyone but it can be large.
It could, for example, be our family, including ourselves, our social class,
those in our country, those in a particular religion, those in the Western
world, and so on.
THE ENGINEER WHO NOTICED AN ERROR "TOO LATE"
During the construction of a ship, the shipyard did everything it could to
ensure that the vessel would be delivered before the end of the year. One day
the shipowner's inspector at the shipyard received a phone call from the chief
engineer of the shipowner. He wanted the ship to be delivered next year instead,
which would lead to beneficial economic effects for the shipowner. The inspector
noticed an error on the ship that neither the shipyard nor the classification
society had noticed, and he waited until "the last minute" before the ship was
going to be delivered to point this out. The delivery was thus delayed until the
fol lowing year. By doing this, the inspector had maximized profits for his own
a:
:::,
company, t he shipowner, at the expense of the shipyard.
1-
<t:
a:
w
.....
I~
1-
z
w
The last answer is "for all" and this theory is called utilitarianism. Here
we need to include everybody in the equation. We cannot say that we only
consider the interests of the Dutch, or the French, or the Japanese, or the
Muslims, or the Christians. The 19th-century philosopher Henry Sidgwick
argued that we, as rational beings, understand that there is no essential
116
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical the-0ries
0
:::,
.....
v'\
C
z
<t:
a:
0
I
1-
:::,
<t:
w
I
I-
"
r
difference between our own pleasure and the pleasure of others, 5 which
is the reason we have to give equal weight to all interests. Peter Singer
describes this as taking the point of view of the universe.6 Sure, we have
pre-rational elements in ourselves, we are egoistic to some extent, but when
we think about it, it is obvious that the pleasure of all individuals should be
given equal weight. If we know that it is rational to do a certain thing, and
if we still do not do it, we will feel uneasy. This has later been referred to by
social psychologist Leon Festinger7 as cognitive dissonance.
Still, the concept of "for all" is problematic. What do we mean by "all"?
Enlightenment philosopher Jeremy Bentham's theories include anyone able
to enjoy or suffer. Bentham8 writes about who should be seen as a moral
subject - in other words who utilitarianism cares about - and argues that
what makes someone a moral subject is not rationality or the ability to talk
- rather, it is their ability to suffer. Utilitarianism thus is not necessarily
centred on human beings. Instead, animals should also be taken into the
equation, since they can suffer too.
Peter Singer9 coined the concept of the expanding circle. Singer claims
that with increased moral maturity, the circle of what we include in ethical
~
t-
z
u..,
0
::,
t-
"'
0
z
<(
a'.
0
I
t-
::,
<(
considerations will expand. The answers to "for whom?" will, or should,
change over the course of a person's moral development. At the beginning
of life, perhaps we are egoistic, or we only consider a few people, but
throughout life we include more and more in our concern. Eventually, we
end up in the very largest circle, which besides animals also includes plants
and perhaps even nature generally.
Furthermore, Peter Singer 10 claims that we should take moral
responsibility to reduce poverty. By doing this, we produce good according
to utilitarianism, since the principle of diminishing marginal utility means
that a dollar in the wallet is more beneficial for a poor person than for a rich
person. As an engineer you probably receive a salary higher than average
in society- in Sweden in 2017, the average salary was 24 ooo SEK and the
average salary for engineers was almost 54 ooo SEK. 11 It is therefore likely
that for engineers, one additional dollar in the pocket will do less good than
for a poorer person.
Some claim that the above means that utilitarianism demands much from
us - too much. Where are the limits? Can you buy gifts for your kids or do
Chapter 7 Consequential ist ethical t heories
117
r
you need to give all your money to the poor? To save utilitarianism from this
counterargument, the concept of supererogatory actions has been introduced:
actions that are too demanding. For example, perhaps your utilitarian calculus
leads you to the conclusion that you should give almost all of your income
to charity and that you should let homeless people live in your apartment.
However, one could then argue that these actions are supererogatory. They are
very good! and commendable, but one cannot reasonably demand any person
to do so. Where does one draw the line between actions and supererogatory
actions? This distinction is probably socially constructed.
■
ENGINEERING FOR POOR CHILDREN
After a hard day's work, you sit down and think about your life. You have spent
the last ten years travelling around the world using your engineering skil ls to help
children in poor parts of the world. Your own children have told you that you care
about all children in the world except for them. Although you think t hat you have
done good, you are not happy.
What should you do as an ethica l egoist? As an ethical particularist focusing
on your family? As a utilitarian?
What?
The second question is "what?" - what are our ethical choices trying to
maximize? - and to that question there are also different answers. The
easy answer is that we should maximize the good consequences, but what
are good consequences?
Jeremy Bentham12 thought that an ethical theory should be faithful to
the most fundamental truth to human beings, what we can all agree upon,
namely the simple fact that people like pleasure and dislike suffering. Hence,
ethics is something that does not contradict human nature but is rather
in line with it. To focus on pleasure and pain is a hedonistic answer to the
question "what?" Hedone is the ancient Greek word for pleasure, which is
why Bentham's theory is sometimes called hedonistic utilitarianism. Is this
a good measure of goodness? We can compare this with our own views by
means of "the open question argument". In other words, we ask ourselves if
our view of goodness equals the proposed definition of goodness, and if the
118
Chapter 7 Consequential ist ethical theories
a:
::,
,_
""
a:
w
....
,_
,_
~
z
w
C
::,
....
V'I
C
z
""a:
0
I
,_
::,
""
w
I
,_
(;l
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
,_
--'
,_
z
w
c:,
::,
,_
V,
c:,
z
<(
a:
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
..
question makes sense, we still have not found the right definition of goodness.
The open question argument related to hedonistic utilitarianism is: "This is
pleasurable but is it good?" If this question makes sense to you, then your idea
of goodness differs from your idea of the pleasurable. And if that is the case,
then perhaps pleasure does not tell us the whole story about what is good.
A second answer could be qualified pleasure, or perhaps happiness.
In Bentham's theory, all pleasure is of equal worth. This means that the
theory is quite "democratic". But some utilitarians, such as the 19th-century
philosopher John Stuart Mill, argue that one should differentiate between
different kinds of happiness. The happiness from, for example, eating
chocolates, reading poetry, going to the opera, or indulging in badminton
statistics is not the same. And what if a person enjoys torturing others
and that the happiness of the torturer exceeds the pain of the tortured?
If we agree to differentiate between different forms of happiness, how do
we do that? Mill 13 says that if everyone or almost everyone who knows
two pleasures gives preference to one of them, irrespective of any moral
obligation to favour it, then it is the more desirable pleasure.
A third answer is preference satisfaction. According to the theory called
preference utilitarianism, we should maximize the preferences satisfied
by a course of action. To maximize preference satisfaction means that we
care about the stakeholders' interests. For example, if I want to smoke, it
is, according to preference utilitarianism, good to do so even if my total
happiness might decrease in the long run. Say that a child wants to eat a lot
of candy every day. Using preference utilitarianism, one could argue that it
would be the best choice to let her do this, since it satisfies her preference and
interest, but ifyou know that she will suffer from tooth decay, and risk being
ill because of the high sugar ingestion, it is not desirable from a hedonistic
perspective. But one can also save preference utilitarianism from this critique.
Some have argued that preferences need not be related to a particular thing,
but more related to a function. So, if we want to smoke cigarettes because we
want to feel calm, what we prefer is not cigarettes but calmness. And there are
probably other roads to calmness, such as meditation. And if a child wants
something sweet, you could prepare a really sweet but healthy fruit smoothie
for her. To think about whether preference satisfaction is a good answer to the
question "what?", one could use the open question argument.
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical theories
119
A fourth answer could be that we should maximize that which we
intuitively consider good, something called ideal utilitarianism. This would
potentially include the value of unspoiled nature, the value of friendship,
beauty, and many other things. This gives a more multifaceted answer
to what we mean by "good consequences", but the answer is also more
problematic due to its vagueness. And perhaps this is where the open
question turns into a closed question.
We could also add less used answers, such as aiming to eliminate
suffering, which naturally focuses on avoiding negative consequences rather
than maximizing the balance between good and bad (see chapter 9 about
the four noble truths of Buddhism). A similar answer could be to minimize
waste, which is central in the Japanese anti-waste philosophy of mottainai,
an expression used to express "what a waste!"
A HYDROPOWER PROJECT
In a country with twenty million inhabitants, a hydropower project is discussed.
The advantage is that the project will lead to cheaper and more stable electricity
for al l citizens. A disadvantage is that two thousand people need to leave their
land. They have lived there for generations and feel attached to it. Another
disadvantage is that it destroys two square kilometres of pristine nature.
Analyse this case from three perspectives:
■
hedonistic utilitarianism
■
preference utilitarianism
■ ideal utilitarianism.14
a:
::,
....
<(
a:
w
,-
....
...,
,-
z
w
C
::,
,-
V)
C
2
<(
a:
A hydroelectric
power station.
C
I
,::,
<(
w
I
(I
120
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical theories
r
Rules and consequences
Consequentialist theories seem to judge the good and bad consequences
for each particular situation, but is this theory also amenable to rules?
Rule consequentialism suggests that we should create rules that lead to
the best consequences. We can create a rule that prohibits lying, since
such a rule would maximize the total amount of happiness (or other
things we would like to maximize). If we follow rule consequentialism,
we do not make a consequentialist analysis for every action. Rather, we
create rules for ourselves (and perhaps for our group, our society, or our
organization if we are in a legislative role) to maximize good consequences.
Rule consequentialism is therefore simpler since we do not have to spend
time thinking about the consequences of every decision. However, some
think this move is a bit suspicious, since utilitarianism starts to look
like deontology (see chapter 8), but the justification behind the rules is
consequentialist. Also, one wonders what would happen if the actions
recommended by rule consequentialism did not conform with what
gives the best consequences for a particular action. Should we break a
consequentialist rule because the consequences of this action are better?
Total happiness or happiness for all?
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
"'
0
:c
>-
::,
«
A somewhat problematic aspect of consequentialism is that it does not seem
to care all that much that good and bad consequences should be distributed
in a fair way. An exception is if we combine consequentialism with the
principle of decreasing marginal utility, which would have redistributive
effects (see the discussion on poverty earlier in this chapter).
Within utilitarianism, there is a debate about whether one should
maximize the total or average happiness. Imagine a society in which
happiness is very unevenly distributed, so that one percent enjoys 99
percent of the happiness, but the total happiness is higher than if everyone
shared equal amounts of happiness. If we care about total happiness,
consequentialism would recommend this very unequal society. There are
conceptual examples about a monster that enjoys very intensely, which
leads to much more total happiness than in a society where all people enjoy
Chapter 7 Conseque nt ialist ethi cal t heories
121
equally. Could this artificial society still be favoured by utilitarianism? Yes,
but only if we look at total happiness.
Except for trying to maximize the total happiness we can try to
maximize good consequences for the average person. Average utilitarianism
tries to maximize the average good "per person". So, a group of a hundred
people where ten people each have twenty units of enjoyment and ninety
people have one unit each is worse than a society where all hundred people
have two units each, despite the fact that the total happiness is higher. In
the chapter on justice and fairness, we return to this issue.
Possibilities and risks
Sometimes it is presupposed that the consequences are certain when a
consequentialist analysis is done: "If we do A, then B will follow." However,
as we know, the future is uncertain. A con sequentialist analysis taking
probabilities into account could be called a probabilistic consequentialist
analysis. For example, in the trolley p roblem we discussed in chapter 2, we
said that the five workers will die if we do not redirect the trolley. But would
they? How can we be sure? Perhaps they would see the trolley coming. Perhaps
someone else would warn them. Perhaps they might get hurt but not killed.
In the remainder of this section , we focu s on risks, but the sam e
reasoning can be applied to possibilities - the opposite of risks. First of all,
let us turn to some definitions. The notion of haz ard is often used to say
that a technology may cause damage or other undesirable consequences,
but it is unclear how likely it is that th is will happen. The term risk means
that we specify the hazard .15 (However, following discussion in chapter
1 - remember that others might not use the concepts in the same way.) Risk
is usually defined as the product of the probability of an undesired event
and the effect of that event. A possibility would then by analogy be defined
as the product of the probability of a desired event and the effect of that
event. To express a hazard as a risk requires knowledge about the potential
consequences as well as probabilities of the unwanted event. A first step is
thus to determine whether we can express the hazard as a risk or not.
There are many models of risk man agement, but they are outside the
scope of this book. Here, we merely discuss the ethical implications of
122
Chapter 7 Co nsequential ist ethical theories
cc
::,
...
...
<(
cc
w
,~
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
v'\
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
1-
::,
<(
w
...
:r:
0
risk. It is likely that we try to keep risk at a low level, but not at whatever
cost. In other words, we value safety, but safety is not an absolute good,
but also needs to be weighed against other values. For example, we could
lower the maximum speed on roads and build additional safety systems
to prevent the risk of casualties in traffic. But these measures always come
at a cost and often a trade-off needs to be undertaken. For example, if
we can only drive at 40 kilometres per hour on highways, the casualties
might be significantly lower than today, but the time it would take to get
somewhere would increase, and this is something we think we cannot
afford socio-economically. Furthermore, if we try to limit risk, we might
also jeopardize freedom - some people want to engage in risky behaviour
(risk that only applies to them). Imagine bans on downhill skiing due to
the risk of collisions, broken bones, and contusions.
According to philosopher Sven Ove Hansson, typically the following
criterion is applied:
... a risk is acceptable if and only if the total benefits that the exposure
gives rise to outweigh the total risks, measured as the probabilityweighted disutility of outcomes. 16
This is, in other words, a consequentialist calculus with probabilities taken
into account. You multiply the impact of the action by the probabilities and
choose the action with the highest expected value.
■
SAVING LIVES IN A PROBABILISTIC WORLD
a:
::,
><(
a:
w
>>~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
V',
Imagine that you can choose between two actions: action 1, which will certainly
save one person's life and have no other consequences, and action 2, which has
a 20 percent chance of saving ten people and an 80 percent chance of saving no
one and no other consequences. Which one should you choose? The expected
value of action 1 would be one life x 1000/o = one life. The expected value of
action 2 would be ten lives x 200/o + 0 lives x 800/o = 2 lives. You ought to
perform action 2 according to a probabilistic consequentialist analysis.
0
z
<(
a:
0
:r:
>::,
<(
w
:r:
>-
"
Chapter 7 Con seq uenti31 ist ethical t heories
123
But what happens when we cannot express a hazard as a risk? This makes
the consequentialist analysis even more complex, since we have an
unknown factor within the system. Then we have to decide what to do
with this unknown factor. One alternative is the precautionary principle "better safe than sorry" - where we avoid the hazard but also miss out on
the potentially good consequences.
There are other ways of thinking about risk. A discourse-based method
of handling risk would be to get the informed consent of affected people (see
chapter 6). Another approach would be that the risks are fairly distributed
amongst the stakeholders (see chapter 12).
In this chapter consequentialist ethical theories have been described, which
mean that it is the consequences of an action which determine whether the
action is good or not. We have discussed different answers to what "good
consequences" mean, what stakeholders one should consider, and how one
proceeds when the consequences of an action are unknown.
cc
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
I-,_
~
1---
z
w
0
::,
,_
v>
0
z
<(
a::
0
:r:
1-
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
124
Chapter 7 Consequent ialist ethical theories
r
STUDY QUESTIONS
...
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
"'
....
<l'.
w
"'
::,
f-
=
15
16
What is a consequentialist ethical theory?
Do consequentialist ethical theories accept lies, murder, and other
"evil" actions?
What is a supererogatory action?
Give some answers to the question "for whom"? What are the pros
and cons of the answers? Which answer gives the most reasonable
normative ethical theory?
What does Bentham mean when he says that it is the ability to suffer
which makes someone or something a moral subject?
What is the expanding circle?
What is the perspective of the universe?
Give some answers to the question "what?" What should be
maximized? What are the pros and cons of each answer? Which
answer gives the most reasonable normative ethical theory?
What is the open question argument?
What is rule consequentialism? What do you think about it?
Should we maximize total or average good consequences?
What is the difference between a hazard and a risk?
What is a probabilistic consequentialist analysis?
Think about the trolley problem. If you do not pull the lever, there
is a 20 percent probability that the five people die, a 50 percent
probability that two people die and a 30 percent probability that no
one dies. If you pull the lever, there is an 80 percent probability that
one person dies and a 20 percent probability that no one dies. Which
one should you choose to maximize expected value?
What do we do when we are unable to convert a hazard into a risk?
What is the precautionary principle?
~
f-
z
w
0
::,
fV,
c:::,
z
<l'.
cc:
0
:,:
f-
::,
<l'.
w
:r:
f-
"
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical theories
125
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU:
CONSEQUENTIALISM IN PRACTICE
You realize that the synthetic model is seeming ly consequentialist. You think about
the various alternatives in relation to the questions "for whom?" and "what?" in your
robot project. Regarding "for whom?", you want to maximize the benefits of the entire
society, which you conceive of as utilitarianism. Regarding "what?", you think that it
might be a good idea to aim for hedonistic consequentialism. Apart from the impact,
you also try to va lue t he pros and cons and also t hink about probabilities - you mark
these in your matrix with plus and minus and with L, M, and H for low, middle, and
high probability.
...cu
C
t:
ra
a..
~
:.:;
cu
..c
....
Q.
..2
cu
>
cu
Own company
Users
Care-givers
+ Potential growth, profitabi Iity,
and fame (L-M)
+ Will appreciate spending
more time with a robot (M)
+ Help to lower stress (H)
- Since the cost is higher
than for the Helper, t he
Life Partner might not
reach a mass market (H,
at least in t he short run)
- Some might feel unhappy
with the robot, particularly
if they feel that it replaces
human contact (H)
+ Potential growth, profitability,
and fame (M-H)
+ The robot might help with
physical tasks in a better
way t han humans (H)
- Might be outcompeted
by the robot (M)
0
...cu
Q.
"ii
::i::
cu
..c
+ Potential for mass market
penetration (M)
....
Q.
..2
cu
>
cu
- Fear that the robot will
hurt them physically (H,
at least in the s!hort run)
+ Help to lower stress (H)
+ The robot assists the
care-givers, rather than
replacing t hem (M)
- More physical jobs
might disappear (H)
0
+ New, better ideas might
...cu
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
..c
....
·.:;
c.
0
"ii
>
cu
..,
....0
-
Lack of potential profits
and good reputation from
the new products (H)
+ Receive care from people (H)
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care-givers (H)
z
126
Chapter 7 Consequentialist ethical theories
- Continue to have a
stressful job (H)
+ They will have jobs (HJ
+ Good negotiating
position for salary (H)
After your tentative analysis, you realize that the Helper has a potential to reach
a larger market and thus have more impact. This seems to go hand in hand with
utilitarianism, but you rethink and realize that it is difficult to measure the
happiness produced by the Helper and Life Partner, respectively. You also see that
the Helper will probably replace physica l labour, while the Life Partner replaces
both social and physical labour. The Life Partner, if implemented on a large
scale, may thus have a truly negative impact on the availability of emp loyment
within hea lt hcare.
Looking at your matrix, you wonder about the impact of consequentialist
theories. Would t he analysis not be identical even if you did not know about
consequentialism? Then again, you realize that your new knowledge made you
understand the importance of identifying for whom you are maximizing the good
consequences and what kind of consequences you are maximizing. Had you thought
about preference utilitarianism or ideal ut ilitarianism, or perhaps particu larism
rather than utilitarianism, your analysis wou ld have been different. The theoretica l
concepts help you realize that there are aspects to look at and choices to make.
Chapter 7 Consequentialist et hical theories
127
Chapter 8
Duties and rights
AS MENTIONED IN THE PRECEDING CHAPTER, consequentialism focuses
cc
::,
>-
on the consequences of actions to establish whether or not an action is
good. Duty ethics, or deontological ethical theories, look instead at actions
and the inherent goodness or evil in those, for example "lying is wrong".
Deon comes from the Ancient Greek word meaning "duty". In everyday
life, perhaps the best example of deontological ethics is our relationship to
the law. In the law-abiding mentality, we follow the law - and do not break
the law - because the law is the law. But we will also see in this chapter that
the law is not equal to the moral law. Another example from our everyday
life is rules - which we follow because they are rules. For example, if you
play badminton, there are certain rules you need to follow. After this brief
mention of deontology from our everyday lives, let us have a look at some
old deontological systems.
<(
cc
w
>>--'
>-
z
w
"'::,>v,
"'z
<(
a:
0
:r:
>::,
<(
w
:r:
>-
"
Traditional deontological systems
An early set of duties are the Ten Commandments that God according to
the Bible handed down to Moses. We saw already in the previous chapter
that rules can be legitimized in a consequentialist way. To make the Ten
Commandments part of the duty ethics tradition, there needs to be an
absence of consequentialist reasoning. In other words, you do not follow
129
the commandment "Thou shalt not steal" since stealing leads to bad
consequences in society (if we were to permit stealing, fewer might want to
work to build capital, which would lead to lower productivity, fewer good
ideas and innovative products, and so on). Rather, we follow these rules
because of duty.
Sometimes the Ten Commandments are compared to the five so-called
training rules in Buddhist Theravada practice. Whether they should be
classified as principles or rules is not fully clear, but let us here look upon
them as duties to be followed. They read as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
to abstain from killing
to abstain from taking what is not given
to avoid sexual misconduct
to abstain from false speech
to refrain from intoxicating drinks and drugs that lead to
carelessness.
THE SOBER SHIP INSPECTOR
A shipping company inspector travelled to a shipyard to inspect a ship. He
was recommended by the shipyard to stay at a particular hotel. He said: "After
one night I found that this was a drinking hotel where the shipyard could get
inspectors really drunk so that they had free rein to build the ship in the way
they saw fit. I checked out the next morning and moved to a smaller hotel in
Rotterdam." This happened some decades ago, but could it be the case that in
some business relationships, you drink alcoho l and are happy together with your
supplier and that this limits your potentia l to do your job? Does alcohol lead to
carelessness, as the Buddhist training rule says?
cc
::,
,-.
<(
cc
w
Another traditional duty often described in the context of deontological
ethics is the Golden Rule: "One should treat others as one would like others
to treat oneself." Confucius (551-479 BC) devised an inverted Golden Rule,
which can also be seen as deontological: "Do not treat others as you would
not want to be treated."
,-.
,-.
-'
,_
z
w
0
::,
,_
v>
0
z
<(
cc
0
::r:
,-.
::,
<(
w
::r:
l-
o
130
Chapter 8 Duties and rights
ISAAC ASIMOV'S LAWS OF ROBOTICS
■ A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human
being to come to harm.
■ A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such
orders wou ld conflict with the First Law.
■ A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not
conflict with the First or Second Laws.1
Apart from being based on religion, duties may also be based on tradition or
sovereignty. Tradition-oriented arguments for duties are "We do things this
way around here", or "In our culture we have to do this and that". This kind
of duty ethics was something Immanuel Kant wanted to reform (see below).
Duties can also stem from various forms of sovereignty, in other words, that
you subscribe to a set of duties as a subject in a state or an organization.
Corporate codes of conduct, as well as engineering codes of conduct, could
be seen as such duties. These duties are not universal since non-engineers do
not have to abide by the engineering code, and people who are not working
in a company do not need to follow the corporate code. However, if you are
a supplier to a company, you might have to abide by the buying company's
code of conduct, since it has been decided by the buyer.
TECH COMPANIES' CODES OF CONDUCT
Today, there are few large technology compan ies that do not have a code of
conduct. Such codes of conduct are readily available online. Go to some company
websites and see what their codes of conduct look like.
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
,_
....
,_
~
z
~
::,
"'
,_
V,
DUTIES TO THE ORGANIZATION AND DUTIES
TO THE PUBLIC: EDWARD SNOWDEN
C
z
<t:
a:
An employer expects you to be loyal and work for the benefit of the company.
0
I
However, if there is wrongdoing in the company, you might think in terms
::,
of EVIL (see chapter 6). Should you sti ll be loyal to the company? Or do you
,_
<t:
blow the whistle?
Chapter 8 Duties and right s
131
r
Edward Snowden, a former US government employee, is perhaps the most
well-known modern whistleblower who leaked information about the US
government's surveil lance programmes. Rather than staying loyal t o the US
government, he blew the whistle, thus breaking his duties towards the employer
but abiding by the more general duty to inform the public.
Edward Snowden.
HOW DO YOU COMMUNICATE DUTIES?
You might have got the feeling that duty ethics is a pretty strict ethics. And
indeed, sometimes duties are communicated with a harsh tone and symbolism
just for the receiver to understand that this is serious. And when we fail to follow
a rule, we are scolded. However, in your everyday life you might have encountered
various duties expressed in a kinder way. For example, in the Stockholm subway,
duties not to place your feet on the seat were accompanied by a cute image.
Simi larly, when travelling on the Keio rail line in Tokyo, it is not uncommon to
see a strict command coupled with an image of Hello Kitty. There are also songs
communicating duties, not least in chi ldren's TV programmes, such as Daniel
Tiger. And, on a coffee machine at a cafe in Uppsala, it says "Don't touch!",
fol lowed by "ar du gullig" (Swedish "please" in a cute tone) and a drawn heart.
cc
::,
....
<!
w
"'
....
....
-'
....
z
w
c:,
::,
....
VI
c:,
z
<!
"'
0
....
:r:
::,
<!
w
Duties can also be based on rationality. This is what we now turn to.
132
Chapter 8 Dut ies an d rights
:r:
.....
0
r
Kantian duty ethics
During the Age of Enlightenment, Immanuel Kant developed deontological
ethics to become a rationalistic ethics.2 The Enlightenment ideals saw the
human being as a rational grown-up, able to make her own decisions. Kant
therefore argued that we should not in an unreflective manner follow duties
that were created in the past. We should problematize tradition and religion
and rather base an ethics on the rationality of the individual.
According to Kant, any rational individual should be able to formulate
her own principles of ethics. But there was just one limitation: the principles
had to be rational, given that human beings are rational. Kant distinguished
between two t ypes of imperatives, hypothetical imperatives, following the
structure "if ... then ...": "If you want t o be a good social m ember, then
you should follow the law", "If you want to be treated well, then you should
treat others well". You could also include tradition and religion in the
hypothetical imperatives: "If you are a Buddhist, then you should to follow
the Eightfold Path" (see chapter 9), "If you are a Muslim, you ought to go to
Mecca", "If you are an engineer, you should not lie about technology". But
there are also categorical imperatives, which are the moral imperatives, and
they do not include an if-clause. They follow the form: "You ought to do X."
In contrast to the Ten Commandments, these imperatives are not given
by any external authority but only by the rationality and reason of the
individual. But what are the criteria for when something is rational and
reasonable? First of all, it needs to be universalizable. Rationality does
not allow for exceptions. If something is true, it is not only true in some
places and times, but everywhere and all the time. This led Kant to the first
~
>-
z
w
0
:::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
cc:
0
I
>-
:::,
«
w
I
>-
"
formulation of the categorical imperative: "Act only on that maxim through
which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."3
A maxim is a rule of action. Kant wanted us to act in a rule-based manner,
since rationality and reason do not change. We create rules by means of
our actions. Action makes law. Kant explains this with reference to the
duty not to steal and the duty not to lie. If we were to create a rule of action
that is "It is permissible to steal", this would result in a contradiction if
we try to universalize it. The notion of stealing presupposes the existence
of property, but if this maxim were universalized, then there could be no
Chapter 8 Duties and rights
133
property and thus the maxim has logically contradicted itself. If we want
to lie to get something we want, we would have to be willing to make it a
universal law that everyone always could lie to get what they want - but
if this were to happen, no one would ever believe us, so the lies would not
work and we would not get what we wanted. To base real duties on the
universalizability argument is complicated, but Kant's intention is clear - to
promote a universal ethics.
BIG DATA MARKETING
Perhaps a company has reached the conclusion that a customer is pregnant
through an analysis of big data and therefore wants to send her targeted ads.
However, when the ads for products are sent to her, only some of those ads are
based on the big data analysis, while other ads are randomly chosen to give the
impression that the company does not know the customer that well. Could this
possibly be analysed by means of Kant's categorical imperative?
The second formulation of the categorical imperative is: "Act in such a
way as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of anyone
else, always as an end and never merely as a means."4 This seems like a
completely different principle, but it coheres with the first formulation. In
the Enlightenment tradition, human beings are free to act according to
their own rationality and we should therefore not restrict human dignity
and autonomy. If we treat a person as a means, then we would stifle this
person's possibilities to engage in free, rational, moral action. She would not
be able to create her own maxims if she was part of my agenda rather than
her own. Her behaviour would then be controlled by others, something
Kant calls "heteronorny". To not only treat a person as a means is basically
about respect for people.
a:
::,
.....
<(
a:
w
.....
.....
.....
~
z
w
0
::,
THE ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR AND THE WORKERS:
THE BRAIN AND THE HANDS
In some historical examples of factory management, workers were cal led hands.
The reason was probably that the worker was boiled down to the parts of his
Iv'\
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
.....
::,
<(
w
I
.....
0
134
Chapter 8 Duties and ri ghts
body that were most central to the work performed - the hands. And who were
the brains? Well, the supervising engineer. Here, we can speculate that the
worker was seen as a mere means to an end, since they were called hands rather
than co-workers. Do we still see employees as means to an end or as ends in
themselves? Would Kant approve of looking upon people as hands?
--------------------------■
The third formulation of the categorical imperative is seeing "every rational
being as a will laying down universal law",5 and this happens in something
which Kant calls a kingdom of ends. By creating maxims, the person is
indeed a legislating member since action creates rules. A kingdom of ends
is a systematic connection between different rational beings by means of
the common laws that are created by the persons. They are not treated only
as means, which is written in the second formulation, but always also as
ends in themselves.
To sum up, the point of Kant's system is to base deontological ethics on
rationality. However, according to the critic Friedrich Nietzsche Kant was
not able to give up on his traditional way of thinking. The morality derived
from the categorical imperative was seemingly similar to the Christian
tradition, and according to Nietzsche6 Kant fled back to the cage which he
broke out of with his strength and shrewdness (see chapter 10).
WAS EICHMANN A KANTIAN?
C<
:::,
>-
<{
C<
w
>>-
..,
>-
z
w
C,
Philosopher Hannah Arendt, in her book The Banality of Evil, describes the tria ls of
Adolf Eichmann. Eichmann, who was one of the main actors in orchestrating the
Holocaust, claimed that he had lived his life according to Immanuel Kant's duty
ethics, but that he departed from t his when implementing the Final Solution.
Instead, he followed orders and rationalized his actions by saying that he no
longer had any possibility to decide by himself. Arendt means that not only did
Eichmann depart from the categorical imperative but he implicitly distorted it.
This distorted imperative would read that you should act in such a way that the
Fuhrer, if he knew of your actions, would approve.
:,
>v,
C,
z
<{
a'.
0
:r:
>:,
<{
w
:r:
>-
"
Chapter 8 Duties and rig hts
135
Prima facie duties
Some hold that the very beauty of duty ethics is that the duties are
unconditional, that one should not lie irrespective of the consequences. In
this view of duty ethics, duties are absolute. Philosopher William David
Ross 7 developed something he called a prima facie duty ethics. Prima facie
means "at first sight". So, at first sight you have to comply with a duty, but on
closer scrutiny, it might be the case that other duties override the duty you
thought you had to follow. Ross presented a list of such prima facie duties:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
fidelity: the duty to keep promises
reparation: the duty to compensate others when we harm them
gratitude: the duty to thank those who help us
justice: the duty to recognize merit
beneficence: the duty to improve the conditions of others
self-improvement: the duty to improve our virtue and intelligence
non-maleficence: the duty not to injure others.
Prima facie thus implies that duties are not absolute, but that they can
conflict with one another. This form of duty ethics is in line with the ethical
process of this book. We need to take duties into account, but perhaps not
as absolute duties. Rather, in every situation, we need to determine whether
or not a duty is to be respected.
■
PRIMA FACIE DUTIES IN RECRUITMENT
During the planning phase for a multi-year project, the REtD manager (an engineer}
identified a highly-qualified senior systems analyst and prepared to make an
cc
attractive job offer for this senior position. However, the Human Resources
::,
,__
<(
Department intervened, stating that the candidate was not a member of one of the
company's targeted groups under their employment equity programme. The REtD
manager was instructed to hire a systems analyst belonging to one of the targeted
cc
w
,__
,__
,__
~
z
w
0
::,
,__
groups. The REtD manager again reviewed all job applications and only identified
V'>
two applicants belonging to the company's targeted groups for employment.
<(
One of them had just graduated from university and had no work experience for
this senior position, while the other applicant had almost ten years of relevant
experience but mediocre performance ratings and references. The REtD manager
0
z
cc
0
:r:
,__
::,
<(
w
:r:
,__
0
136
Chapter 8 Duties and ri ghts
approached the HR Department stating that neither of these applicants was
qualified for the job and that the original candidate should be offered the position.
To the R&D manager's dismay, the HR Department insisted that one of the two
applicants from the targeted groups be offered the position and receive the same
attractive offer proposed for the original candidate.
What are the prima facie duties at stake in this decision? Try to use the duties
formulated by Ross. Are there other prima facie duties? What should the R&D
manager do?8
------------------------•
Rights: patient-centred duty ethics
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>-
.,.,
0
Often, rights are seen as the other side of duties. Someone's right to privacy
implies a duty for others not to invade this privacy. A duty to partake of
education is sometimes explained as corresponding to a right to education.
Sometimes, rights-based theories are described as a form of duty ethics
which focuses on the person affected by an action (patient-centred duty
ethics, in contrast to agent-centred theories).
That you have a right to something means that you are entitled to
it. An early example is the Constitution of Medina, where Muhammad
chartered the rights and duties of the eight Medinan tribes and Muslim
emigrants from Mecca. Jumping forward a millennium or so, 17th-century
philosopher John Locke argued that we had rights to property, speech, and
religious expression. These rights had several characteristics. They were
natural and thus not invented by governments. They were universal and
thus not country-specific. They were equal in that they applied to, and were
the same for, all people. They were inalienable, meaning that they were
not transferable. The United States Declaration of Independence specified
that individuals had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights9 specifies all the rights we
currently think we have as human beings. In addition, as part of a country,
a municipality, an organization, and so on, we can have additional rights
(and duties).
z
<(
cc:
0
I
>::,
<(
Chapter 8 Duties and rights
137
GENETIC ENGINEERING AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Think about the possibilities to modify human DNA by genet ic engineering.
There are a variety of technologies and their purposes differ. First, there is gene
therapy, which means that a f law is repaired. Second, there is enhancement for
example to ensure that a child will not inherit the genetic disease of the parent.
Third, one could think of remedial enhancement, for example if you consider
yourself to be less intelligent than t he average. Yet another alternative is pure
enhancement, that even if the child has a good chance of becoming intelligent
one cou ld try to make the chi ld even more intelligent.
From when are we subject to human rights? May a human embryo be seen
as having the right not to become "enha111ced"? May a human embryo be seen as
having the right not to be subjected to gene therapy?10
Genet ic engineering.
a::
:::,
I<(
a::
w
,I-
_,
Why do we have rights, or expressed in another way, where do the rights
come from? There are two dominating alternatives: either they are socially
constructed or they are natural. Natural rights are rights we have not agreed
upon but rights that just exist out there. Some claim that these rights are
metaphysically dubious. What is their essence, what are they made of, and
in what sense are they natural? One might argue that the right to life is such
138
Chapter 8 Duties an d ri ghts
,-
z
w
0
=>
,v'l
C
z
<(
"'0I
I-
=>
<(
w
I
,(I
a natural right, but it is not easy to see how such a right is derived from the
mere fact that people are alive. In that case, other sentient beings might also
have a right to life, which they do not have in today's society. A possibility
is of course that rights are bestowed upon human heings hy some godlike
power. The perspective in this book is that, as with the view of other ethical
theories, many of our rights are socially constructed, meaning that they
come about as a result of social processes. Often they come about as a
result of agreement, but the agreement can be made by a varying number
of people. For example, a feudal lord could possibly argue that he has adroit
du seigneur (a right to sleep with his vassal's wife on the first night). It is
not likely that this right stemmed from an agreement with the vassal, and
if it was an agreement, perhaps power relations shaped the nature of the
agreement (it was not made according to discourse ethics, see chapter 6).
In any case, many rights may be seen as stemming from social contracts.
THE RIGHT TO BE FORGOTTEN
The right to be forgotten - a concept which was introduced in the EU in
2014 - reflects the cla im that a person should autonomously be able t o live
her life without being affected by her actions in the past. When the right to be
forgot ten is discussed, it often concerns deleting search results on the Internet,
for examp le search resu lts that lead to information about negative things that
can have an impact on the genera l perception of the person. What do you think
about the right to be forgotten? In what areas should it apply (for example
search results on the Internet. archive materials. registers)? Should it become a
universal human right?
"'
::,
,_
<(
cc
w
,_
,_
--'
,_
z
w
<Cl
::,
,_
V,
<Cl
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
,_
In this chapter, duty ethics have been discussed, a form of ethics which
prohibits or prescribes actions with less focus on their consequences. We
started from traditional deontological systems, and moved on to Kant's
categorical imperative and the more modern prima facie duties. Finally, we
discussed rights, which are often seen as the other side of duties.
::,
<(
w
:r:
..,_
Chapter 8 Dut ies and rig hts
139
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
What is the difference between deontological and consequentialist
ethical theories?
What is the Golden Rule? What is the inverted Golden Rule?
Duties may be based on religion, tradition, sovereignty, and
rationality. Which one does Kant argue for? What are the pros
and cons of basing duties upon religion, tradition, sovereignty,
and rationality?
What is the difference between hypothetical and
categorical imperatives?
Explain the categorical imperative.
What is Nietzsche's critique of Kant?
What is the difference between a prima facie duty and an
absolute duty?
What do you think about Ross's list of prima facie duties?
Think about the example of "Prima facie duties in recruitment".
What should the R&D manager do?
10
What is the relationship between duties and rights?
11
Do we respect the right to life? For humans? For all living beings?
Where do rights come from?
12
cc
....:::,
<(
cc
w
,_
....
,_
~
z
w
C
:::,
,_
V'I
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
....:::,
<(
w
I
>-
0
140
Chapter 8 Duties and ri gMs
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER. AND YOU:
DUTY ETHICS IN PRACTICE
You have now learned that a part of duty ethics is about types of actions that are
prescribed or prohibited. Perhaps the UN Declaration of Human Rights - particu larly
articles 5 and 25, which state that no one should be subjected to degrading treatment
and that all people have a right to a standard of living leading to health and wellbeing - could be relevant for you in your robot project. Of course, these human rights
may be seen as regulating much harsher forms of degrading treatment and very low
standards of living, and thus one could argue that the treatment of users by means
of robots wou ld be perfectly OK from the perspective of human rights. On the other
hand, if the experience of the user is that she is subjected to degrading treatment,
either by being taken care of physically by a robot or if human social interactions are
replaced by a robot, one needs to take th is seriously.
In this sense, it does not real ly matter if the development of either the Life Partner
or the Helper is generally favourable "for all" - one needs to respect the rights of the
individual. This also goes hand in hand with respect for human dignity and autonomy,
which is an important part of the Kantian categorical imperative. One could obviously
problematize whether we are considering absolute rights (the abso lute duty to protect
rights) or prima facie rights (a prima facie duty to protect rights). In t he case of
abso lute rights, one wou ld have to make su re that the robots are only implemented in
accordance with the free consent of the user.
This makes you t hink again about implementers - t hose who decide which
technology to implement. An implementer cou ld thus not just decide to implement
the technology against the will of (some) users. Given the recursive nature of the
synthetic model, you allow yourself to add the implementers. Furthermore, one might
problematize the third alternative - not to develop either of t he robots. Perhaps
today, the treatment might also be degrading since there is a lack of caregiving. This
might lead you to reflect upon the very structures of public and private healthcare, its
economic conditions, and the possibilities to treat others with dignity and to respect
their rights.
To make it clearer you have underlined what has been added to the matrix in this
st ep of the analysis.
►
Chapter 8 Duties and rights
141
r
.,...
.......
C
.,"'
....
::i
Q..
QJ
....
~
Q.
0
"ii
>
.,
C
Own company
Users
Care-givers
Implementers
+ Potent ia I growth, profitability, and fame (L-M)
+ Will appreciate
spending more time
with a robot (M)
+ Help to lower stress (H)
+ This robot will be a
solution to the problem
of understaffing
- Since t he cost is higher
than for the Helper, the
Life Partner might not
reach a mass market (H,
at least in t he short run)
- How do we make sure
that implementers
only implement the
technology if a11users
give their consent? Not
doing so might affect
the company negat ively
+ Potent ia I growth, profitability, and fame (M-H)
.,...
Q.
"ii
.,
:l:
....
~
Q.
.,
.,
.£
>
C
...
QJ
....
·v
~
Q.
0
"ii
>
.,
"C
....0
z
- Might be outcompeted
by t he robot (M)
- Some might feel
unhappy with the robot ,
particularly if they
feel that it replaces
human contact (H)
- It is expensive and could
not be imglemented
on a mass market
- This could violate human
rights in that it does not
respect users' dignity.
Might necessitate
an alternative ca re
option for such users.
+ The robot might
help with physical
tasks in a better way
tha n humans (H)
+ Help to lower stress (H)
- How do we make sure
that implementers
only implement the
technology if all users
give their consent? Not
doing do so might affect
the company negatively.
- Fea r that the robot will
hurt t hem physically (H,
at least in t he short run)
- More physical jobs
might disappear (H)
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
+ Receive care from
people (H)
- Continue to have a
stressful job (H)
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care-givers (H)
+ They will have jobs (H)
+ Potent ia I for mass
market penetration (M)
- Lack of potential
profits and good
reputa tion from the
new products (H)
142
+ The robot assists t he
care-givers, rather than
replacing them (Ml
+ This robot will be a
solution to the problem
of understaffing
+ Better economy for
healthcare qrganizations
(particularly in the
public sector)
- This could violate human
rights, similarly to the
Life Partner (see above)
- Perhaps this lack of
car~ivers can lead to
<lliJ.!ading he<!ltbcare
Chapter 8 Duties and rights
+ Good negotiating
position for salary (H)
- Will continue to use
~xisting technCJ~d
look for alternatives
Chapter 9
Virtue ethics
THE BASIC MESSAGE OF VIRTUE ETHICS is that we do not only consider
a:
~
cc
the nature of the action and its consequences, but we also need to think
about the agent and, more specifically, about the character of the agent.
Good actions flow from a good character but, simultaneously, good
actions build a good character. Virtue ethics urges us not to abstract the
decision from the person acting. The action is thus dependent on the
specific actor, and the action will also affect the actor. This is a somewhat
different focus from other theories we review in this book. Virtue ethics
is linked to existentialist ethics (chapter 10), in the sense that it focuses on
the personal dimension.
From a Western perspective, virtue ethics emerged in Ancient Greece
with proponents such as Plato and, more importantly, Aristotle. Some
Asian ethical systems are often seen as virtue ethics, and these are also
briefly surveyed.
>-
z
UJ
C
~
>v,
C
z
<!
cc
0
I
>~
<!
UJ
..
I
>-
Plato
Today, when we travel to Greece to experience the remains of the ancient
culture, we probably fantasize about a functioning democracy, an open
society, and the birthplace of Western philosophy. Plato (427- 347 BC),
however, saw things differently. He was highly concerned with the decay
143
r
in Athens. The society, according to him, was only about material welfare
and political power, and there were "salesmen of wisdom" roaming the
streets, teaching the youth how to convince others by means of rhetoric.
These teachers, the so-called sophists, saw this as a way to make money and
gain political power. If this was something that annoyed Plato, the smack
in the face came when Athens sentenced Plato's teacher Socrates to death
for corrupting the youth.
Plato, who had a much more idealist leaning, was opposed to the present
state of affairs. One could make an analogy to the current situation in the
world. Quite a few people are deeply concerned with how the world is
developing and doubt the viability of the current state of affairs, since it
leads to environmental destruction, social isolation, increasing inequalities,
and the breaking down of sound traditions. This did not mean that Plato
was a conservative, but he held that society should not be ruled by the vain
or greedy but by the wise.
There are many well-known concepts from Plato, such as the distinction
between the shadow world and the world of ideas. To be able to move beyond
the shadow world, the one we all live in, the one where we are fooled to pursue
the wrong goals and live by the wrong principles, we need to work hard with
philosophical studies. Only by doing that could one live a life in wisdom. To
understand the virtue ethics of Plato, it is important to understand his view
of the harmony between micro- and macro-cosmos, between individual and
society. We already said that Plato wanted the wise to rule society, not just
because he happened to be a wise person himself, but since the wise could
guide society and make it flourish as opposed to those who were in it only
for the money, power, and glory. Still in our society, there are ideas that those
who govern society ought to be wise and competent.
We can picture Plato's ideal society' (which never materialized) as a
triangle with the philosopher-kings at the top, as rulers. Their main virtue
was wisdom (sophia). Below them there are guardians who protect society
from internal and external enemies - similar to our police and military.
Their main virtue is courage (andreia). They carry out the orders they receive
from the philosophers without fear for their own lives. Below them are the
people. They live in the shadow world and should therefore follow the advice
of the philosopher-kings. In Plato's ideal society, the most important virtue
144
Chapter 9 Vi rtue ethics
cc
::,
...
..._,
<(
cc
w
I-
,__
z
w
c:,
::,
I-
v,
c:,
z
<(
cc
0
I
...
::,
<(
w
...
I
0
r
of the people was restraint (sophrosyne) in order to be able to subordinate
their desires, wills, and whims to the will of the philosophers, for the social
good. This setup ofsociety, according to Plato, was just (dikaiosyne). Justice
for Plato was thus that the right thing was in the right place. For those
schooled in a democratic tradition, this seems utterly undemocratic. But
for Plato, the people were not smart enough to make important decisions
about politics, so that should be left to the wise. This corresponds to some
kind of paternalism, and if one takes it a bit farther, one might even call it a
wisdom-based dictatorship, an enlightened despotism.
Similar to society, the soul is structured into three different parts. The
top layer potentially has access to the world of ideas, may distinguish the
true from the false, and make good decisions. The next layer of the soul
is the active part, which carries out what the upper part of the soul has
decided. The bottom part of the soul is that part of us where our wishes and
desires are. 2 In chapter 4, we discussed Freud's theories about the person.
The lowest part in Plato's soul bears quite a strong resemblance to Freud's
Id. And just as the people in Plato's society must restrain themselves,
this part of the soul must also check and subordinate itself. But the most
important thing is the right organization - everything should be in the
right place or, in other words, it should be just. It means that the lowest part
should not control our behaviour - for example, that we make decisions and
judgements based on our drives and desires. The middle part of the soul
makes sure that we act according to our wisdom and do not fall victims to
acrasia: weakness of will (see also chapter 14).
TECHNOCRACY: A SOCIETY RULED BY SCIENTISTS AND
ENGINEERS
Technocracy is governance based on expertise, particula rly in science and
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>-
"'0
z
«
"'0
:c
>-
::,
«
technology. This system is in direct contrast to democratic ru le, where the rulers
are elected by the people. In a technocracy, society is governed by those who
know how to find efficient solutions, those with knowledge about the world, and
those skilled in social engineering, that is, the applicat ion of eng ineering methods
to social problems. Ideas of technocracy are not that popular today, but they have
some similarity to Plato's ideas. Would you like to live in such a society?
Chapter 9 Vir t ue ethics
145
ALL WATCHED OVER BY MACHINES OF LOVING GRACE
Adam Curtis documentary series from BBC, All Watched Over by Machines of
Loving Grace, alluded to the poetry collection by Richard Brautigan with the same
name. This col lection of poetry envisaged a stage of humanity where one wou ld
be governed by extremely smart and benevolent computers. Brautigan 3 wrote:
I like to th ink (and
the sooner the better')
of a cybernetic meadow
where mammals and computers
live together in mutually
programming harmony
like pure water
touching clear sky.
Is not the computer the ultimate wise ruler, which cannot be corrupted, which
is impartial, which treats everyone the same? What wou ld Plato think about a
society ruled by computers?
As a social critic, Plato wanted to change society, and in order to change,
he needed a roadmap for how things should be changed (for another kind
of roadmap, see chapter 14). He is therefore a critical thinker, arguing that
wisdom is the fundamental principle upon which societies should be based.
Aristotle
Plato's student Aristotle (384-322 BC) developed virtue ethics.4 He held that
good deeds stem from good persons. The good person has knowledge about
her actions and strives for good. Habitual actions lead to the forming of
character traits and Aristotle's theory is therefore processual. It takes time
and hard work to become virtuous.
Aristotle's theory was teleological - he thought that everything in the
universe has a telos, a purpose. To say that something is good is to say that
it fulfils its function well. When we say that a knife is good, we mean that
it is cutting well. When we say that a tailor is good, we mean she is good
at sewing and repairing clothes. But what do we mean when we say that a
human is good?
146
Chapter 9 Virtue ethic s
a:
::,
....
<(
a:
w
.....
....
....,
.....
z
w
0
::,
1v'I
0
2
<(
a:
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
w
,_
:r:
G
THE TEL05 OF THE ENGINEER?
What is a good engineer? Is it a person who solves technical problems well? Is it
a person who creatively designs a future society? (These issues were discussed in
chapter 5). What do you think is the purpose of an engineer?
;
....
~
Aristotle believed that the function of humans is to practise the virtues.
By living a life in accordance with the virtues, human beings could reach
eudaimonia, which means happiness, fulfilment, and satisfaction.
There are intellectual virtues and practical virtues. Aristotle mentions
intellectual virtues such as wisdom (sophia), knowledge of the world
(episteme), and craftsmanship (techne). A very important intellectual virtue is
phronesis. It is often translated into practical knowledge or practical wisdom,
and is about knowing how to make the right judgement in individual cases,
and what is right in different situations. It is a virtue that mediates between
the universal and the particular. Another part of phronesis is the ability to
see which aspects of a situation have moral importance. Phronesis is a source
of inspiration for our view of critical thinking.
Many of Aristotle's practical virtues are situated between two extremes
- on "the golden mean". The virtue of courage is between the extremes
foolhardiness and cowardice. And generosity is a virtue between the two
extremes of wastefulness and stinginess. The idea of the middle way is that
virtue ethics is not as extreme as deontology in its prohibition of certain
actions. For example, virtue ethics might not prohibit all kinds of lies.
An honest person will try to work with other honest people, have honest
friends, try to raise her children to be honest. She does not like dishonesty
and is not pleased by successes brought about by using dishonesty. But this
does not mean that she would never ever lie.
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>-
"'
Q
z
<l'.
C£'.
0
I
>::,
<l'.
Chapter 9 Virtue ethics
147
r
Courage or foolhardiness?
THE ENGINEERING VIRTUES
The engineering virtues are the character traits allowing one to become a good
engineer. However, as we know, it is not est ablished what an engineer is, so
therefore the virtues of engineering are a lso subject to debate. One could perhaps
imagine that engineering virtues are honesty, humility, preparedness to learn
from others, persistence, self-discipline, optimism, courage, and wisdom. What do
you think of this suggestion? Make a list of engineering virtues as you see them.
Compare with others. Do you agree with each other?
a:
::,
r-
<(
a:
But acting virtuously is not enough to achieve eudaimonia. Many of our
actions are unreflected - we simply do not think thoroughly about what we
do. From the perspective of this book, we could say that we do not think
critically before we act. We act by habit. Aristotle said that habits were
important but not sufficient for a life according to the virtues. We also need
to know why we act in different ways - we need to have an intellectual layer
on top of our actions.
148
Chapter 9 Virtue ethics
u.,
I-
r-
~
r-
zu.,
0
::,
Iv'\
C,
z
<(
~
0
I
r-
::,
<(
u.,
I
r0
Like Plato, Aristotle considered that it was a difficult and demanding
project to reach eudaimonia. It requires training and life experience.
A person's character may get stronger through exercise, but may also decay.
Eudaimonia is not something one has or does not have, but something one
strives for throughout one's entire life.
Modern virtue ethics
a:
::,
....
<[
a:
"-'
r....
~
r-
z
"-'
0
::,
C-
V,
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::,
<[
For some time around the turn of the 20th century, virtue ethics had lost
its status to consequentialism and deontology. But in the 1950s, virtue
ethics received renewed interest when Elizabeth Anscombe5 argued that
it was a good alternative to the dominant ethical theories. In contrast to
duty ethics and consequentialism virtue ethics was interested in virtues,
moral character and moral education, all which are important topics
in our societies. Rosalind Hursthouse is a major modern proponent of
virtue ethics.
However, the relevance of virtue ethics is still being questioned within
normative ethics since it does not seem to lead to clear advice on how to act
in a particular situation, in contrast to deontology and consequentialism.
Virtue ethics is often described as a theory rejecting rules and codes that
provide specific action guidance. However, modern virtue ethics stresses
that it can indeed provide action guidance. Each virtue generates a kind
of instruction, "be honest", "do good", but also prohibitions, "do not do
what is not honest". These injunctions are sometimes called v-rules (virtue
rules). Once again, we see the links between various ethical theories, like
that between deontology and consequentialism in rule utilitarianism.
Furthermore, virtue ethics is often seen as not telling us how to deal
with conflicts between virtues. These critiques may be directed to most of
the theories surveyed in the book, particularly given our pluralist approach
(see chapter 6). Given the way virtue ethics is seen in this book, namely as
one relevant ethical claim amongst others in the process of critical thinking,
it does not have to be a problem that it does not tell us how to deal with
conflict. Conflict is indeed a core aspect of the process of critical thinking.
Indeed, modern virtue ethics often sees virtues as prima facie duties (see
chapter 8) - the virtues are only seemingly conflicting, but that in every
Chapter 9 Vi rtue eth ics
149
situation seemingly conflicting virtues are really not in conflict, and the
right action will appear in the situation. If there is also a real conflict
between the virtues, we need to exercise our sense of judgement, phronesis,
to understand which of the virtues has precedence.
What does modern virtue ethics have to say about what virtues are
desirable? Aristotle would say that the virtues are universal, in the sense that
they apply to anyone wanting to reach eudaimonia. The virtues delineated
by Aristotle are therefore desirable for all human beings. Others (such
as Alasdair MacIntyre in After Virtue) view the construction of virtues
as rooted in a particular community or society and that Aristotle was
more bound by his context than he cared to admit. What is considered a
virtue in one society need not be a virtue in another society. This is a more
culturally relative virtue ethics. But also within societies, there might be
disagreements about which virtues are relevant. To find a set of virtues
we can all agree upon is thus difficult, but that does not mean that it is
impossible to find relevant virtues in various settings.
■
UNIVERSAL OR PARTICULAR ENGINEERING VIRTUES?
Do you think that the virtues of an engineer differ between engineers from
different countries and cu ltures? In other words, are the engineering virtues
universa l or particular?
-----------------------■
It has been suggested that one can use either of three ways to find out which
virtues are desirable. First, by seeing which character traits are needed
to reach eudaimonia. Given that eudaimonia is such a complex concept,
this way of finding which are the concrete virtues might be problematic.
Second, as Alasdair MacIntyre holds, we can ask which virtues are needed
to be successful and reach excellence in various practices, such as farming,
chess, science, and engineering. Such virtues may include honesty, humility,
preparedness to learn from others, persistence, self-discipline, optimism,
courage, and wisdom. Third, we can be inspired by exemplars - virtuous
people - and see which character traits they possess.6
In the movie Dream Big Menzer Pehlivan tells how she experienced
the great earthquake in Turkey in 1999, when she had just become a
150
Chapter 9 Vir t ue et hics
a:
:::,
I-
""
a:
f-
l-
f-
z
w
0
:::,
fV)
C
z
""a:
0
I
1-
:::,
""
w
I
,_
0
The 1999 lzmit earthquake.
cc
::,
....
<(
er:
u.,
>>-'
>-
zu.,
0
:;;,
>-
v,
0
z
<(
C£'.
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
u.,
:r:
..
>-
teenager. The devastation after the earthquake led her to want to become
a civil engineer specialized in earthquake-resilient buildings. She has also
participated in various charity projects where she has supplied engineering
competence to build earthquake-resilient buildings in developing countries.
Another role model when it comes to engineering is the engineer Elon
Musk, the person behind innovations such as the electric car Tesla and the
space exploration company SpaceX. The exemplar Elon Musk reminds us
about the importance of courage, optimism, and creativity.
Swedish innovator Hakan Lans developed a tracking system for ships
and aircraft, which has become the global standard, as well as a colour
graphics processor and other inventions. Lans has also sued large American
companies for infringements on his patents, which also gives us the image
of him as a person with high integrity, who not even the largest companies
dare step on.
We should of course not only focus on famous engineers and see them as
role models. There are probably role models very close to you, for example
a co-worker, a parent, or a teacher.
Chapter 9 Vir t ue ethics
151
THE ANTI-ROLE MODEL
Fred Singer, an electrical engineer and later professor of environmental sciences,
is not only a well-known climate sceptic. He has also questioned the link between
UV-8 radiation and melanoma rates, and between ChloroFluoroCarbon componds
and ozone loss, as well as downplayed the risk of passive smoking. Apart from
role models you can also have anti-role models, people you really do not want to
be like. Do you have any anti-role models?
•
STUDENT VIRTUES
What are the virtues of students? Which character traits are needed as a student
to reach eudaimonia? Which virtues are necessary to reach excellence in the
practice of studies? Which exemplars are you inspired by?
Virtues or situations?
There are those who claim that virtue ethics is contradicted by findings in
experimental psychology, more specifically that situational aspects shape
action more than character and that the stability of character is weak over
time. In other words, critics argue that good and bad actions do not flow
from a good or bad character, as virtue ethics posits, but that they are
significantly, or even fully, determined by the situation.
An example comes from a famous study in the field of psychology by
Alice Isen and Paula Levin.7 1he authors wanted to study if happy people
tend to help others to a greater extent than others. The authors studied if
a person who had just found a dime in a public telephone was more likely
to help a person who dropped her papers near the phone booth. And that
was the case. The happiness from finding the coin seemed to matter a lot.
Similar to how technology can shape our perceptions and actions, a
situation can shape our perceptions and actions. Certainly, the virtues
are not irrelevant, they are indeed a relevant ethical claim, but situational
cc
::,
,._
<(
cc
w
,-.
,._
_,
,-.
z
w
Cl
::,
,-.
V'\
Cl
z
<(
cc
0
:r
,._
factors might also influence our behaviour. The debate between virtue
::,
ethics and the situationalist critique is far from over, but both should be
I
,._
152
Chapter 9 Virtue et hics
<
w
0
seen as complementary rather than as mutually exclusive alternatives for
what guides moral action. The character definitively exists and affects our
actions, but it is not a rock-solid character withstanding everyth ing.
■
ETHICS IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Many engineers become project managers. Let us look at a situation in project
management from the perspective of virtue ethics:
About ha lf-way th rough a major project, a project manager becomes anxious
about the schedule. The project has been falling behind schedu le for some ti me
and a forma l project review with the cl ient is set for four weeks from today.
The project manager discusses the situation with several senior members of
the project team. At the end of the meeting, t he project manager decides not
to mention the schedu le problem to t he client or to senior ma1agement in
the hope that the project might get back on schedu le by t he time the project
review is held.
A main point in this vignette is that the proj ect manager does not mention any
problems to either the clients or senior management in the company. Wh ich
virtues would be relevant in this example? On the one hand, one could argue that
t he project manager should be t rut hful and tell all relevant stakeholders about
t he delay. One might also argue that it is cowardly not to tel l the t ruth. However,
t his truthfulness stands in opposition to integrity and perceived competence,
which could possibly be jeopa rdized if she admits that she has run into t rouble.
In proj ect management, as well as in other aspects of life, self-presentation
is also important. Too much anxiety cou ld lead to people losing faith in a
particular person.
Thus, t here is a pot entia l value conflict between honesty and the ideal of
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
,_
-'
,_
a strong, steadfast project manager. There seems to be a contradiction, but
can it be resolved? Perhaps the ideals are flawed? If one instead argues that
a competent project manager is not independent, impart ial, and has integrity,
but rather sees t he competent project manager as one who can also ask for
help, know her limits, be moderate, then the clash between the virtues would
potentially not appea r. 8
z
w
c:,
::,
,_
V,
c:,
z
<(
a:
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
Chapter 9 Virtue eth ics
153
The Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path
Some Asian systems of thought, such as Buddhism, stress the role of the
person in ethics. In that sense, it is related to virtue ethics, but it is not
a complete overlap. Confucian ethics is reviewed in chapter 11 since it
fundamentally concerns relationships. However, Confucianism also puts
emphasis on the strivings of the person, and a goal of Confucian ethics is
to become an exemplary person (junzi). This is similar to being a virtuous
person, as we have discussed above. Perhaps, the main difference is that
in Confucian ethics, it is emphasized that we become exemplary persons
through our relationships.
■
SELF-CULTIVATION TOGETHER WITH OTHERS
Philosopher Robert Carter in the book The Kyoto School: An Introduction,
exemplifies Confucian ethics through aikido. In the practice of aikido, there
are no opponents, on ly partners. The goal of the practice for every partner is
to lift the others to a higher level of performance and understanding. Is this
way of developing oneself together with others relevant in your studies? Or
at your workplace? Give examples. How does this self- cultivation together
with others work?
In some Buddhist schools, karma means action, and karmic actions are
those involving moral choices. Such actions have both transitive and
intransitive effects. The transitive effects are those that affect others, while
the intransitive have an impact on the agent. Similar to virtue ethics, the
agent is of central importance. One might explain karmic action as: "Sow
an act, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a
destiny." Your actions affect your character. That sounds reasonable, but
what should we do? How do we live a full life? Are there any concepts in
Buddhism similar to Aristotle's eudaimonia? In Buddhism, the Four Noble
Truths and the Eightfold Path guide our behaviour.
a:
:::,
I-
""
a:
w
II-
w
I
l-
o
154
Chapter 9 Virtue ethic s
The Four Noble Truths of Buddhism, as expressed by Thai 20th-century
philosopher Sulak Sivaraksa,9 are:
•
•
•
•
Suffering exists.
Suffering has causes.
We can stop producing the causes of suffering.
A path of mindful living can show us the way.
The first truth describes that suffering exists. Rather than theorizing
and searching for happiness, it is a fundamental truth in Buddhism that
suffering exists, whether because of the birth, life, ageing, and death of an
individual, or because an individual tries to find meaning when meaning
is in itself unstable and constantly changing. The first truth also claims that
suffering is more widespread than one may believe. Not only do I suffer, but
people in general suffer.
The second truth is that suffering has causes and that these causes can be
known. One major explanation for suffering is attachment. Ifwe are attached
to ideas about a particular form of life and fail to achieve it, we will suffer.
If we are attached to ourselves, we will suffer and fear the end of our lives.
If we are attached to things and money, this will cause suffering. As a Volvo
"'
::,
,_
«
.,.,
"'
,,_
..,
t-
z
"'
Ll
::,
,-
"'
0
2
«
"'
0
I
,_
::,
«
commercial puts it: "Don't let the things you own own you." This truth urges
us to try and understand the causes of our suffering and that of others, rather
than just alleviating the symptoms of suffering, for example, by thinking
about something else, by busying oneself with petty but urgent things, or
by intoxicating oneself. Sivaraksa notes that the causes of suffering are not
always a question of attachment, but can also be due to structural violence,
that the world is shaped in a way in which suffering is produced.
The third truth is that we can stop producing the causes of suffering.
This means that when we have identified the causes of suffering, we should
work directly to stop producing them. This third truth implies that people
have agency and that Buddhism does not have to be about coping or seeking
harmony through meditation. Here, one could change one's own needs, but
also engage in resolving structural violence.
The fourth truth is that a path of mindful living can show us the way.
The way to mindful living is the abovementioned Eightfold Path.
Chapter 9 Virt ue ethics
155
The Eightfold Path, which is divided into three parts, is a way of life
related to the cessation of suffering. The first part of the path concerns
wisdom (prajna) - right understanding and right intention. According to
Sivaraksa, right understanding refers to a true understanding of The Four
Noble Truths. This seems like a circular argument and something that
could be classified as a logical fallacy (see chapter 6). However, by walking
The Eightfold Path, one will probably reach a different understanding of The
Four Noble Truths, which in turn wil1 change the way one lives according
to The Eightfold Path. Indeed, The Eightfold Path is often portrayed as a
wheel. Right intention is freedom from that which cannot bring satisfaction.
The point here is to focus on the right things. Only long practice can show
what the right things are, but one may also turn the precept around to avoid
the things that most clearly result in suffering.
The second part of The Eightfold Path concerns ethical conduct (sila) right speech, right action, and right livelihood. Right speech, according to
Sivaraksa, is to speak truthfully and skilfully. In practice, this could mean
that rather than just spreading the general discourse while keeping an ironic
distance to it, one should intervene, problematize, and critique it. Perhaps one
should also through speech influence others to start their own search for a
life without suffering. According to Sivaraksa, right action means not killing,
stealing, or indulging in irresponsible sexual behaviour. This is related to
the five precepts reviewed in chapter 8. Right livelihood means not engaging
in a profession that brings harm to others. Work is an integral part of one's
life and the ethical consequences of one's work must be taken into account.
The third part of The Eightfold Path concerns concentration (samadhi)
- right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. Right effort
means encouraging wholesome states of mind in order to understand one's
position in a larger context. For example, one should aim to reach a full
understanding of one's position to avoid misguided patterns of action.
This aspect also encourages us to take responsibility and affect others in
their own strivings. Right mindfulness means awareness of the physical and
mental dimensions of our experience, which means remaining mindful and
unaffected by greed and not being depressed and indulged in one's own
suffering. Right focus is about staying focused and mindful while striving
for the Four Noble Truths.
156
Chapter 9 Vi rt ue ethics
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
.....
1....,
.....
z
w
0
::,
.....
V'I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
1-
::,
<(
r
BUDDHIST TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
Right understanding and right intention might be two concepts that may be used
in the design of technology. Rather than just following orders, we cou ld truly try
to understand the t echnology we. are going to develop. Will it lead t o the removal
of suffering? Wi ll it do so only in the long run or the short run? Right intention
might be that we develop techno logy for the purpose of eliminating suffering
rather than just tying users to the technology.
Rather than striving for something positive, such as eudaimonia in
Aristotelian virtue ethics, one strives through The Eightfold Path for the
absence of suffering. Ifone compares the eight principles with the virtues of
Aristotle, there are similarities. Perhaps the most salient difference concerns
the principles of right concentration and right mindfulness. Indeed, might
this be the reason why those aspects have been so stressed when Buddhism
has been translated from East to West?
•
SOCIALLY ENGAGED BUDDHISM IN ENGINEERING
A leader of the movement of socially engaged Buddhism is the Vietnamese Zen
Buddhist teacher Thay, or Thich Nhat Hanh. For him, not only is spiritual practice
important, but also good ethical action. A Western expression of social ly engaged
Buddhism may be found in the work of Bernie Glassman. 10 Glassman frequently
draws on the Japanese Buddhist monk Kukai, who lived in the ninth century
and who sa id: "The way you can tell the depth of a person's enlightenment is
by the breadth of their service to others." Glassman states in an interview that
broadening the notion of "self" to include the whole world wil l almost by defau lt
lead us to engage with social problems. Glassman holds that there is no need for
first acquiring wisdom in order to do good. Rather, he argues that ethica l conduct
:::,
"'
....
<t:
CZ::
(silo) might indeed be of primary importance for reaching wisdom (prajna) .
........
....z
Social ly engaged Buddhism may be integrated into workplaces or engineering
UJ
through working with others, rather than to emphasize technology as such.
UJ
~
0
::,
....
"'
0
z
<t:
education by emphasizing the good one does to others through technology and
------------------------■
a:
0
....I
::,
<t:
UJ
....
I
"
Chapter 9 Vi rt ue ethics
157
In contrast to consequentialism and deontology, virtue ethics stresses
the agent. Virtue ethics holds that actions stem from the character of an
agent, and also affect the character. In this chapter, we have surveyed some
Western manifestations of virtue ethics, but also turned East to study
ethical systems that stress the personal dimension.
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
n
12
What is the main difference between consequentialism, deontology,
and virtue ethics?
Explain Plato's view of wisdom, courage, restraint, and justice.
What is the relation between courage and weakness of will?
What is eudaimonia?
What is the golden mean?
Give an example of a practical virtue and its two extremes.
Can we be morally good but unreflective (like a stupid but kind
person), according to Aristotle?
What is phronesis?
What is av-rule?
How can we decide what is virtuous?
What is the situationalist critique of virtue ethics?
What are the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path? How do
they relate to Aristotelian virtue ethics?
a:
...
......
:::,
<(
a:
w
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
v"I
0
z
<(
a:
0
...:r
::,
<(
w
:r
>-
0
158
Chapter 9 Virtue et h ics
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU:
VIRTUE ETHICS IN PRACTICE
This far into your ethics course, you rea lize that the decision to develop either the
Life Partner or the Helper has a direct impact on you as a virtuous person. Already
by thinking about ethical issues, you have shown that you are a reflective person.
You believe that you have strong engineering virtues, such as curiosity and diligence,
which cou ld benefit society. Given the potential negative consequences on the user's
feelings, you think about whether you could live with this and what this action says
about you. You have some role models in industry who often promote advanced
technology. You are inspired by them but also start to problematize their values.
After having read about the Buddhist view of eth ics, you start to think about what
"right understanding" means. Are robots really the right way to solve t he problem of
not enough care- givers in relation to the care recipien t s? Should we rat her move some
of the care to the families of the care recipients? But then these family care-g ivers
wou ld not have time to work. Then again, do they have the right understanding of
their life if they decide to spend more t ime at work than with their old or ill fam ily
members? You start to realize that the whole system perhaps pushes us not to Iive
according to the Eightfold Path, what Sulak Sivaraksa would call structural violence.
►
Chapter 9 Virt ue et h ics
159
r
.,...
.5...
:'II
0..
~
::i
IJ
.:::
....
C.
0
"ii
>
IJ
C
...IJ
C.
-;;
::c
IJ
.:::
....
C.
0
"ii
>
IJ
C
...IJ
.:::
....
"jj
C.
-=>
IJ
IJ
-0
....0
z
Own company
Users
Care-givers
Implementers
+ Potential growth, profitability, and fame (L-M)
+ Will appreciate
spending more t ime
with a robot (M)
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
+ This robot will
be a solution to
the problem of
understaffing
- Since the cost is higher
t han for t he Helper,
t he Life Partner might
not reach a mass
market (H, at least
in t he short run)
- Some might feel
unhappy with the
robot, particularly if
they fee l t hat it repla ces human contact (H)
- How do we make sure
that implementers
only implement the
technology if all users
give their consent? Not
doing so might affect
the company negat ively
- This could violate
human rights in that it
does not respect users'
dignity. Might necessitate an alternative care
option for such users
+ Potent ial growth,
profitability, and
fame (M-H)
+ The robot might
help with physical
tasks in a better way
than humans (H)
+ Potential for mass
market penetration (M)
- How do we make sure
that implementers
only implc:mc:nt
t he technology if
all users give their
consent? Not doing
do so might affect the
company negatively
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
- Lack of pot en t iaI
profits and good
reputation from the
new products (H)
160
- Fear that t he robot
will hurt them
physically (H, at least
in the short run)
- This could violate
human rights, similarly
to the Life Partner
(see above)
- Might be
outcompeted by
1he robot (M)
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
+ "The robot assists
1he care-givers,
rather than
replacing
1hem (M)
- More: physical
jobs might
disappear (H)
- Continue to have
a stressful job (H)
- Continue to suffer
because t here are too
f ew care-givers (H)
+ "They will have
jobs (H)
Chapter 9 Virtue ethic s
+ You will exhibit
engineering
virtues
- You wonder if
this is t he right
understanding,
since t he robot
seems to be
too complex
a solution to
the problem
- You could
contribute
to structural
violence if
people are made
red undant
+ Receive ca re from
people (H)
- Perhaps this lack of
care-givers can lead to
degrading healthcare
- It is expensive
and could not be
implemented on
a mass market
Impact on you as
a virtuous person
+ Good negotiating
position for
salary (H)
+ This robot will
be a solution to
t he problem of
understaffing
+ Better economy
for hea Ithcare
organizations
(particularly in the
public sector)
- Will continue
to use existing
technology
and look for
alternatives
+ You will exhibit
engineering
virtues
- You could
cont ribute
to stru ctura I
violence if
people are made
redundant, but
less so than if
you develop the
Life Pa rtnfr
- You will not
cont ribute to
society as a
virtuous engineer
(in the short run)
- Goes against
role models
r
Chapter 10
Ethics of freedom
IN THIS CHAPTER, we discuss theories concerning how you as an
individual should live a free, autonomous life. The philosophers we read are
often called existentialists, but we will also present some libertarians. Ethics
of freedom puts the individual at centre stage, but often as a protection
against the complete dominance by external forces. A good example of such
a message is the song from the Disney movie Moana:
a:
:::,
....
<t
I know, everybody on this island seems so happy on this island
Everything is by design
I know, everybody on this island, has a role on this island
So maybe I can roll with mine
I can lead with pride, I can make us strong
I'll be satisfied ifl play along
But the voice inside sings a different song
What is wrong with me?
cc
,_
z
w
<Cl
:::,
,_
"'
C
z
<t
cc
0
:,:
,_
:::,
<t
w
:,:
,_
~
Here, Moana sings about the traditional social system on the island.
Although all islanders seem satisfied and comfortable, Moana believes
that there is something more to life. Here we see a distinction between
morality (the social norms) and ethics (the personal choice) in existential
philosophy (see page 15).
This ethics also protects against current inhuman ways of relating to
161
each other. For example, philosopher Lewis Mumford1 argued that the
machine age began not with the industrial revolution, but when humans
began treating each other and themselves as machines.
To put it briefly, the ethics of freedom proposes that we, as individuals,
are free and therefore always responsible for our choices. In a sense, this
ethics opposes domination from societal norms. But such theories also
oppose ideas of rationality, for example that we are bound to act in a
utilitarian way just because it is rational to do so from "the point of view of
the universe" (see chapter 7), or that we are not allowed to lie because that
would break the Kantian categorical imperative.
Nietzsche
The 19th-century philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche claimed that we have
lived and are living under the oppression of old values and traditions.
Nietzsche claims that particularly the Christian tradition has urged us to be
weak, repress ourselves, hold back, and act against our will. He refers to this
as slave morality. Perhaps today, we are not suppressed by these values and
traditions, but by others. Nietzsche thought that human beings who have so
cc
::::,
I<(
cc
w
I-
1-
...,
1-
z
w
0
::,
Iv'\
0
z
<(
a:.
0
I
I-
::,
<(
w
Slave morality.
162
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedo m
I
1(il
much potential to be whatever they want are instead becoming slaves under
values that are old and outdated. Instead of trying to develop our potential,
human ethics has been about adapting to others. So, Nietzsche's imperative
would be: "Break down the old values and create new ones!" Another way
in which he explained the new situation was that God is dead. And if God
is dead, we cannot rely on some ultimate guarantor of value and meaning.
If God is dead, we need to create our own values, our own way of living.
Nietzsche does not only turn against religious values suppressing our
freedom, but also structures of society. This is similar to philosopher
and economist Karl Marx who argued that ethical values promoted in a
society are also a way to stifle the freedom of the people and maintain the
power of the ruling class. In that case, the conclusion to be drawn is that
ethical values are perhaps not ethical values in the true sense of the word.
Therefore, it is important to problematize the ethical values and the social
norms of a society to unveil whom these values benefit.
THE ENGINEERING HONOUR CODE: COMPLETE LOYALTY
Once in a while, questions are raised about the fifth item in the code (see box in
chapter 5), namely: "Engineers ought to show complete loyalty to employers and
colleagues." From a Marxian, unveiling perspective, this item could be seen as a
way to ensure that engineers are loyal to the company, rather than serving the
public. However, other items within the code contradict this absolute loyalty.
-----------------------•
a:
:::,
....
<t:
a:
....
z
~
~
0
:::,
....
V,
0
z
<t:
a::
0
I
....
:::,
<t:
Nietzsche did not give ethics or morality a defined content, but the basis of
the theory is freedom and creativity. Ethics should be based in the will, but
it does not have to be a will to dominate others. In an interesting section in
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Nietzsche describes three metamorphoses (changes),
from camel to lion to child. The camel bears a heavy burden, it tries to collect
knowledge, it wants to be "well-laden". This is sometimes represented in
popular culture as our emotional backpack. When the camel discovers that
it is free to create its own destiny, it transforms into a lion saying, "I will".
The lion meets with a dragon on which "Thou Shalt" is written on its scales.
The lion engages with the dragon and kills it, thus creating a situation where
the lion is free. The lion transforms into a child when the "I will" is no longer
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
163
directed against a "Thou Shalt" but rather for the sole purpose of creativity
and freedom. The child is a new beginning, a holy yes to life.
The world is new to the child, and she sees it in its nakedness, and
instead of uncritically adopting any beliefs, she tries to create new values.
She is not strong and forceful like the lion, but curiously and hesitantly
moves forward.
Nietzsche's theory thus says that freedom is fundamental. Further, it
says that there is no need to adapt to old values and traditions just for the
sake of complying. Sometimes ethics is seen as "old men" saying what is
right and wrong to the younger parts of the population, but for Nietzsche
ethics is the creation of new values.
In contrast to deontological theories and consequentialist theories,
Nietzsche's ethics is neither subjected to ideas about rationality, like Kant's,
nor to the universally rational of maximizing good consequences for all,
like in utilitarianism. For Nietzsche, such a subjugation would be similar
to a slave morality, in other words, that some external authority decides
what we ought to do.
NIETZSCHEAN TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
Nietzsche would probably have t hought t hat t he et hics of technology
development, as it is practised today, is conservative. He would have thought that
ethics tries to make sure that no stakeholders get hurt and, by doing so, it does
not use the full potential of technology. It is quite likely that Nietzsche would
have promoted technologies that create the new, free human being. Whether this
concerns sex robots, space tourism, or climate geoengineering is less relevant.
cc
=>
I<(
TRANSHUMANISM
cc
w
II-
In the past we made body enhancement technologies in the form of wooden legs,
1-
spectacles, and hearing aids. In the future, we cou ld possibly replace body parts
c:,
and enhance our senses with technology and become true cyborgs. This changes
human nature radical ly. It could change the nature of competition, for example in
sports. Perhaps you could even avoid death . Is this not re-creating the human, in
z
w
=>
1V'I
c:,
z
<(
a:
0
I
I-
2
a Nietzschean way?
=>
<(
w
I
l-
o
164
Chapter 10 Eth ic s of f reedom
Kierkegaard: the aesthetical
and ethical way of life
a:
::;,
....
«
a:
"-'
,-
....
~
,-
z
"-'
0
::,
,v"I
C
z
«
a:
0
I
,::;,
«
Philosopher S0ren Kierkegaard argued that the very choice is what makes
you a moral being. Rather than just following the norms of society, you need
to make a choice and live according to the consequences of this choice over
time. We have already discussed the importance of the choice in freedom
to in the discussion about responsibility, but Kierkegaard's choice is on an
even deeper level.
Kierkegaard3 , in his work Either/or, describes two fundamentally
different attitudes towards life, personified as person A, the aesthete, and
B, the ethical person. Person A lives a life guided by his senses - aesthesis is
the Ancient Greek term for perception or sensation. /\s writings consist of
a number of essays and a collection of aphorisms (short observations). The
aphorism itself represents what guides the aesthete in his life: ephemeral
encounters, short-lived passions, the flux of desire. What is in focus for
the aesthete is enjoyment. One might suppose that the aesthetic person
is living the happy life, but there are rather indications that it leads to
meaninglessness and unhappiness. A particularly interesting part of Either!
or is "Rotation of Crops", where the aesthete recommends not entering into
friendship or marriage. The freedom to be able to metaphorically rotate
crops is key to happiness. A says that he is constantly on the go with several
plans and schemes at the same time. Apart from the aphorisms, the aesthete
writes about Don Juan in the "Seducer's Diary". It concerns a person who
becomes obsessed with seducing a woman, but by succeeding he loses
interest in her. What seems to be left at the very core of the aesthete's life,
beneath the frenetic search for new loves, new projects, and new things to
do, is emptiness .
Let us now turn to B, the ethical person. From the point of view of
the aesthete, the ethical attitude is utterly boring. When ethics arrives,
everything becomes harsh and tedious. B writes long letters to the aesthete,
explaining the ethical validity of marriage. For the ethical person, marriage
is a perfect example of the ethical way of life, being committed long-term
to a project, constantly having to handle the ups and downs. B takes
full responsibility for his life. He feels the weight of responsibility and
Chapter 10 Et hics of freedo m
165
understands the infinity of ethical d emands. He feels that he con stantly
fails since he has let his ideals enter into his reality.
To sum up, Kierkegaard's view of the aesthete is a person who chases the
latest and the newest. He does not have any long-term commitment and has
not made any choices about how to lead his life. On the contrary, the ethical
person has committed himself to something and takes full responsibility for it.
■
KIERKEGAARD AND SOCIAL MEDIA
Perhaps Kierkegaard's aesthete would be happy on socia l media. Various items are
flashing by in the newsfeed. Cute cats, news about politics, some desirable bod ies,
and some logic quizzes. You never get bored but at the same time, you get the
sensation that this is completely meaningless. Perhaps one of these news items
says that the time you spend on social media cou ld be used to engage in longterm development projects, such as deep relationships, sport or music. This is the
ethical person shining through. Who is the most prevalent in today's society, the
aesthete or the ethical person?
■
KIERKEGAARD AND GAMIFICATION
One could motivate oneself or others to c.are about the environment by various
kinds of argument. The supporters of gamification claim that we shou ld make it
fun to care about the environment. For example, one could get points, badges, and
rewa rds by caring about the environment. What wou ld Kierkegaard say about t his?
Would he not say that such gamification appealed to the aesthetic dimension of
us, and that we wou ld soon be tired of being environmentally friendly and then
turn to the next cool thing? How would orne encourage someone to be more like
Kierkegaa rd's ethical person in relation to environmental responsibility?
cc
....=>
<(
cc
Authenticity
w
....
....
....z
w
c:,
Authenticity is a central concept in the ethics of freedom. An authentic
choice is to stay true to yourself. This is well represented in popular
culture; for example, in the song "Bara fa va mig sjalv" (Just be myself) by
Laleh. She sings:
....=>
V)
c:,
z
<(
a:
0
....::,
I
<(
w
I
.....
0
166
Chapter 10 Et hics of freedom
I see you there in the mirror
So cowardly, why did you even smile
No, you smiled as if it was a joke
You can never take shit again
I will just be myself ...
Turning from popular culture to philosophy, Heidegger4 (see chapter 2)
explained that we should not act as the general masses (<las Mann) but
rather try to stay true to ourselves and act authentica lly. In a similar vein,
Jean-Paul Sartre claimed that inauthentic actions lead to what he called
bad faith - a state in which the person acts as if she were not free. Rather,
one should remain committed to one's freedom and one's ability to make
choices. Many people say that they do not really have a choice, they have
to do the same as the others (see chapter 4). This, according to the ethics
of freedom, is a sign of inauthenticity - that the person does not take
responsibility for her choices. There is an expression called TINA, there is
no alternative, and this is an epitome of the inauthentic way oflife.
"YOU SHOULD REALLY BECOME AN ENGINEER"
Imagine a pupil who is always good in school. She is excellent in maths and
sciences just as in other subjects. She considers where to go to college and
receives a lot of advice from various parties. "You should go into engineering
since you're so good in maths." "Engineering programmes lead to a good job
and a stable future." "What? Do you want to become a musician? You'll be
unemployed for su re." She decides to go into engineering. From time to time,
she wonders if she is really aut hentic. 5
------------------------■
QC
::,
,_
<(
QC
,_
,_
w
-'
,_
z
w
0
::,
,_
V,
0
z
<(
QC
0
::r:
,_
::,
<(
w
::r:
,_
0
Philosopher Alain Badiou, who works in more or less the same tradition
as the abovementioned philosophers, argues that ethics is about how
one relates to an event. An event is not just something that happens
but something that shakes and disrupts a person's being and questions
her way of living or her outlook on ethical issues. Badiou6 says that an
ethically correct attitude is that you are faithful to the event instead of
trivializing it. He exemplifies this by becoming part of a political movement
because you experienced an event, for example, the attack on the anti-Nazi
Chapter 1O Ethics of freedo m
16 7
demonstration (see chapter 3). Or in our case it can be about being faithful
to a set of engineering ethics ideals after there was an accident because
engineers did not adhere to such ideals.
■
THE EVENT AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE
At a work site in the construction industry, there was a lot of racist talk, which
was fundamenta lly about a person who was part of the work team. People would
make racist jokes about him. He obviously did not like it, but it was difficult for
him to change the situation. One morning when everyone came to work, someone
had vanda lized the entire work site and drawn large swastikas al l over the place.
This could possibly be seen as an event according to Badiou, since it changed
the relationships at the workplace. Due to this severe expression of racism, the
employees at the site changed their minds and stopped making racist jokes and
harassing the person.
Another way to wake up from inauthenticity is explained by Emmanuel
Levinas. He claims that ethics is about how one faces the Other. The Other
is a complex concept used here to describe someone who is often outside the
scope of your everyday life, someone you usually do not care about. It may
also concern aspects you often neglect concerning someone, for example,
that you boil down a human being to a number of categories such as age,
ethnicity, and gender. Or that you objectify someone and do not see her as a
full person. The full person would then be the Other. When we hear the call
of the Other, in other words when the Other reaches out to us and demands
something from us, and we respond to that call, we are acting authentically.7
An example of this call of the Other is when a chicken fell off the production
line in an intensive factory farming system (where animals are bred and
slaughtered industrially). A worker raised her hands in shock, picked it up,
checked it for injuries, and gently and with care put it back on the line. 8 For
a brief moment, the worker heard the call from the Other.
...""
::,
<(
""
w
......._,
....
z
w
C
::,
....
V'O
C,
z
<(
""
C
...
I
::,
<(
w
....
g
I
168
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
Life and death
The thinkers presented in this chapter wonder how to live a meaningful
life, which also implies that death is part of the equation. Death is quite
seldom mentioned in other ethical theories. We willingly discuss how we
should make judgments about other people's life and death in an ethically
correct way (think about the trolley problem), but not the actor's death, my
death and yours. Heidegger9 states that life is "being towards death". We
all know that life ends with death, but in our everyday life quite a few of us
do not think about this fact thoroughly. Rather, when death comes up in a
conversation, it often feels uncomfortable.
An event, such as an accident where death is near, may make us
realize that the rest of our life has to be meaningful. A similar thing could
possibly happen to those who suffer from burnout syndrome - that they
think about how they have lived their lives and how they ought to live. In
the movie To Live by Akira Kurosawa, a local government bureaucrat is
diagnosed with terminal cancer. But even before this he has been a living
C<
::,
><t
C<
w
>>-
...,
>-
z
w
C,
::,
>v,
0
2
<t
a:
dead, only following orders. From the point of time when he knows that
his death is coming within less than a year, he starts to live. He tries to
enjoy himself more but finds no meaning in it. Instead he starts to fight
for the construction of a playground he has previously tried to stop.
However, facing death could also lead a person to embark on another, more
problematic path of action. In the TV series Breaking Bad, the chemistry
teacher Walter White learns that he will soon die from cancer. To make sure
that his family will be economically stable after his death, he starts cooking
and distributing methamphetamine.
It is not difficult to understand that these people changed their lives
because of the threat of imminent death. However, we all know that we
are going to die, that time is precious and should be taken care of. In the
ethics of freedom death is seen as something which emphasizes that we
have freedom and responsibility, but not forever. These thinkers thus urge
us not to administer ourselves to death, nor busy ourselves with things that
do not allow us to live.
0
I
>::,
<t
Chapter 10 Et hics of freedom
169
Libertarianism
The question of freedom - which is obvious in the name - is a central
topic in libertarianism, a philosophy and political theory based on the
freedom of individuals and the withdrawal of the state. John Stuart Mill,10
a utilitarian thinker we got acquainted with in chapter 7, wrote a book titled
On Liberty where he sketched the fundamentals of libertarianism. Basically,
the argument is that as long as our actions only affect ourselves, we can do
whatever we please. For example, if you want to drink yourself dead drunk
at home alone, then there will not be any impact on other people (let us
imagine that you also stay at home until the hangover goes away). However,
if you are drunk and then get in your car to go and buy something, your
actions will most probably affect others, and then you do not have full
liberty anymore. So, your freedom is reduced if you affect others. There is
a saying that goes "your liberty to swing your fist ends just where my nose
begins". This little saying says a lot. Your liberty is limited by other people's
freedom to avoid harm - called the harm principle. As written in the US
Constitution, each person has the right to pursue happiness, but only as
long as this does not cause harm.
Like other ethical principles, the harm principle is not absolute. For
example, we allow competition, where the winner indirectly harms the
loser, since the loser does not get a promotion, a new job, or a scholarship.
So, the harm principle does not say that we should avoid all kinds of harm.
Mill is a utilitarianist and thinks that competition can lead to the greater
good for society and therefore it is acceptable, or even commendable.
Autonomy
The concept of autonomy has been used several times in the book - for
example in the discussions about whether we have a free will or whether we
are determined, and in the description of preference utilitarianism - and is
probably already familiar to the reader, but it basicaIIy means the right to
freely decide how to act. Agency is used in a similar way but in other theoretical
traditions. It is difficult to be against autonomy. Some have indeed claimed
that autonomy is the sole absolutely good value. But others have claimed that
170
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedo m
cc
::,
1-
<t:
cc
=
,I~
,-
z
=
0
::,
,-
v'\
0
z
<t:
cc
0
:r:
,-
::,
<t:
STEREOTYPES AND THEIR IMPACT
ON AUTONOMY AND AGENCY
Respecting the people's autonomy is a fundamental concern in ethics. This is
also a core argument in the book Orienta/ism written by Edward Said, where
orientalism means that we produce knowledge about "other people", which has
a negative impact on their autonomy. In oriental ism the Orient is seen as the
opposite of the West. Where the West is light, rational, and straightforward, the
Orient is obscure, irrationa l, and mysterious. This image is something created by
the West. Orientalism may affect autonomy, and this is an ethical prob lem, since
in the end it creates stereotypes t hat prevent people from acting freely. Given our
stereotypes, we might see others as irrational, lazy, driven by desire, which for
example could have the result that they face various kinds of disadvantages when
applying for a job. Having stereotypes means not seeing the other person as a full
person, but reducing her. This could be read as a Levinasian take on stereotypes
where you do not respond to the call of the Other.
~
>-
z
w
0
:::,
>-
v-,
0
z
<1:
cc:
0
:r:
>-
:::,
<1:
w
Image of the Orient.
:r:
>,;,
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
17 1
people do bad things with their autonomy, such as hurting others, committing
crimes, and so on, which is why it could be a good idea to restrict people's
autonomy. Furthermore, it is often said that people do not know what is best
for them, so therefore we help them make good decisions, for example, forcing
them to participate in public health insurance or a public pension scheme.
Furthermore, the way in which technology shapes perception and action (see
chapter 2) is also a breach of autonomy, because something other than the
individual shapes her perceptions and actions. However, we could of course
say that we are never autonomous and that shaping perceptions could be
used to create more autonomy rather than less. For example, to help people
perceive how much electricity they consume, there are cables that shine when
electricity is flowing through them. This could increase the awareness of the
user to turn off the electricity when it is not needed.
THE BLACK ENGINEER
A survey performed by the Royal Academy of Engineering in the UK in 2016
showed that black and minority ethnic engineering graduates were twice as
likely to be underemployed two years after graduation compared to white
people, although the two groups had similar degrees from similar universities.
Furthermore, even if they got a job, they were offered fewer career opportu nities
in the companies. What are the stereotypes and ideas behi nd this discrimination,
which so clearly limits the autonomy of these persons?11 Does this type of
discrimination exist amongst engineers in your country?
In this chapter, we have surveyed some theories focusing on the concept
of freedom. To promote freedom is ethically good, according to these
theories. Freedom in existentialism is seen as a space where one can be
oneself despite the pressure from social structures. However, one might
wonder what would happen if a Nietzschean engineer had the power to
really re-create values. Would there not be a need for any limits at all? In
libertarianism, the limits of freedom are decided by the harm principle.
However, what do you do about social changes that cause harm to some
people (for example the richest) but are still beneficial for the entire society?
17 2
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
a:
...<
..._,
...
:::,
a:
~
I-
:z
~
,0
:::,
IV'\
,0
:z
<
a:
0
::,:
...
:::,
<
r
It is possible that the libertarian notion of freedom runs the risk of being
conservative. Yet another important aspect to think about when it comes
to the creation of new values in the existentialist tradition is the value of
traditions. Some traditions are kept not because people are unreflective or
fooled, but because they support the values of the tradition, that they believe
in the values of the tradition and that the tradition does more good than
harm. So, even if you, like Nietzsche (and indeed Moana), are negative to
tradition, you also have the obligation to think critically about tradition meaning that you see its good and bad sides (see chapter 6).
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
10
Describe the main idea behind the ethics of freedom.
What is slave morality?
Describe what Nietzsche means by the three metamorphoses.
What does Kierkegaard mean by the aesthetical and ethical
attitude to life?
What is authenticity?
What does it mean to be faithful to an event?
What is the Other?
What role may death play in ethics?
How is the concept of freedom discussed in libertarianism?
Is freedom always good or desirable?
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU:
ETHICS OF FREEDOM IN PRACTICE
There are many aspects from what you learned about freedom that you think you can
use to ana lyse your robot project, but you think that the Nietzschean notion of tearing
down old va lues and creating new ones is particularly relevant. Robotics represent
values that can free humans to engage in other creative activities. Furthermore, you
think, inspired by Mumford, that the relationships that users have w ith human caregivers are already robotic (due to the lack of caregivers) and that the introduction of
robots might not be a qua litative change to a worse situation. Rather, the relationship
with robots may lead to new interesting possibi lities for the development of human ity.
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
173
►
To implement robots in care practices is thus a welcome step towards the future. You
t hink that by not developing the Life Partner, you are possibly holding yourself back.
The Helper seems more boring, and given its inability to communicate, you do not fully
uti lize the potential for transformative technology.
In your synthetic model, you decide to add a column to your matrix. You know
...
V
C
t'.
"'
CL.
~
~
V
...
..c
0..
0
.:;
>
V
0
Own company
Users
Care-givers
+ Potential growth, profitability,
and fame (L-M)
+ Will appreciate spending
more t ime with a robot (Ml
+ Help to lower stress (H)
- Since t he cost is higher than
for the Helper, the Life Partner
might not reach a mass market
(H, at least in t he short run)
- Some might feel unhappy
with the robot, particularly
if they feel t hat it replaces
human contact (H)
- How do we make sure
that implementers only
implement the technology if
all users give their consent?
Not doing so might affect
the company negatively
- This could violate human
rights in that it does not
respect users' dignity. Might
necessitate an alternative
care option for such users.
However, this could also
be a sign of conservatism
which should be combatted
L
+ Potential growth, profitability,
and fame (M-H)
...
V
0..
.:;
::c:
...
V
..c
0..
0
.:;
>
V
0
...
...
V
..c
"ij
+ Potentia I for mass market
penetration (MJ
- How do we make sure t hat
implementers only implement
the technology if all users
give t heir consent? Not
doing do so might affect
the company negatively
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
0..
0
.:;
>
V
...
~
0
z
- Lack of potential profits
and good reputation from
the new products (H)
174
+ The robot might help with
physical tasks in a better
way t han humans (HJ
- Fear that the robot will
hurt them physically (H, at
least in the short run)
- Might be outcompeted
by the robot (Ml
+ Help to lower stress (H)
+ The robot assists the
care- givers, rather than
replacing t hem (Ml
- More physical jobs
might disappear (H)
- This could viola,te human
rights, similarly to the Life
Partner (see above)
+ Receive care from people (H)
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care-givers (H)
- Perhaps this lack of
care-givers can lead to
degrading healthcare
Chapterr 10 Ethics of freedom
- Continue to have a
stressful job (HJ
+ They will have jobs (H)
+ Good negotiating
position for salary (H)
that Nietzschean perspectives do not represent another stakeholder (like the other
columns), but an aspect of the problem. And if the impact of the Nietzschean
perspectives is important for the ana lysis that you have done in the other
columns, you add it.
Implementers
Impact on you as a
virtuous person
+ This robot will be a solut ion to
t he problem of understaffing
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
- It is expensive and could not be
implemented on a mass market
- You wonder if this is the right
understanding, since the robot
seems to be too complex a
solution to the problem
Nietzschean perspectives
+ The robot could contribute
to revit alizing humanityL
more than t he Helper
- You could contribute to
structural violence if people
are made redundant
+ This robot will be a solution to
the problem of understaffi ng
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
+ Better economy for healthcare
organizations (particularly
in the public sector)
- You could contribute to structural violence if people are made
redundant, but less so than if
you develop t he Life Partner
- Will continue to use
exist ing technology and
look for alternatives
- You will not contribute
to society as a virtuous
engineer (in t he short run)
- You are perhaps stuck in a
mentality of utility - that
we should assist rath~r
than t ransform
- The alternative represents a
form of slave morality, which
impedes development
- Goes against role models
Chapter 10 Ethics of freedom
175
Chapter 11
Relational ethics
THIS CHAPTER CONCERNS RELATIONSHIPS and the ethical value of
::,
"'
....
<(
cc
....
....
....z
UJ
such. We first discuss ethics of care, which is also called feminist ethics.
Care relationships are often thought to be between human beings, but we
will also discuss the possibility to care about animals and things. Although
care seems fundamentally good, we will discuss the limits of care. Then
we turn to other kinds of relational ethics, which concern the different
obligations we have in different kinds of relationships. The chapter ends
with a discussion about trust. But first let us take a detour to Lawrence
Kohlberg, because it was his work that triggered Carol Gilligan's feminist
critique, which led to the creation of what we today know as ethics of care.
In the 1960s, psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg1 conducted studies about
moral development. His theory was a development of Jean Piaget's works
in developmental psychology that concerned the cognitive development of
children. Kohlberg was interested in understanding how children reason
about ethical issues. According to Kohlberg there are different stages of
moral development where the ethical concern (or the scope of it) is enlarged
0
::,
....
V,
0
z
<(
cc
0
I
....
::,
<(
UJ
....
I
(>
at each stage (compare with Peter Singer's "expanding circle" in chapter 7).
Kohlberg distinguishes between six different stages of moral development,
divided into three different l,evels.
The first two stages are classified as pre-conventional morality and
mainly concern how the person is interested in direct consequences for
177
herself. In the first stage, a moral action is wrong if it leads to physical
punishment. In the second stage, the person thinks that a good action is one
which she benefits from personally. The following two stages are classified
as conventional morality, which means that the goodness of an action is
dependent on social expectations. In the third stage, the person wants to
be confirmed and approved by others, and a good action is an action which
others think is good. In the fourth stage, goodness is about following laws,
duties, authorities, and social conventions. The fifth and sixth stages are
categorized as post-conventional morality. Here, goodness is something
that goes beyond social expectations, namely principles. In the fifth stage,
good action is something that has been thought through and agreed by the
entire society. In the sixth stage, good action is based on universal ethical
principles, like the categorical imperative (see chapter 8) and the notion of
justice (see chapter 12).
KOHLBERG'S STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT
Level 1. Pre-conventional morality
1 Obedience and punishment
2 Egoistic orientation
Level 2. Conventional morality
3 Interpersonal orientation
4 Law and social order-maintaining orientation
Level 3. Post-conventional morality
5 Contractual orientation
6 Orientation towards universal ethical principles
cc
...
....
..._,
::,
<(
cc
But the reason why we survey Kohlberg's work in this chapter is not
based on its own merits, but because of the critique directed against it by
feminist philosophers. From his studies, Kohlberg concluded that girls often
remained at stage 3, preoccupied with questions about how to maintain
relationships and how to promote the welfare of family and friends, while
more boys went all the way up to the post-conventional level. Didn't this
imply that boys were more morally developed than girls?
178
Chapter 11 Relational et hics
0----
0----
z
w
C
::,
0----
v'I
0
z
<(
cc
0
...
I
::,
<(
w
-'--
...
"
Ethics of care
a:
::,
....
<[
a:
"-'
r
....
~
r
z
"-'
0
::,
r
V,
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::,
<[
As a reaction to Kohlberg's theories, Carol Gilligan2 developed an ethics of
care, which meant that moral development was not a movement towards
universal ethical principles, but that caring for personal relations is equally,
if not more, important. Thus, one could not say that girls are less developed
than boys but that they are different.
Ethics of care builds on a view of human existence as interconnected
and dependent. Alison Jaggar3 describes some ways in wh ich the ethics of
care, seen as a feminist ethics, problematizes the masculine focus of ethics.
She argues that ethics, traditionally, shows less interest in women's issues,
for example ethics in private life, that it implies that women are not as
morally mature as men, and that masculine traits such as independence,
autonomy, and intellect are overrated, while interdependence, connection,
emotion, and body are underrated. Apart from this, the masculine ethics
favours ways of reasoning emphasizing rights, universality, and impartiality
over relationships, particularity, and partiality.
These feminist thinkers hold that there are two fundamentally different
ethical paradigms, one called the ethics of justice, which is ethics based on
abstract principles (not the same meaning as we assign to justice in chapter
12), and ethics of care, which is rooted in personal relationships. Similar
thoughts have appeared historically; for example, in t he 18th-century
philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft.
Ethics of care concerns how we care in close personal relationships.
We may of course care about many other t hings such as money, power,
and prestige, but the fundamental meaning of ethics of care is the ethics
occurring in relationships. The caring relation comprises the caring subject
(the one-caring) and the one who is cared for (the cared-for). The usual kind
of relationship considered in ethics of care is one where the cared-for is
seen as more vulnerable, with less power, than the one-caring, for example
between a child and a parent. But the cared-for may also be more powerful
in some respects, such as in a wife-husband relationship. Traditionally, the
one-caring was often supposed to be a woman, but both the one-caring and
the cared-for are gender-neutral positions.
Ethics of care is based on female ethical thinkers, but it would be wrong
Chapter 11 Relational ethics
179
to call it a feminist theory, although many people do that. Rather, what
ethics of care describes is a different perspective focusing on relationships.
A relevant question in duty ethics is for example if I am allowed to lie to a
person. Duty ethics does not care that much about my previous relationship
to this person, but focuses on the nature of the action itself - that lying is
wrong. A consequentialist argument tries to maximize good consequences.
Utilitarianism is well-aware of relationships but, as we have seen, it tends to
neglect close relationships in order to maximize good consequences for all.
Virtue ethics also has an interest in relationships, but they always remain in
the background. TI1is is the way in which the relational ethics is different.
Philosopher Nel Noddings 4 describes ethics of care as a practice
consisting of engrossment, motivational displacement, commitment, and
confirmation. When engrossed in the cared-for, the one-caring abstracts
from herself and feels with the cared-for. Motivational displacement means
that the one-caring carries out acts according to the perceived needs and
wants of the cared-for, rather than caring about herself, the greater good,
or other moral principles. Commitment means steadfastness to the caring
relationship, through good and bad times, and confirmation implies that
the one-caring sees the cared-for both as she is at present and also in her
full potential.
ETHICS OF CARE IN PRACTICE
Can we learn about ethics from being in caring relationships? What are the caring
relationships you have been in, either as one-caring or cared-for, and how have
they affected your view of relationa l ethics?
a:
=>
,-.
Caring about animals and things
Many have deep and fulfilling relationships with pets, and also here there
is obviously a caring dimension. The pet needs food and other care and is
therefore dependent on the owner. And it does not even need to be a real
animal for the relationship to be perceived as meaningful. The Japanese
robot dog Aibo sold out in twenty minutes when it was launched in 1999.
The dogs were cared for and loved as if t hey were real pets. When the
180
Chapter 11 Relational ethics
<(
a:
w
I-
,-.
~
1-
z
w
0
:;,
I-
v'\
0
z
<(
a:
0
:r
,-.
=>
<(
w
:r
l-
o
Aibo.
"'
::,
>.,:
cc
w
>>--'
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
.,:
er:
0
:c
>::,
.,:
w
:c
>-
"
manufacturer decided to not make any spare parts for the product anymore,
a collective funeral was held.
This raises questions about how you classify something as a relationship.
Is there a need for verbal or other communication? Is there a need for
meaningful exchange? Is there a need for both parties to have entered the
relationship willingly? Perhaps you experience that you have a relationship
with your bicycle. You care about its needs and find information online
about how to treat it well, and perhaps you feel that you become one with
it when you cycle. It gives you freedom, and you have experienced a lot
together. You could even have a relationship to a place, where the place is
seen as something vulnerable and something that you must care about.
Chapter 11 Relational ethics
181
THE CARING HIGH-SPEED FERRY INNOVATOR
An engineer, together with his tea m, developed a high-speed ferry in the 1990s. It
was supposed to change the dynamics of the ferry industry. It was an innovative
project where many subsystems had to be developed from scratch. The ferry got
a positive reception, but after some years oil prices rose dramatically. A highspeed ferry naturally consumes more fuel and after some time, the ferries had to
be scrapped. This engineer said that he was crying when he helped out with the
dismantling of the ferries. He said that this dismantling would have violated the
Hippocratic oath for engineers (had there been one), since he kil led his creation.
The limits of care
Given the above discussion, caring seems ethically commendable, but are
there limits to caring? Can we care too much? Perhaps there could be an
ethical conflict between caring and freedom. The Japanese word omoiyari
means to anticipate and take care of the other person's wants and needs.
This is quite similar to the concept of care in English. However, in Japanese,
there is a downside of omoiyari, namely osekkai, which can be translated as
"meddlesomeness". It is about caring too much or in the wrong way.
This is not an uncommon problem in families. Parents might have very
clear ideas about what is good or bad for their child and therefore think that
they have the right to violate their freedom to choose, for example, leisure
activities. This throws light on the power differentials in a family - children
have fewer rights, no economic means, and a limited social network that
could help them break free. So even though care seems thoroughly good,
we must remember that there may be limits to it.
Furthermore, the ethics of care means that we should nurture our
relationships with our nearest and dearest. But is there an intrinsic value
to maintaining these relationships? Relationships can also be suffocating
for the people involved, and therefore there might also be very good reasons
to break them. Often, such arguments are based on freedom (see chapter
10) - that some relationships could impede our lives.
cc
::,
,_
<(
a:
w
,_
I~
1--
z
w
C,
::,
I-
v'\
C,
z
<(
a:
0
:r
I--
::,
<(
w
:r
1--
0
182
Chapter 11 Re lat ional et hics
r
RELATIONSHIPS ONLINE
On the internet , it is possible to be anonymous and never see those you are
communicating with face to face. This, according to the philosophy of Emmanuel
Levinas (see chapter 10), means that we never really see the face of the Other,
meaning that we do not meet them as full individuals. Perhaps t his is the reason
w hy there is harassment and mistreatment going on online. Can you have a true
relationship to someone you never really meet?
Ethics in different relationships
Ethics of care is one form of relational ethics. We may turn to Confucianism
to get another understanding of relational ethics. In Western philosophy,
people are often seen as independent, rational, and self-determining, while
Confucianism has a view of people as social, cultural, and h istorically
situated. In Confucianism, the most important aspect of the person is to
be located in the set of relationships that she has. Of course, such a view
of personhood exists even in Western contexts, but it is more accentuated
in Confucianism. The Confucian self is relational. Japanese philosopher
Tetsuro Watsuji5 explained that t he word for human being in Japanese
(ningen, .AFic!i ) consists of two Chinese characters: person and betweenness.
In other words, he means that in the word human being in Japanese, the
idea of betweenness already exists. Watsuji was inspired by Confucianism
in his focus on the human being as relational.
COMMODITY FETISHISM
::,
"'
><(
"'
~
>z
UJ
c:,
::,
>v,
c:,
z
<(
a:
Karl Marx wrote that relationships between people in capita lism are perceived
as relationships between obj ects and money. He referred to this as commod ity
fetishism. He argued that we almost think that commodities (products we
consume) exist independent of us, rather than being produced by other human
beings. When you buy coffee, you have some kind of relationship with the
growers of the coffee beans, those who roast it , those who transport it, and so
on. Still, this is not what you perceive when you buy coffee. Perhaps you only
0
I
think that the coffee has a relationship to a certain price. If I pay 5 dol lars, I get
<(
this package of coffee. The in-betweenness (Tetsuro Watsuji) runs the risk of
>::,
UJ
I
&
being hidden in the consumer society.
Chapter 11 Relational ethics
183
r
Different kinds of relationships have different rules of behaviour and rituals.
In Confucianism, five relationships are seen as central: parent-child, elder
and younger sibling, husband-wife, ruler-subject, and friendship. These
relationships should be harmonious, which actually is quite similar to
Plato's idea of justice (see chapter 9). In the first four relationships, which
are more vertical, the former party is hierarchically superior to the latter,
while the relationship between friends is more horizontal - both friends
are on the same hierarchical level. In all cultures, there are both vertical
and horizontal relationships (and intricate combinations of them) but
in some cultures, it is more legitimate to speak of vertical relationships
than in others.
In the parent-child relationship, the child should show respect, take
care of her parents, conduct herself well not only in relationships with her
parents but also in society so as to not disgrace the parents, and so on.
Parents should be loving towards their children and care about them. Older
siblings should be gentle and kind to younger siblings, and the younger
ones should be respectful of their older siblings. A husband should be good
to his wife, and his wife should, in turn, be loyal. The good ruler should be
benevolent, and the ruler's subjects should be loyal. Two friends need to be
considerate and respectful in their relationships with each other. These are
the ethical rules that, according to Confucianism, contribute to creating a
successful society.
In many societies, there is a form of sponsor system, where the more
experienced person in a particular field assists the less experienced. The
sponsor is not ready with her education or training, but still has more
knowledge than the less experienced person and can therefore help her. In
Japan, the sempai-kohai system, where sempai is the more experienced and
kohai the less, is widespread and explicitly used. Perhaps directly inspired
by the Confucian virtues, sempai helps kohai grow and kohai respects
sempai, without necessarily obeying everything sempai says.
In the Confucian framework, particularly in the relationship between
ruler and subject, it is obvious that we get particular responsibilities
when we enter into certain formal positions. In today's society, this
often coincides with us being in certain positions where we are expected
to take more responsibility - for example, being a leader of the student
184
Chapter 11 Relational ethic s
a:
::,
I<(
a:
w
,_
I-
,_
~
z
w
c:,
::,
,_
v"I
Q
z
<(
a:
0
I
1-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
union or being a manager. In these roles, we perhaps have more formal
responsibilities stipulated by the employment contract, but this may also
concern responsibilities that come in more indirect ways. For example, as
a manager, you will have responsibilities to deal with various ethical issues
coming up in your department. However, you might also feel that being a
manager means that you are a role model and must act in an exemplary
way to inspire your colleagues.
An ethical issue is what we do when we have power over others in
relationships. Philosopher Knud L0gstrup6 held that power is involved in
every human relationship and that we have to decide whether we should
use our power to serve the other or to serve ourselves.
In relationships that are more symmetrical, there is a norm of
reciprocity guiding our action. Anthropologist Marcel Mauss7 mentioned
three obligations: the obligation to give, the obligation to receive, and the
obligation to reciprocate. If we follow Mauss this could lead to problems
in engineering practice. Imagine that you have been helped to get a job by
a friend. This friend is now working in the workshop, and you are under
pressure from your manager to close down the workshop. Could you neglect
this person who helped you get a job?
THE CONSULTANT ENGINEER
In this context of roles and relationships, it could be interesting to think about
the responsibilities of a consultant engineer. The consultant is employed by a
consultancy company and provides services to another organization. How much
responsibility should the consultant take concerning ethical issues occurring in
the customer's organization? Do you have any responsibilities to deal with it or
do you just do as they do? Since you are in a precarious position and in a way not
part of the relationships at the workpl ace, it is not clear how you should act.
-----------------------■
f-
z
UJ
<Cl
::,
f-
"'
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
>-
::,
<(
UJ
I
&
One could use the ideas that we have surveyed to also think about
relationships between groups. Between groups there are also ethical issues
concerning care and relationships. "The test of courage comes when we are
in the minority. The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority", to
cite the well-known American pastor Ralph W. Sockman. In other words,
the relationship and power difference between groups have implications for
Chapter 11 Relati onal et h ics
185
what kind of ethical behaviour is expected. When it comes to groups with
less power, sometimes care is not enough. It might also be the case that the
social systems disfavour particular groups of people, and rather than just
showing care for the weaker party in unequal relationships, there is also
a need to change the system to make it more fair and just (see chapter 12).
Trust
Trust is an aspect of relational ethics. Often, we use the word trust to talk
about relations. However, we can also say that we trust a material artefact
such as a bicycle (that it will do its job) or some larger entity, such as a
political system or an organization.
If we trust someone, it follows that this person is able to harm us in some
way, that we are exposed to this person. For example, we can trust a driver
to stop at a red light when we cross the road, but if she does not stop we can
get hurt. We can remind ourselves of Aristotle's view that all things have
a function or purpose (see chapter 9). Often we trust people to fulfil their
function in their different roles. For example it is part of the function of a
car driver that she stops at a red light. When I trust a government official,
I trust her not to wilfully favour nor disfavour me. When I say that I trust
my partner, this is often dependent upon some explicit or implicit rules
and norms, for example that the partner will be faithful, not lie (too much),
and not steal.
The one who trusts has no guarantees that the other will act in the
expected way. We make a judgement between trusting and mistrusting
depending on who we relate to and in what function. We know that there
are car drivers who do not stop at a red light, corrupt government officials,
and unfaithful partners. Furthermore, there is no external party making
sure that violations are not made. Certainly, there can be laws which make
sure that the person misusing trust is punished, but this is only after the fact.
Trust is an important value of society, and when trust is breached, it
is seen as gravely unethical. For example, if I break a promise to act in a
certain way, this is a breach of trust. Good ethical action is something that
builds trust.
Lack of trust may be based on factors that can be both relevant and
186
Chapter 11 Relational ethics
a::
::,
...
"'
......
..,
a::
w
,._
z
w
Cl
::,
,._
v'I
c:,
z
"'a::
0
...
I
::,
"'w
...
I
~
r
irrelevant for the situation. Distrust could lead to inefficiency since we need
to check and double-check. Moreover, the person who is distrusted could feel
insufficient, and this could cause behavioural change. If you are treated like
a person who cannot be trusted, you might start acting like such a person.
TRUSTING TECHNOLOGY
Representatives of two organizations handling car inspections met and discussed
a variety of things, such as how to test the functionality of the suspension
of a car. One sa id that the best way is to let a car inspector drive the car for
a while. The other said that the best way t o is to let a machine test it. In the
country where the latter organization was active, they did not really trust the
car inspectors. Mach ines, on the ot her hand, were seen as incorruptible and thus
trustworthy.
"'
::,
><(
w
"'
>-
>-
_,
>-
z
w
c::,
::,
>-
"'
c::,
z
<(
"'
0
:r:
>-
;;;!
Trusting technology.
w
:r:
>~
Chapter 11 Relat ional ethics
187
In this chapter different ethical dimensions of relationships have been
discussed. We have surveyed ethics of care and enlarged it from its usual
human focus to also concern animals and artefacts. We have talked about
Confucianism and its focus on different eth.iical demands in different
relationships and ended with a discussion about trust.
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Describe Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Why is there a
feminist critique of Kohlberg's theory?
What do Alison Jaggar (and others) mean when they say that
traditional ways of thinking about ethics have a masculine focus?
What is engrossment, motivational displacement, commitment,
and confirmation according to Nel Noddings?
Is ethics of care a feminist theory?
Can we have caring relationships with animals and artefacts?
Are there limits to care or is care absolutely good?
How did Watsuji describe the Jajpanese word for human being?
How do people view the human being in your country and in other
parts of the world?
Describe relational ethics in Confucianism.
How can we use our power over others according to L0gstrup?
What are the good and bad sides of sponsorship (sempaikohai or similar)?
What is trust? What are the positive and negative consequences
of trust and lack of trust?
a:
:::,
,_
<(
a:
w
.....
,_
,_
z
w
C
:::,
.....
VI
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
,_
:::,
<(
w
I
,_
0
18 8
Chapter 11 Relational et hics
r
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU:
RELATIONAL ETHICS IN PRACTICE
You have now arrived at a deeper understanding of relationships that you think you
can use in your robot project. First of all, the relationships between the care-giver and
the care recipient could be seen from the light of ethics of care, where the care-g iver
is the one-caring and the care recipient is the cared-for. The one-caring, due to lack of
time, might probab ly not be able to exhibit engrossment, motivational disp lacement,
commitment, and confirmation. If the Life Partner had these characteristics, it could
perhaps do a better job? However, you also remember the discussion about whether
one could have relationships with non- humans. Since a robot does not have true
autonomy, nor a freedom of will, you think that one cannot really have a relationship
with a robot, but you know that not everyone wou ld agree with you. You also
start to think about how the implementation of this technology would change the
relationships in the care facilities and also tne relationships between care recipients
and their relatives. The introduction of the Life Partner cou ld perhaps lead to social
isolation if the care recipients "forget" how to treat other humans since they spend so
much time with a robot. The relatives might feel that the cared- for receives such good
care and attention from t he Life Partner that they start to visit the cared-for more
seldom? However, might it also be the opposite - t hat the relatives feel pity for her
and visit her more often?
With the Helper you do not really disturb the relationships. Rather, the Helper
assists in freeing up time for the human care-giver to care abou t the cared-for.
►
Chapter 11 Relat ional ethics
189
r
.....,
....,
C
t::
Cl.
....
:.::;
..,
...,
.c
0.
0
.:;
>
..,
0
Own company
Users
Care-givers
Implementers
+ Potent ial growth, profitability, and fame (L- M)
+ Will appreciate spending
+ Help to lower
+ This robot wil I
- Since the cost is higher
t han for t he Helper, the
Life Partner might not
reach a mass market (H,
at least in the short run)
- Some might feel unhappy
with the robot, particularly
if they feel t hat it replaces
human contact (H)
- How do we make sure that
implementers only implement the technology if all
users give their consent?
Not doing so might affect
t he company negatively
+ Potent ial growth, profitability, and fame (M-H)
.....,
0.
.:;
::i:::
..,
.c
....
0.
..2
..,
..,>
0
.....,
.c
....
'iu
0.
0
.:;
..,..,>
....0
+ Potential for mass
market penetration (M)
- How do we make sure
t hat implementers only
implement the technology
if all users give their
consent? Not doing
do so might affect t he
company negatively
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
- Lack of potential profits
and good reputation from
the new products (HJ
z
190
more time with a robot (Ml
stress (H)
- Might be outcompeted by t he robot (M)
be a solution to
t he problem of
understaffing
- It is expensive
and cou Id not be
implemented on
a mass market
- This could violate human
rights in that it does not
respect users' dignity. Might
necessitate an alternative
ca re option for such users.
However, t his could also
be a sign of conservat ism
which should be combatted
+ The robot might help with
+ Help to lower
+ This robot will
physical tasks in a better
way than humans (H)
stress (H)
be a solution to
the problem of
understaffing
+ The robot assists
- Fear tha t the robot will
hurt them physically (H,
at least in the short run)
the care-givers,
rather than
replacing them (M)
- This could violate human
rights, similarly to the
Life Partner (see above)
- More physical jobs
+ Receive care from people (H)
- Continue to have
a stressfu I job (H)
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care-givers (H)
- Perhaps this lack of
care-givers can lead to
degrading healthcare
Chapter 11 Relational et hics
might disappear (HJ
+ They will have
jobs (H)
+ Good negotiating
position for
salary (HJ
+ Better economy for
healthcare organizations (particularly
in the public sector)
- Will conitinue
to use existing
technology and look
for alternatives
Impact on you as a
virtuous person
Nietzschean perspectives
Relationships
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
+ The robot could contribute
to revitalizing humanity,
+ The robots could possibly
more than the Helper
- One cannot have true
wtionshi~ with robOTI
- You wonder if this is t he right
understanding, since t he robot
seems to be too complex a
solution to the problem.
provide care
Unclear impact on the user's
other relationships, for
example with her fami ly
- You could contribute to
structural violence if people
are made redundant
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
- You could contribute to structural
violence if people are made
redundant, but less so than if
you develop t he Life Partner
- You will not contribute
to society as a virtuous
engineer (in the short run)
- You are perhaps stuck in a mentality of utility - that we should
assist rather than transform
+ The robot will allow more
time for care provid~ by
human care-givers
+ Will leave other relationships unaffected
- The alternative represents a
form of slave morality, which
impedes development
- The absence of true care
continues to be prevalent
- Goes against role models
Chapter 11 Relat ional ethics
191
Chapter 12
Justice and fairness
QUESTIONS OF JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS are central to ethics. We have
a:
=>
....
<(
cc
r....
r-
z
UJ
0
=>
r-
"'
0
z
<(
cc
0
....I=>
<(
UJ
:r:
....
I)
already touched upon such questions in discussions about consequentialist
ethics, regarding what is a fair distribution of consequences. Also, justice
and fairness may seem to have a negative impact on libertarian freedom that a person is for example required to contribute to the less advantaged
in society, which limits the freedom of those contributing.
Both justice and fairness are fundamentally concerned with giving each
person what she deserves. Justice and fairness arguments often appear
when resources are to be distributed or redistributed. Such discussions
may be based on conflicts of interests, in other words where people do not
agree about who should get what and why. Also, justice and fairness are
also important aspects that appear when we discuss equal treatment and
various forms of discrimination. In sum, we care a lot about fairness and
justice, and the stability of a society is dependent on its being arranged
in a just and fair way. It is even argued that perceptions of unfairness
are biologically grounded - we are hardwired to react to unfairness. For
example, there was an experiment where two capuchin monkeys had to
perform a particular action and afterwards received a reward. One of them
got a piece of cucumber and the other a grape. When the monkey who only
got the cucumber realized that the other one received something more
tasty, it protested. 1
193
r
Different thinkers use the concepts of justice and fairness in different
ways, but we will treat them as synonymous (compare with the discussion
about ethics and morality in chapter 1). In the previous chapter we saw that
care ethicists sometimes divide ethics into two different domains: an ethics
of care and an ethics of justice. For them, justice concerns abstract moral
ideals. Others see justice as synonymous to ethics - how one should live
one's life, what is good, what is the right way to act, what one should do.
For example, American philosopher Michael Sandel's book Justice: What's
the right thing to do? is basically about ethics and covers theories similar to
those described in this book.
Basic concepts of justice
In chapter 9, about virtue ethics, Plato's concept of justice, which said that
the right thing should be in the right place, was presented. This corresponds
to a basic notion that justice is about giving a person what she deserves. In
Plato's conceptualization, it is just that the wise rule the society, that the
courageous are guardians, and that the people are kept in check. Aristotle,
Plato's disciple, said that equals should be treated equally and unequals
unequally. 2 Using Plato's ideal society as an example, we should perhaps
treat all guardians equally, if they are equal (given certain characteristics,
such as courage, physical attributes, and other relevant factors), but we
cannot treat a guardian and a regular person equally.
A slightly more contemporary way to define justice is to say that
individuals should be treated the same, unless they differ in ways that are
relevant to the situation in which they find themselves. Imagine two people
doing exactly the same job, where one is paid more than the other. The
reason might be that the one who is paid more is a man, or white, but these
could hardly qualify as relevant factors for a difference in pay, which leads
us to think that it is unjust.
""
::,
I<(
""
w
II~
1-
z
w
0
::>
1-
v"I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
I-
::>
<(
w
I
l-
o
194
Chapter 12 Justice and fa irness
SOME EXAMPLES FROM EVERYDAY LIFE
■ In a particular country, it is up to three times more expensive to go to the
theatre, opera, and museum if you are a tourist. Is this fair?
■ In country X, you pay a reduced subway ticket price if you are not more than
14 years old and 91 - 120 centimetres tal l. In country Y, the discounted ticket
price applies to people younger than 20 years. Which system is more fair?
■ Each person travelling by air can bring a suitcase of 20 kg. However, no
importance is paid to the weight of the passenger. Is this fair?
QC
::,
....
<(
QC
u.,
....
....
....
~
z
u.,
D
:::,
....
V,
D
z
<(
"'
0
....
:::,
:r
<(
u.,
:r
....
0
Sometimes we speak about various domains of justice and fairness. For
example, one domain concerns how resources are distributed amongst the
members of a group, organization, or society. A group doing things together
needs to agree upon who should do what, how much each person should do,
and who will reap the benefit of the work they do, for example, when you
write a group essay. Who will do what? Is everyone working equally hard? Is
everyone contributing with equally valuable ideas for the end result? These
types of questions concern what is called distributive justice.
A second well-known domain in which issues of justice and fairness
come up concerns punishment. TI1ese kinds of questions are often called
questions of retributive or corrective justice. Such questions can be: Is capital
punishment acceptable? Should one punish according to the principle of
"an eye for an eye"? These discussions are also based upon the same basic
ideas as the ones described in this section - that we should treat equal
cases equally, but unequal cases unequally. For example, if there are two
people committing the same crime, and all other circumstances are equal,
we might think that they should get the same punishment. Also, the other
traditional formulation of justice also makes sense - that we should give an
offender "what he or she deserves".
Sometimes yet another domain of justice issues is identified: compensatory justice. This concerns how people are compensated for their injuries by
the person who has injured them. Similarly, the principle is often that one
should get what one deserves, a fair compensation.
After this brief introduction, we now go a bit deeper, mostly focusing
on issues of distributive justice, as those issues are th e most common
Chapter 12 Justice and fairness
195
r
within the engineering profession. We could think of fairness and justice
as arguments concerning t hree different categories: equality, need, and
contribution.
Distributive justice based on equality
Equality here means that equal amounts of something are distributed to
each member in a group. In a work setting, it could mean that all employees
in a company are paid the same salary. In a society, it could mean that all
citizens always have the same amount of resources - food, housing, and
so on. This way of distributing something is sometimes called equality of
outcome or strict egalitarianism. In many countries, it is quite accepted that
this cannot be applicable overall, but it could be applicable to some things,
for example, that all children should have equal access to schooling (in
the same amount, with the same quality) or that all citizens should have
equal access to healthcare. A guaranteed universal basic income for all
citizens in a country is a form of equality of outcome. So, although strict
egalitarianism seems exaggerated in some aspects of life, it is perhaps a
reasonable philosophy in some others, particularly concerning a person's
access to basic goods.
THE DIGITAL DIVIDE
Things that people in the more technolog ically developed parts of the world see
as basic utilities, such as a computer with high-speed access to the Internet , are
of course not avai lable everywhere. The digital divide means that the world is
divided into those with good access to the digital realm and those without. This
is basically a question of whether everyone has equa l access to the possibi lities
a:
offered by the digital realm.
::,
,_
..:
a:
w
,_
,_
..,
,_
z
While t he above examples have concerned equal access to something,
one could also consider another kind of equality: equality of opportunity.
The idea behind this is that at some particular point in time, people have
equal opportunities to live their lives and follow their dreams. There is no
need for strict equality in the distribution of goods from the perspective
196
Chapter 12 Just ice and fai rness
w
c:,
::,
,_
v'\
c:,
z
..:
a:
0
I
,_
::,
..:
w
I
,_
"
of equality of opportunity. Fair competition is a good example of equality
of opportunity. An example of this can be a recruitment process, where
all applicants compete on the same terms and irrelevant factors are not
taken into account. However, does this mean that all applicants have equal
opportunities? Probably not, because of privilege. So, for some proponents
of equality of opportunity, it is not only important to improve the processes
and procedures of selection or competition, which is called formal/
procedural equality of opportunity, but also to substantially increase the
opportunities for those who are underprivileged. This is called substantive
equality of opportunity.
PRIVILEGE IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Imagine that you are born into a family where the parents are engineers and
have a great interest in technology. This might lead you to develop knowledge
about technology already before studying on an engineering programme. Perhaps
given this interest, you were able to have some summer jobs at your parents'
companies, or in the companies of their acquaintances. When you wanted to
build simple engineering constructions at home, your parents always supplied
you with enough money to carry out these projects. By the day you start your
engineering education, would you not be privileged?
Distributive justice based on need
QC
::,
,_
<(
er::
u.,
,_
,_
..,
,_
z
u.,
D
::,
,_
V,
C
z
<(
er::
0
:r:
,_
::,
<(
w
:r:
,_
"
The idea of substantive equality of oppor tunity is well-aligned with the
following discussion about need. For substantive equality of opportunity to
materialize, people who need support to compete in the market should be
given such support. Also, when it comes to mentor relationships, it might
be fair to allocate more time to those who need it, to weaker mentees.
Need could be a relevant factor regarding the distribution of goods and
outcomes. Imagine that persons A and B have the same job. Person A has
four children and an unemployed wife while person B lives alone. Perhaps
it would be fair if A gets a higher salary? Many people think it is fair to
carry out some kind of redistribution of income to help those in need, for
example, those who cannot work due to illness or other relevant factors.
Chapter 12 Just ice and fa i rn ess
197
But why does the person have this need? Is it because of the person's
own choices, or just bad luck? Some thinkers, called luck egalitarians, have
argued that inequalities that arise from personal choices are not bad, but
those that arise from bad luck should be remedied. For example, if a person
has dedicated her life to a career as an engineer, but the career has failed
because the person did not study enough, then this outcome stems from
the engineer's choice. However, if the engineer was working very h ard,
but suffered an accident that made it impossible to continue work ing,
this would be a case of bad luck. Similarly, some of these luck egalitarians
hold that if someone has willingly chosen to smoke despite the risks,
then this person is not entitled to subsidized healthcare. Choice is indeed
fundamental in discussions about fairness (see also the discussion about
freedom to in chapters 3-4). There seems to be an intrinsic link between
what we contribute and what we are entitled to.
NEED-BASED JUSTICE TOWARDS YOUR CONTRACTOR
The competition to win a construction tender process was very harsh, and the
wi nning bid was low and very economica lly favourable for the buyer. During the
construction process, at times the contractor asked for extra money since the
construction drawings were incomplete or faulty. Rather than vehemently trying
to avoid such extra costs, the buyer decided to grant some of the money, because
the contractor needed it.
-----------------------•
a=
::,
,_
<(
a=
,_
"'
,_
...,
,_
z
"'
0
::,
,_
v'\
Equality
Need
Liberation
0
z
<(
a=
0
In these images distributive justice based on equality and need is depicted. It also
indicates that there might be ways of solving the very issue of scarcity of resources:
to tear down the fence.
198
Chapter 12 Justice and fairn ess
:r:
,_
::,
<(
"'
,_
:r:
"
Distributive justice based on contribution
oc
::,
Distribution based on contribution corresponds well with the notion "to give
each person what she deserves". Most of us think we should give rewards
based on how much a person contributes. But what is a contribution? One
could think of efforts that lead to the desired end result. From this perspective,
it is acceptable that the CEO has a much higher salary than the average
worker since she contributes more to the business. An engineer who has
contributed with smart technical solutions would be entitled to a fair share
of the profit. But contribution also works the other way around. If you have
contributed to some kind of unethical act in a more direct way, you deserve
more punishment than someone who has taken a more indirect role.
However, in some cases we also want to reward those who have spent
time working for a purpose, even though the direct contribution is not
entirely clear. In some schooling systems, there is one grade for the students'
knowledge and a grade for their effort. So, the one who has really done her
best might get a high "effort" grade but perhaps not a high "outcome" grade.
Sometimes, we want to value the time and effort someone spends.
A potentially productive way to think is to consider which resources
and how much resources one particular individual contributes. Does
the individual contribute time, effort, knowledge, money? How unique
are the resources (implying that unique resources are worth more)? How
relevant are the resources for the outcome? Sometimes, there are very
highly competent people in a project who perhaps still cannot contribute
to the end result.
To sum up, contribution is an important way to decide how much of
the outcome should come to every person, but it is not always clear what a
contribution is.
><(
oc
w
>>-'
>-
z
w
<Cl
::,
>-
V',
<Cl
:z
<(
a:
0
:r:
>-
::,
<(
w
:r:
>-
"
A FAIR SHARE OF THE PROFIT
In the early 2000s, two graduate students did a master's thesis at Volvo Cars. They
developed a software application that could detect if drivers were getting sleepy.
This invention was patented and allowed Volvo Cars to sell a car with the Driver
Alert Control system, which warns drivers who are about to fal l asleep. The two
students were encouraged to apply to Volvo's internal system for innovations and
received about 120,000 SEK for the invention. However, later they realized that they
Chapter 12 Justice an d fai rness
199
r
had the right to the patent. They tried to push Volvo Cars to reward t hem more, but
unsuccessfully. With the support ofThe Swedish Association of Graduate Engineers,
they sued Volvo Cars and asked for 8.7 million SEK each (3 percent of the expected
profits as long as the patent was va lid). In 2015, Volvo Cars and the inventors
reached a settlement. After t he settlement, Volvo Cars changed its contracts with
graduate students so that Volvo Cars will own future inventions made by students.
What is a fair share if you happen to invent something as part of your thesis?
Do you think t hat others contributed to the work that led the students to
invent the Driver Alert Control system? Would they have been able to invent it as
independent researchers (outside Volvo)?
Was it fair of Volvo Cars to amend its cont ract terms with students?
---------------------■
Justice and its relation to other ethical claims
There is much more at stake than fairness when distributing resources.
In a broker company, the issue of fair pay was discussed. In the company,
all employees were paid equally independent of how much business they
generated for the company. Other companies in the same industry paid
a salary based on how much money every broker made for the company.
Although this would probably increase the motivation to work, the company
thought that it would be difficult to say who really made the deal, since work
is often collaborative. In every deal, there would be a debate about who did
what and how much each person contributed. Furthermore, as a broker one
would be more hesitant to let another broker deal with a customer when
taking a vacation, since the customer could potentially like the substitute
broker better. Also, they thought that this could lead to situations where a
young person would earn twice as much as a senior broker in the company.
That m ight feel awkward for both. Given these factors, they decided not to
opt for a performance-based pay scheme, and rather stuck to what they call
a "socialist" principle, where everybody gets the same. This example points
out that there are many more aspects at stake than fairness when deciding
on a pay system. One such aspect is the willingness to create harmonious
relationships in the workplace - a relational ethics. In this example, harmony
is used as an argument for equal pay, but you can also see harmony as created
by pay based on contribution (since those who generate a lot of business but
still get paid as the others will probably not experience harmony).
200
Chapter 12 Justice and f airness
a:
...
......,
::,
<(
a:
w
I-
0---
z
w
0
::,
0---
V'I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
...
::,
<(
w
...
I
g
Another ethical theory that may conflict with fairness based on
contribution is ethics of care. Here, we might want to favour a weaker party
in a group. For example, imagine that you are doing a group assignment
and there is one person who does not contribute. She lacks the language
skills, both orally and in writing. She also seems to lack knowledge and
skills about the topic. Perhaps she is competent, but there is no way to tell.
Furthermore, this person seems upset by things that are not related to her
studies, perhaps conflicts at home. She attended some meetings and wrote
some paragraphs, which you had to rewrite entirely. You might want to
practise ethics of care and put her name on the report.
There may obviously also be power differences which impact on how
resources are distributed. Those with political, economic, or other forms
of power could have a large influence on how resources are distributed,
and their principles for how to distribute are perhaps not based on justice.
INEQUALITIES IN THE ICT VALUE CHAIN
ICT gives users enormous opportunities for learning, communicating, and sharing
experiences. However, as mentioned in the box about the digita l divide, not
everyone is an ICT user. Furthermore, the ICT hardware might also be unequally
distributed in another way. For example, the best, fastest, and most reliable
equipment is probably available in the richest countries. The production of
ICT equipment often takes place in medium-rich countries, such as China. The
resource extraction for ICT, as well as the treatment of electronic waste, is
concentrated in poorer countries. This might suggest that both the user value of
ICT and the environmental consequences (treatment of hazardous e- waste and
resource extraction) are unequa lly distributed.
,_
,_
--'
,_
z
w
0
::,
,_
"'
0
z
<(
a'.
0
I
,_
::,
<(
Elect ronic waste.
Chapter 12 Justice and fairnes s
201
Unfairness and injustice
To get another view of the issue, we could discuss injustice and unfairness,
and such discussions take place all the time and everywhere. Now we have
the concepts of equality, need, and contribution to think with. Regarding
equality, it seems unfair that not everyone is entitled to the same resources,
but even when we accept that wealth is unequally distributed since we value
people's freedom and rights of ownership, great disparities upset us, for
example, that "1 percent" owns "99 percent" of the world's riches.
However, often unfairness concerns the lack of equality of opportunity.
Perhaps not everyone has the same chance to get a particular job. In
employment processes, there is maybe different treatment due to age, sex,
ethnicity, or religious preferences. In Sweden there has been much debate
about how people with not traditionally Swedish names are disfavoured
in employment processes. A substantive form of equality of opportunity
is affirmative action - actions that favour people from underprivileged
groups in employment processes (see also the box "Prima facie duties in
recruitment" in chapter 8). These people m ight otherwise lose out in an
employment process, which is why they should be given a competitive edge
over others. This is also perceived to be unfair by some.
■
.A SENIOR ENGINEER AGAINST DIVERSITY
A senior engineer at Google wrote and circu lated an anti-diversity manifesto
criticizing Goog le's efforts to increase gender and racial diversity. After an
externa l and internal outcry, he was fired. 3
We now briefly review two very well-known thinkers of fairness and justice,
namely John Rawls and Robert Nozick. To develop their own theories of
justice, they draw on parts and pieces of the theories mentioned above, in
this chapter and in other chapters.
cc
=>
0-
<(
cc
w
00-
o-
z
w
c:,
=>
....
VI
c:,
z
<(
a:
0
I
0-
=>
<(
w
I
0-
0
202
Chapter 12 Ju st ice and fa irness
r
John Rawls
a:
::,
....
<(
cc
w
>....
..,
f-
z
w
C
::,
>-
v,
C
John Rawls's 4 theory of justice is explained in the simplest way as a theory
that does not require strict equality, but requires that we care about the
neediest in a society.
First, let us think about how he reached that conclusion. John Rawls
devised a way in which we can ensure, according to him, that a society is
just - the veil of ignorance. But the veil of ignorance could also be used to
create a just organization, company division, or project organization.
Rawls created a thought experiment where he asked us to imagine that
we do not know our place in society, our class, or social status, whether or
not we are rich or poor, strong, beautiful, or smart. We also do not know
how we are as a person, our physical and psychological health. This lack
of knowledge is what is meant by the veil of ignorance, and behind such
a veil, Rawls asked us to create a society we would like to live in. The idea
was to force us to avoid our bias. If I am a man approaching 40 years,
reasonably healt hy, born in Sweden, I would possibly favour a society that
would favour me and my prospective life. But ifI were born elsewhere, with
other physical and psychological capacities, perhaps I would want another
society. So, what kind of society would we design where anyone would be
happy and live a fulfilling life? Rawls created a solution based on a layer
of strict egalitarianism in the sense that each person would have a fully
adequate scheme of basic rights and liberties. Furthermore, he allowed for
inequalities, given that these inequalities satisfied two conditions. First,
that they were attached to positions or offices that anyone could compete
for - which represents equality of opportunity. Second, that they were to
benefit the least advantaged member of society, since behind the veil of
ignorance, these least advantaged members could be us.
Rawls' theory thus counterbalances ethical particularism (whose goal
could be to increase the total happiness in a particular country) as every
increase in total happiness for Rawls must also be accompanied by an
increase in the happiness of the least advantaged person.
z
<(
a:
0
I
>-
::,
<(
w
I
f-
0
Chapter 12 Just ice and fai rness
203
r
DISTRIBUTING PROFITS ACCORDING TO RAWLS'S THEORY
You have just created a company and wonder how the gains from the business
wi ll be fairly distributed. You have worked in organizations where the gains were
distribut ed very unfairly, so you want to make your company fair. You decide to
use the vei l of ignorance as a tool. You should thus create a profit distribution
system that is based on your not knowing what role you have in the company,
of even if you work in the company. To distribute all profits to the owners would
perhaps have been a reasonable solution if you knew that you were the owner
of the company, but not behind the veil of ignorance. Since you do not know
if you wil l be part of the company, you want some of the profit to go to the
society. And imagine that you are not t he owner but an employee ... You continue
your analysis.
Robert Nozick
A competing theory of justice was developed by Robert Nozick. 5 It is a
libertarian theory, which stresses the freedom of individuals (see chapter
10). The main argument is that equality is not needed to create a just society.
Justice is rather that individuals freely can enter contracts with each other
or with organizations to reach their goals. To be forced to pay tax to a
government or municipality that you have not freely entered into a contract
with is thus unfair. Nozick argued for a minimal state which was limited
to the protecting people against force, theft, and fraud, and which was
concerned with enforcing contracts.
Since the focus is on individual freedom, Nozick's theory of justice
allows for great inequalities in society. If your family happens to be much
richer than other families, this is just a fact, and no one has a right to
interfere with that situation. However, if these riches have been acquired in
an unfair way, for example if they were stolen from someone, then it would
of course be unfair. One could naturally problematize how people have
acquired more resources than others. According to the so-called ·w orld
Systems Theory, which is a Marxist theory, rich countries systematically
exploit poorer countries, which leads to masses of wealth being concentrated
in these richer countries. Both trade agreements between countries and
employment contracts between companies and employees are to some
204
Chapter 12 Justice and fa irness
"'
::,
I<(
"'
=
,,-
0
::,
I-
v'\
0
z
<(
cc
0
I
I-
=>
<(
=
I
l-
o
extent voluntary. But more vulnerable nations or people entering into these
contracts are arguably less free than those creating the contracts. All people
are free, but some are more free than others.
■
NOZICK AND THE EXPERIENCE MACHINE
Nozick asked us in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia to think about a machine
that can give us any experiences we wish. Would we prefer this machine to
real life? He believes that if pleasure were the ultimate good (see hedonistic
utilitarianism in chapter 7), then we wou ld want to be hooked up to the machine.
Nozick argues that still we would not want to be plugged into the machine, which
means that pleasure is not the ultimate good. A more modern version of this
thought experiment is found in t he Matrix movies.
-----------------------■
In this chapter, different ways of thinking about justice and fairness have
been introduced. One could think of justice as an equal distribution of
resources, as equality of opportunity, as based on need and contribution.
We have also discussed that fairness is only one of the issues at stake when
you discuss the ethics in a group or society. Sometimes a fair society is a
harmonious one, but sometimes harmony is created by not trying to find
out exactly who contributed what. We also said that care and power can
influence what is perceived as fair. In the end, we briefly presented two wellknown theories about fairness and justice, that of Rawls and that of Nozick.
a:
::,
....
<l'.
cc
UJ
>->--
...,
r-
z
UJ
0
::,
>--
"'
0
z
<l'.
a;:
0
I
>-::,
<l'.
Chapter 12 Justice a nd fairn ess
205
r
STUDY QUESTIONS
2
Exemplify traditional ideas of justice.
What is distributive, retributive, and compensatory justice?
3
What is strict egalitarianism? Give some examples of whether, when
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
and why we should all have access to the same resources.
What is equality of opportunity?
What is the difference between formal/procedural equality
of opportunity and substantive equality of opportunity?
Give examples.
Is need a relevant factor when we distribute something? What
kind of needs?
What is luck egalitarianism?
Is contribution a relevant factor when we distribute something?
What kind of contributions?
What conflicts exist between justice and other ethical values?
What is unfairness/injustice? Give examples of unjust things and
practices and try to relate them to theories of fairness and justice.
What is the veil of ignorance?
Explain the difference between Tohn Rawls's and Robert Nozick's
theories of justice.
a:
::,
,_
<(
a:
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
C
::>
,_
V'I
C
z
<(
cc
0
I
,_
::>
<(
w
I
,_
(;l
206
Chapter 12 Justice and fa irness
r
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU:
JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS IN PRACTICE
One main point here, you think, is related to the equa l availability of good care
(equality argument). Given its higher price, the Life Partner will be bought by fewer
than the Helper. If you develop the Life Partner, the "robot divide" between those who
have a robot and those who do not will be larger. Another main point is that you think
that the effects in this matrix are somewhat unfairly distributed. It seems as if the
implementers and the company are benefitt i ng more than t he care-givers and users in
the development of both robots. You start to think about power and that it seems that
powerful actors, such as private businesses and implementers, might want to promote
t he robot technologies. Furthermore, the Helper outcompetes physical work (and
we know that "simple jobs" might very well be needed in the future), while the Life
Partner might outcompete both physical and socia l work.
►
Chapter 12 Justice and fai rness
207
____. Own company
.....,
C
-e
"'
a..
~
::i
Users
Care-givers
Implementers
+ Potential growth, profitability, and fame (L-M)
+ Will appreciate spending
more t ime with a robot (Ml
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
- Since t he cost is higher
than for the Helper, the
Life Partner might not
reach a mass market (H,
at least in t he short run)
- Some might feel unhappy
with the robot, particularly
if t hey feel that it replaces
human contact (H)
- Might be outcompeted by the robot (M)
+ This robot will
be a solution to
the problem of
understaffing
., - How do we make sure t hat
...
~
Q.
0
.:;
.,>
C
implementers only implement the technology if all
users give t heir consent?
Not doing so might affect
the company negatively
+ Potentia I growth, profitability, and fame (M-H)
.....,
Q.
.:;
:c
..,
...
~
Q.
..,
..,
..!=
>
C
.,...
...
~
+ Potentia I for mass
market penetration (Ml
- How do we make sure
that implementers only
implement the technology
if all users give their
consent? Not doing
do so might affect the
company negatively
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
"ij
Q.
0
.:;
>
.,
...
"C
- Lack of potential profits
and good reputat ion from
the new products (H)
0
z
208
- It is expensive
and could not be
implemented on
a mass market
- This could violate human
rights in that it does not
respect users' dignity. Might
necessitate an alternative
care option for such users.
However, this could also
be a sign of conservatism
which should be combatted
+ The robot might help with
physical tasks in a better
way than humans (IH)
- Fear that t he robot will
hurt them physically (H,
at least in the short ru n)
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
+ The robot assists
the care-givers,
rather than
replacing them (M)
- This could violate human
rights, similarly to t he
Life Partner (see above)
- More physical jobs
might disappear (H)
+ Receive care from people (H)
- Continue to have
a stressful job (H)
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care -givers (H)
+ They will have
jobs (H)
- Perhaps this lack of
care- givers can lead to
degrading healthcare
+ Good negotiating
position for
salary (H)
Chapter 12 Justice and fa irness
+ This robot will
be a solution to
the problem of
understaffing
+ Better economy for
healthcare organizations (particularly
in t he public sector)
- Will continue
to use existing
technology and look
for alternatives
Impact on you as a
virtuous person
Nietzschean
perspectives
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
+ The robot could
contribute to
revitalizing humanity,
more than t he Helper
- You wonder if
this is the right
understanding, since
the robot seems to be
too complex a solution
to the problem.
engineering virtues
- You could contribute
to structural violence
if people are made
redundant, but less so
than if you develop
t he Life Partner
- You will not contribute
to society as a
virtuous engineer (in
the short run)
- Goes against
role models
Fairness and justice
+ The robots could
possibly provide care
- Unequal availabi lity
of care
- One cannot have
true relationships
with robots
- Positive andl@aJiv~
consequences are
unequally distributed
Unclear impact on
the user's other
relationships, for
example with her family
- You could contribute
to structural violence
if peo pie are made
redundant
+ You will exhibit
Relationships
- You are perhaps stuck
in a mentality of utility
- t hat we should assist
rather than t ransform
+ The robot will allow
more time for
care provided by
human caregivers
+ Will leave other relationships unaffected
- The alternative
represents a form of
slave morality, which
impedes development
- The absence of true
care continues to
be prevalent
+ More equal availability
of care (given the
lower price)
- Positive and negative
consequences are
unequally distributed
+ Al]_Qtopl~now have
a£S:ess to simil.fil <;_are
+ Positive and negative
consequences are
equally distributed
Chapter 12 Justice and fairness
209
r
Chapter 13
Environmental ethics
ENGINEERS WORK WIT H TECHNOLOGIES that have an environmental
a:
::::,
....
<t:
a:
........
....z
UJ
~
UJ
0
::::,
....
V,
0
z
<t:
cc:
0
I
....
::::,
impact in the short or long term, and it is therefore important to think about
these issues. Also as private persons, we are concerned about environmental
issues. Environmental ethics is a distinct field within ethics. It can be seen
as an applied ethics in the sense that theories from ethics (such as the ones
studied in this book) are applied to environmental issues.
There are various aspects of environmental issues and some do not relate
to ethics. Studying and learning about the environment, exploring the more
natural science dimension of environmental issues, does not pertain to the
domain of ethics, even though such facts are important for making ethical
decisions (see chapter 6, step 2 in the synthetic model). Tools such as the
life-cycle analysis (LCA) are also not about environmental ethics. However,
how we design and perform an LCA can have ethical implications; for
example, how the boundary conditions are set (what is included and what is
excluded in the analysis) and if we pay attention to how the environmental
impact is distributed in space and time (fairly or unfairly). Furthermore,
an ethical take on environmental issues would be if and how we do take
responsibility for our environmental impact, or if we try to avoid taking
such responsibility (see chapter 4).
<t:
UJ
....
I
"
211
THE TOYOTA PRIUS IS LESS ENVIRONMENTALLY
FRIENDLY THAN A HUMMER?
Could a hybrid vehicle such as the Toyota Prius be less environmenta lly friendly
than a Hummer? The report "From dust to dust" from CNW Marketing Research 1
argued that. Even though the Prius had superior fuel economy, t he entire life
cycle required more energy than that of the Hummer, it was claimed. The report
received much interest. However, there were some prob lematic assumptions
that the article was based on .2 First, it was assumed that a Prius will last
175,000 kilometres while a Hummer wou ld last 610,000 kilometres. Second, it
was assumed that the Prius had nickel batteries with material mined in Ontario
and then shipped to Japan for assembly, which was a flawed assumption. CNW
Marketing Research had to revise their numbers and the Prius was then deemed
more environmentally friendly t han the Hummer. A similar debate is t aking place
today between electric cars and cars with combustion engines.
The ethica l issues related to such debates are to describe and argue for the
facts and assumptions accurately and with no deception. Perhaps anot her ethical
issue would be not to spread misleading information, which the Prius vs. Hummer
study contained.
A brief background to environmental ethics
The subject of ethics is constantly chan ging depending on the issues
that the current population, and its academics, finds interesting, urgent,
and important. For a long time, human beings were not concerned with
environmental issues in the way we are concerned today. Certainly, one
could trace environmental ethics back to natural philosophy such as the
Japanese Shinto tradition, which respects spirits harboured in trees, rocks,
and other things. Furthermore, the Buddhist tradition with its belief in the
interdependence of all beings could also be seen as an embryo of a concern
for the environment. However, these traditions were likely to be concerned
with the local environment, in contrast to today when we fear that the
conditions of the entire Earth will be radically altered and that Earth will
be ultimately uninhabitable, not least because of global warming.
Continuing with the link between environmental ethics and religions,
perhaps the most well-known thinker who has described the relationship
between humans and nature in the Ch ristian tradition is Lynn White. 3 He
212
Chapter 13
Env iron ment al et hics
cc
::,
....
<(
cc
w
....
....
....z
~
w
0
::,
....
V'>
0
2
<(
cc
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
w
....
0
I
Effects of global warming?
c:c
...<
......
......z
...
::,
c:c
w
w
0
::,
"'
0
z
<
"'
0
::c
...
::,
<
w
...
::c
I>
wrote that the main strands of Judeo-Christian thinking have encouraged
the overexploitation of nature and human superiority over animals and
nature (see, for example, Genesis 1: 27- 8). The environment is thus viewed as
having instrumental value for human beings (see chapter 1). Hence, nature
does not have intrinsic value in this tradition. Similarly, the worldview is
anthropocentric, putting the human in the centre.
It is often said that the values embodied by the Christian tradition the superiority of humans over nature - are what have led to the current
situation where the earth is strained. Perhaps the basic mindset is one factor
that leads to environmental destruction, but are there also other factors
(psychological, biological, economic, and political).
The real concern for global environmental issues arose on a broad scale
during the 1960s. Rachel Carson's4 book Silent Spring, about how pesticides
such as DDT became concentrated th roughout the food chain, was very
influential. Ecologist Paul Ehrlich5 warned about the environmental impact
of population growth. These concerns were rearticulated in the Limits to
Growth study, made by the Club of Rome6 in 1972.
Philosopher Hans Jonas7 pleaded for the urgency of creating an
Chapter 13
Environmenta l ethics
2 13
r
environmental eth ics for our technological civilization. The reason was
that modern technology had turned into a threat of total d isaster. Our
new technological skills and knowledge had given us the ability to cause
irreversible damage to the planet. Not least the risk of global nuclear war
was seen as a fundamental threat. A single form oflife - human beings - is
in a position to endanger all forms oflife, our own included, and this has
not been the case in the past. Therefore, we have responsibilities towards
the biosphere - ethics can no longer be linked to issues between human
beings. The imperative of responsibility is the duty for human beings to be
and to lead a life worthy of being called human, and for this purpose nature
is needed. Jonas argues for a principle of precaution (see chapter 7) as a basic
foundation of the responsibility in our times.
■
ANTHROPOCENE AND POLLUTER PAYS
Anthropocene usually refers to the period of history roughly from 1800 when
human beings have a significant impact upon Earth's geology and ecosystems.
Given t hat humans have such an impact (see t he discussion on responsibility in
chapter 3) on the Earth, we cannot avoid responsibil ity for environmental issues.
The impact component of responsibility is ailso behind t he "polluter pays
principle" - the one causing the damage is liable to do something about it. The
producer of ICT equipment needs to dea l with e-waste, the producer of packaged
products needs to deal with the packaging waste, and so on.
Given that these global concerns have been aggravated during the past few
decades, it is not surprising that env ironmental ethics has also received
significant interest.
a:
Sustainable development and sustainability
Currently, environmental issues are often discussed as issues of"sustainable
development" or "sustainability". Indeed, these newer concepts bridge the
gap between ethical and environmental issues. The original definition
of sustainable development from 1987 was that sustainable development
is the kind of development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 8
2 14
Chapter 13
Environ men t al ethics
::,
....
<(
a:
w
.....
....
...,
,_
z
w
C
::,
.....
v'>
C
z
<(
a:
C
I
,_
::,
<(
w
I
....
G
0::
::,
><(
0::
w
>>~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
v',
0
z
<(
0::
0
I
>::,
<(
There are several links we can make to the concepts we have studied
so far. For example, there is a justice dimension to the problem. But here
it does not only concern justice between the current members of society
but also towards future generations. This is called intergenerational justice.
How much resources are we allowed to use today for the future generations
to still be able to meet their own needs? Which needs will they have? What
can we indeed know about future generations? Although we might not
know a lot about future generations, they will most definitely have basic
needs for clean water, food, and shelter. Then they will have interests and
our obligations are to strii.ve for that they can realize those interests (an
ethics of freedom). But we also need to think about the present, since we
also do not fulfil all the needs we have in the present for all parts of the
population. The concept of sustainable development plays an important
role in the public debate, for governments, private businesses, and others.
The Sustainable Development Goals9 (SDGs) were developed in 2015
to deal with global issues and to promote the welfare, happiness, and
liberty for all.
Although the concept of sustainable development and, more recently,
sustainability have a basis in environmental issues, both concepts have been
expanded and developed to include a range of issues. This is apparent in the
SDGs, which span from social issues, such as to alleviate poverty, improve
education and gender equality, environmental issues such as clean water
and energy, to economic issues concerning decent work and economic
growth and innovation. Sustainability is increasingly seen as consisting of
development in three dimensions: economic, social, and environmental.
The social dimension of sustainability is very similar to our discussion of
ethics - a concern for freedom, justice, fairness, consequences, duties, and
so on. The economic dimension means the creation of jobs, a fair return on
investment, etc. The environmental aspects concern the biosphere.
An honest commitment to sustainable development or sustainability
would be an ethical imperative. And, indeed, it is difficult to find people who
are against sustainability. But there are critics who claim that sustainability
talk is just "greenwashing" and "window-dressing" and that nothing
changes except for the way we talk about things. Perhaps one cares about
the environment as long as one feels good about it, or that one does it to
Chapter 13
Environm ental ethics
215
get status in society (compare with the reasons for taking responsibility in
chapter 3). And even though we do take environmental issues seriously, one
often has to weigh them in relation to other values (in the synthetic model).
TECHNOFIX FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
Often we try to solve ethical problems by means of technology. We have seen
examples of such solutions in the book, for example when smart systems replace
the human need to switch off the light, when a hawk-eye replaces the need for
human judgement in tennis and badminton, and when a machine replaces the
need for (potentially corrupt) ca r inspectors. There are many who think that
environmenta l problems may be solved by technology. Perhaps the most int rusive
of such technologies is climate geoengineering, for example, injecting aerosols
into the atmosphere to deflect sunlight. A critic has mentioned that believing
that technology wil l save us is th inking that an escalator would have liberated
Sisyphus. What do you think about this?
When researchers have discussed the relationship between economic,
social, and environmental issues, some have said that we are living too much
according to the Mickey Mouse model, where Mickey's face symbolizes
our interest in economic sustainability and his two ears represent our
interest in social and environmental sustainability (see figure below). His
face is bigger than the ears, which shows the prioritizations that we have.
Social
sustai nability
Environment
Environment
Society
Society
ac
:::,
I<(
ac
w
....
....
....
~
Economic
sustainability
Environmental
sustainability
z
w
C,
:::,
:;:,
C,
z
<(
ac
The "Mickey
Mouse" model
Weak sustainability
Strong
sustainability
0
:r:
I-
:::,
<(
w
:r:
Different sustainability models.
216
Chapter 13 Env iron mental ethics
I-
"
r
Another visualization shows overlapping circles, where sustainability
means that the three dimensions work together harmoniously. This is
called weak sustainability. You could also visualize sustainability as three
circles. That the environmental dimension is the outer circle means that
the environment is the fundamental basis for our existence. The societal
system is a part of the environmental system. And the economy is a part of
the societal system. This model, which represents strong sustainability, tells
us that we cannot think about the society or the economy without thinking
about the environment. A well-functioning environmental system is a sine
qua non for social and economic systems to exist.
Having discussed that environmental issues are seen as increasingly
important, we now turn to why animals and other natural entities should
be seen as agents with a moral value.
The moral standing of animals
and other things
ac
::,
....
<(
ac
........w
....z
~
w
0
=:,
....
V,
0
z
<(
"'
0
:r:
....
::,
<(
In the chapter on consequentialism, we read that Jeremy Bentham argued
that the only criterion for ascribing moral value to a being is its capacity
to suffer. Peter Singer agrees and argues that we should take into account
the preferences of beings who are able to suffer and feel pleasure: sentient
beings. Other philosophers, such as Tom Regan,10 have argued that what
is really at stake is that animals are "subjects-of-a-life", living beings with
beliefs, desires, perception, memory, emotions, a sense of the future, and
an ability to initiate action - to act rather than just react. While Singer is
a utilitarian, Regan is a deontological thinker, holding that all subjects-ofa-life have rights. If animals are included in ethics, we need to think more
carefully about actions that affect the environment. For example, depleting
biodiversity is of course directly or indirectly detrimental to animal species.
There is also a significant debate between those who hold that moral
standing should be given to individuals of a species and those who claim
that what has moral standing are the species themselves. The latter would
argue that killing the last wolf in the world is less ethically acceptable than
just killing one of millions of dogs. Using such an argument, many have
argued that we need to prioritize endangered species.
Chapter 13
environmenta l eth ics
217
But what about those species that perhaps cannot be seen as a subjectof-a-life but still have a direction towards life, such as a growing tree?
Since they strive for development, one could argue that we are not right in
affecting this striving. Such claims lead to significant reductions of human
freedom. If all living things have a moral standing, human beings would
be significantly hampered in their lives - perhaps we would not be allowed
to eat or pull out weeds in our garden. To counteract this situation, some
have created hierarchies of various animals (where humans are at the top),
followed by plants, and then non-living things, which to some extent make
us return to the traditions that environmental ethics tried to escape.
According to some thinkers, we are still moving on a too individualistic
level even if we talk about animal species. We should rather consider the
moral value of holistic (whole) ecosystems. Aldo Leopold was an early
proponent of environmental ethics with his land ethics that he developed
in the 194os.11 He held that a thing is right insofar as it tends to preserve the
integrity, stability, and beauty of the ecosystem. The ecosystem is seen as
an interaction of non-living and living beings, flows of energy, unending
circuits of life and death. Like ideal utilitarianism, this ethics seems to
proceed from the fact that we, as humans, feel that we want to protect the
ecosystem. It is not any characteristic of the ecosystem itself (for example,
it being a subject-of-a-life) that leads to the duty to protect it. However, one
understands easily that in order to preserve humans, animals, and other
living beings, there is a need to adopt a holistic perspective.
THE NEW RIGHT OF RIVERS
In 2017, the third largest river in New Zealand was granted the same right s as a
human being. The Whanganui tribe sees itself as one and t he same with the river,
and harming the river would mean harming the community. The lead negotiator
of the Whang anui tribe said:
a:
::,
....
<(
a:
....
f-
f-
z
We have fought to fi nd an approximation in law so t hat al l others can
understand that from our perspective t reating the river as a living entity is t he
correct way to approach it, as an indivisible whole, instead of the traditional
model for t he last 100 years of t reating it from a perspective of ownership and
management. 12
w
C
::,
fV)
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::,
<(
w
I
,__
0
218
Chapter 13
Environ ment al ethics
After this, the Ganges river in India and its main tributary, the Yamu na, was
granted the same rights as a person in March 2017. 13 This will most likely have an
impact on t he possibilit ies of industry operat ing in the area.
Deep ecology
Deep ecology, a theory that is very well-known within environmental ethics,
is according to its proponents a more profound and thorough way to think
about environmental issues. Rather than the "shallow" ecology movement,
which often proceeds from the rich person's relatively shortsighted needs
whether it concerns pollution or resource use, the deep ecology movement
views all life as having intrinsic value. Even the concept of "life" gets a broader
meaning in deep ecology and comprises even what biologists classify as nonliving, for example rivers, landscapes, and ecosystems. Thus, the theory is
biocentric (puts the biosphere at the centre) rather than anthropocentric. In
contrast to some theories extending moral standing from humans to other
forms oflife, the deep ecology movement takes its starting point in nature.
A source of inspiration for deep ecologists such as Arne Nress14 comes
~
>-
z
w
0
:::,
>-
v-,
0
z
<1:
cc
0
:r:
>-
::,
<1:
w
:r:
~
Deep ecology.
Chapter 13
Environ mental ethics
219
from those who live close to nature and experience the smallness and
relative irrelevance of humanity, for example the Sherpa culture in the
Himalayas, which regards certain mountains as sacred, refusing to venture
on them. When you have understood. the smallness of humans in relation
to nature it is selfish and unfounded to think that humans should be given
a special status over all other life.
Nress's deep ecology is based on his own fundamental philosophy, called
ecosophy T. It is basically about how all life has a right to self-actualization.
Not only do human beings seek self-actualization. Even other forms of
life have a will to self-actualize; for example, a seed contains some kind
of movement towards becoming a plant. Inspired by the Buddhist idea of
the non-permanent self (anatman), Nress argues that humans should have
a broader view of the self. Instead of having an individualistic view, he
says that we should see the self as a holistic self which includes all life on
the planet (and beyond). This not only leads to us caring more about the
environment, but also that we will experience a more meaningful existence.
Besides being a worldview with ethical implications, deep ecology
is a political movement with a set of platform principles which all deep
ecologists could agree upon (see box).
THE PLATFORM PRINCIPLES OF THE DEEP ECOLOGY MOVEMENT
1 All living beings have intrinsic value.
2 The diversity and richness of life has intrinsic value.
3
Except to satisfy vital needs, mankind does not have the right to reduce this
diversity and this richness.
4 It would be better for human beings if there were fewer of them, and much
better for other living creatures.
5 Today the extent and nature of human interference in the various ecosystems
are not sustainable, and the lack of sustainability is rising.
6
a:
:::,
I-
..:
a:
.....
I-
Decisive improvement requires considerable changes: social, economic,
.....
technological, and ideological.
C
:::,
7 An ideological change would essentially entail seeking a better quality of life
rather than a raised standard of living.
8 Those who accept the aforementioned points are responsible for trying to
z
w
.....
V)
C
z
..:
a:
0
I
1-
contribute directly or indirectly to the realization of the necessary changes.15
:::,
..:
w
I
.....
0
220
Chapter 13
Environ mental ethics
This chapter has concerned environmental ethics, which can be seen as
a subfield of ethics, like engineering ethics, business ethics, or the like.
The theories used are therefore often similar to those described in the rest
of this book.
STUDY QUESTIONS
:::,
"'
....
w
"'
r<(
....
-'
r-
z
w
0
:::,
r-
v"l
Q
z
<(
1 Which aspects of ethics do or do not concern the environment?
Which parts of environmental sciences do or do not concern ethics?
2
Are electric cars more environmentally friendly than cars with
combustion engines?
3 How does Lynn White describe the Christian tradition and its
implication for environmental issues?
4 What happened in the 1960s and 1970s, which had an impact on
environmental ethics?
5 What is the imperative of responsibility?
6 What is sustainability and sustainable development?
7 What are the needs of future generations?
8 What are the sustainable development goals?
9 Think about the different visualizations of sustainability. What
do you think about these different models? Are they descriptive
or normative?
Do animals, plants, species, and holistic systems have a
10
moral standing?
11
What is deep ecology?
12
What is the difference between anthropocentric and
biocentric theories?
13 Do you agree with the platform principles of the deep
ecology movement?
c,::
0
....:::,
I
<(
w
I
....
"
Chapter 13
Environ mental ethics
221
THE LIFE PARTNER, THE HELPER, AND YOU :
ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN PRACTICE
The environmenta l discussion has so far been absent from your ana lysis. When
it comes to t he robot project, you do not think that environmental aspects
are f undamental but re-t hinking it, you realize t hat the resource extraction,
manufacturing, and recycling of care robots indeed have an environmental impact.
....
QJ
.......
C
"'
0..
~
::i
QJ
...a.
J::
0
.:;
>
QJ
C
Own company
Users
Care-givers
Implement ers
+ Potential growth, profitability, and fame (L- M)
+ Will appreciate spending
more time with a robot (M)
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
- Since the cost is higher
than for t he Helper, the
Life Partner might not
reach a mass market (H,
at least in the short run)
- Some might feel unhappy
with t he robot, particularly
if they feel t hat it replaces
human contact (H)
- Might be outcompeted by t he robot (M)
+ This robot will
be a solut ion to
the problem of
understaffing
- How do we make sure that
implementers only implement the technology if all
users give their consent?
Not doing so might affect
the company negatively
+ Could lead to broader
economic development
+ Potent ial growth, profitability, and fame (M- H)
....
QJ
+ Potential for mass
market penetration (M)
.,a. - How do we make sure
:I:
QJ
...a.
J::
0
.:;
>
QJ
C
that implementers only
implement the technology
if all users give their
consent? Not doing
do so might affect t he
company negatively
- It is expensive
and could not be
implemented on
a mass market
- This could violate human
rights in that it does not
respect users' dignity. Might
necessitate an alternative
care option for such users.
However, this could also
be a sign of conservatism
which should be combatted
+ The robot might help with
physical t asks in a better
way t han humans (H)
- Fear that the robot will
hurt them physically (H,
at least in the short run)
+ Help to lower
stress (H)
+ The robot assists
the care-givers,
rather t han
replacing them (M)
- This could violate human
rights, similarly to the
Life Partner (see above)
- More physical jobs
might disappear (H)
+ Receive care from people (H)
- Continue to have
a stressful job (HJ
+ This robot will
be a solution to
the problem of
understaffing
+ Better economy for
healthcare organizations (part icularl·t
in the public sector)
+ Could lead to broader
economic development
....
QJ
...
J::
"ii
a.
0
.:;
>
QJ
"C
...
0
+ New, better ideas might
come up, which should
be investigated (H)
- Lack of potential profits
and good reputation from
the new products (H)
z
222
Chapter 13
- Continue to suffer
because there are too
few care-givers (H)
- Perhaps this lack of
care-givers can lead to
degrading healthcare
Environment al ethics
+ They will have
jobs (H)
+ Good negotiating
position for
salary (H)
- Will continue
to use existing
technology and look
for alternatives
r
This would mean that there are some negative consequences related to developing
both the Life Partner or the Helper. Given its smaller sales volumes, the Life Partner
will lead to lower impact. However, even if you do not develop such robots, it is
possible that others will develop a similar robot for mass use and thus cause a similar
environmental impact.
Thinking broadly, you also realize that the production of robots could lead to
positive effects on the economy more broadly. Your company would benefit directly,
Impact on you as
a virtuous person
Nietzschean
perspectives
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
+ The robot could
contribute to
revitalizing
humanity, more
than the Helper
- You wonder if
t his is t he right
understanding,
since t he robot
seems to be too
complex a solution
to the problem
- You could
contribute to
structural violence
if people are
made redundant,
but less so than
if you develop
t he Ufe Part ner
- You will not
contribute to
society as a
virtuous engineer
(in the short run)
- Goes against
role models
Fairness and justice
+ The robots
could possibly
provide care
- Unequal
availability of care
- One cannot have
true relationships
with robots
- Positive and
negative consequences are unequally
distributed
Environmental
impact
- A widespread use
of the robot will
lead to greater
environmental
impact
+ Somewhat less
impact than
the Helper
Unclear impact on
the user's other
relationships, for
example with
her family
- You could
contribute to
structura I violence
if people are
made redundant
+ You will exhibit
engineering virtues
Relationships
- You are perhaps
stuck in a mentality
of utility - that we
shouId assist rather
than transform
+ The robot will allow
more time for
ca re provided by
human caregivers
+ More equal
+ Will leave other
rela tionships
unaffected
- Positive and
negative consequences are unequally
distributed
- The alternative
represents a form
of slave morality,
which impedes
development
- The absence of
true care continues
to be prevalent
+ All people now
have access to
similar care
availability of
care (given the
lower price)
+ Positive and
negative
consequences are
equally distributed
Chapter 13
- The widespread
use of the robot
will lead to greater
environmental
impact
+ You will not
contribute
to increased
resource use
- Other companies
might develop
products that have
the same impact
Environmental eth ics
223
►
but there could also be a cluster of companies growing around your company, whether
suppliers of parts and subsystems, or competit ors. Remembering that it is OK to
be recursive, you decide to add this. You think that your matrix is already complex
enough, so you decide to see this broader economic impact as a sub- aspect of the
stakeholder "own company".
You also wonder if there are any other eithical issues that you have yet not covered
in your matrix, but you cannot come to think of any.
You now have quite a complex matrix. If you just show this to someone, it might
be seen as difficult to understand, but since you have undergone the process
of creating it, you understand what it is about. Wit h this matrix, you cou ld also
explain to another person the way you thought. You think that the process has been
fairly rewa rding and you have learned something, not only about the issue but also
about yourself. Now, t he challenge is to make the decision. You remember from
earlier in your ethics course that there were different ideas about how to make a
decision about an ethical issue, namely to quantify al l the consequences into one
measure, to do a mu lti-criteria analysis where one compares alternatives with
separate measures, to introduce thresholds for each dimension, to make a random
choice between some alternatives, and to reason oneself to a conclusion. You do
not see the possibi lity of converting the consequences into measures, and you do
not believe in a random choice. You cou ld use the t hreshold idea, for example, that
we should not choose an option that might lead to human rights violations. In that
case, both the Life Partner and the Helper could maybe be discarded, but also the
third option - not t o develop either.
In the end, you decide that the Helper is the right way to go, first and foremost
because it leads to great positive impact for many people and to a greater extent
aims at assisting rather than outcompeting caregivers. You take your computer
where you have the matrix and ca ll for a meeting wit h your col leagues.
224
Chapter 13
Environmen ta l et hics
r
Chapter 14
Action and beyond
IN CHAPTER 1, ETHICS IN ENGINEERING was introduced and, more
specifically, the process developed throughout the book: awareness (chapter
2), responsibility (chapters 3-5), critical thinking (chapters 6-13), and action
(chapter 14). Now you know the basic judgement and decision-making models
in ethics, and you have also filled the models with content (consequences,
deontology, virtues, freedom, relations, justice, and environmental concerns).
You have learned that when you need to make reasoned judgements or
decisions concerning ethics, it is a good idea to think the issue through,
following the synthetic model - a structured, recursive, and visualized
approach, in a constant dialogue with ethical theory.
Ethical action following a judgement
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
cc:
0
I
::,
«
w
I
>0
When you have made a reasoned decision, it is time to act. The standpoint of
the book is that ethics can never only be about reasoning and thinking, but
also needs to concern action. This applies to most fields in the engineering
sciences. When you design a building, a road, or a bridge, you then try to
build it more or less according to plan.
In some of the theories we have surveyed, the part concerning ethical
action is trivialized. It seems enough to just identify the right way to act and
then "just do it". For example, in Collste's framework, action is not really
225
r
Just do it!
discussed - it is supposed to follow naturally from the ethical judgement.
Similarly, in the ethical cycle, the action just flows from the decision.
In the autonomy matrix, the action is not really part of the model. The
various ethical theories in chapters 7-13 are often concerned about thinking
rather than acting.
The fundamental viewpoint regarding ethical action is to avoid weakness
of will, acrasia. In other words, we should do what we know that we should
do after thinking critically- not something else. An example of the latter is a
scene from the movie Adaptation, where the protagonist, screenwriter Charlie
Kaufman, takes his friend Amelia to her home. He likes her very much. She
invites him in, but Charlie declines - not because he does not want to but
because of his lack of self-confidence. Sitting in his car, he thinks:
a:
::,
...
.....,
<(
a:
w
I-
1-
Why didn't I go in? I'm such a chicken. I'm such an idiot. I should have
kissed her. I've blown it. I should just go and knock on her door and just
kiss her. It would be romantic. It would be something we could someday
tell our kids. I'm gonna do that right now.
z
w
C
::,
,-
VI
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
...
::,
<(
w
While thinking this, he drives away.
2 26
Chapter 14 Ac t ion and beyond
I
0
Ethical action over time: a roadmap
w
:r:
..
>-
Ethical action, not related to one decision but over the long run, is according
to S0ren Kierkegaard (see chapter 10) about letting ideals affect one's life.
As virtue ethics implies, it is about gradually and processually approaching
a virtuous life. It is about improving oneself, strengthening one's positive
sides and trying to counteract the negative.
Perhaps you have done things that you regret, or at least that you would
do differently ifyou did them today. It could be that you break ideals that you
really believe in or rationalize your actions too much. Ethical action over time
means realizing that it is possible to go beyond the descriptive - how one is
at present - to overcome oneself. To keep acting against one's beliefs leads to
a lack of authenticity and "bad faith", as Sartre called it, in other words that
your actions are an expression oflack of freedom (see chapter 10).
A potential way to support ethical action is to create an ethical
roadmap for oneself. It consists of a description of the current situation
(the descriptive), a description of your normative ideals, and a description
of how to get there. Thus, first you should think about how you currently act
and think. This probably depends on a mixture of various things, ranging
from moral education at home, at school, through leisure activities, to
moral learning in friendship and at work. Schumacher1 calls this "the dark
ages", since we sometimes do not reflect about the moral values we inherit
from various sources.
The main tenet here is the ancient Greek saying "know thyself", which is
of course easier said than done. The first component is thus a descriptive list
of practices you would be willing to change (even better, a list of practices
including things that you realize that you should want to change). Perhaps
you think that you are not courageous enough. Or that you support a social
system you do not think is good, a system that might cause structural
violence (see chapter 9).
Then one could think about how one would like to be from a more
normative perspective. The whole process starts from the simple question:
"Am I happy with myself, from an ethical perspective?" Here one departs
from "the dark ages" by trying to take control and shape one's ethical
character. Normatively, you could create goals - how you want to change
Chapter 14 Action and beyond
227
these practices, such as "I ought to be more courageous." These ideals would
be represented in the reviewed ethical theory (chapters 7- 13). It is obviously
not necessary to draw on these particular ideals. When you choose ideals
you also do not choose other ideals. One should try to think about why and
how one makes this choice. For example, if your normative ideal is to earn
as much money as possible for yourself, you would probably need to think
about why you do not choose to live according to other normative ideals.
It is not obvious that one needs to change. Perhaps you are perfectly happy
with how you behave - you never do anything that you see as unethical,
and there is a perfect correspondence between the descriptive and the
normative. In that case, you could still describe the current situation, which
is the same as the normative situation, and describe how you are going to
ensure that your actions and thoughts will not change.
The third component is how to get there - how to go from the descriptive
to the normative. From the perspective of this simple model, ethical action
in the long term means doing exactly that. If achieved, the normative would
then be the new description of the way you are. So, if you want to be more
courageous, you might ask: "How can I become more courageous?" ·w ell,
you could t ry to overcome some of your fears, and then take it to the next
level. Which fears could you start with? How can you prepare yourself for
overcoming them?
■
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN LOGGING GOOD AND BAD ACTIONS
Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, created a
list of virt ues (similar to the normative ideals mentioned above), which he would
try to practice. He believed that he could not practicse all of them at the same
time, so each week he focused on one virtue. Every evening he performed a selfcc
exam ination of his behaviour with respect to the virtue in focus and marked in a
::,
,._
<(
little notebook how the day had gone - whether or not he was virtuous.2
cc
w
,,._
_,
,-
z
w
0
::,
,-
Ideals and how to relate to them
V'>
0
z
<(
Ethical action thus concerns introducing ideals into your life. But what if
the ideals are too demanding? Simon Critchley held that ethics is infinitely
demanding and we will always fail to live up to our ideals (see chapter 4).
228
Chapter 14 Action an d beyond
cc
0
,._
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
,__
0
r
But how should we act in relation to this failure? One way would be to go
the cynical route - if we cannot fulfil the demands of ethics, then we can
completely disregard ethics and only concentrate on our own well-being.
We are thus cynical in relation to the ideals. Perhaps we use strategies of
rationalization and ways to avoid taking responsibility.
Another attitude is the tragic one. Here, we internalize the failure to
live up to our ideals and make it a part of our personality. As in an ancient
Greek tragedy, we realize that we cannot resolve any conflicts, that we must
always break principles, and we feel unhappy about it. In the tragic response
to our shortcomings, we are always depressed, knowing that we have failed
and will continue failing to live up to our ideals.
A third attitude is the comical one. Here we see our shortcomings as
comical. We try to do our best, but we cannot always live according to our
principles. Rather than responding tragically, we laugh at our shortcomings,
but not in a contemptuous, cynical way. We keep pushing, we keep trying,
but we are also light-hearted about the process.
Perhaps, another more down-to-earth approach would be to set more
achievable ideals. We should of course be ambitious in the way we set
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
........
....z
goals, but at the same time, we can create a third component that is less
demanding, which acknowledges that it is a long process, with small steps.
Perhaps this strategy tells us that ethics is indeed about very hard work, but
that if you want to be good at something, whether it is maths, management,
or engineering, you need to put in some hard work and reflection. This is
an ambitious strategy, but it is not infinitely demanding. We of course have
to accept our shortcomings, to accept the way we are, to relax and think
that some things cannot be changed, and to not feel ashamed of failure. But
while we think in this light-hearted way, the ideals are still there pushing
you forward. This strategy allows for an acceptance of the way we are, but
not a full celebration of it.
~
~
0
::,
....
v"I
0
z
The linear process becomes circular
<t:
cc:
0
....I
::,
<t:
You now have your roadmap, you know where you are and where you
are heading. But the world changes and you change with it. Your actions
become habitual. When we have decided to buy organic food, these actions
Chapter 14 Action and beyond
229
become habits. We do not engage in a process of critical thinking every time
we are faced with a decision to buy food. Our actions flow automatically.
We create a sense of what is right and wrong. Perhaps we gradually even
build a wall of obviousness around ourselves. Our emotions focus around
this new conviction.
But it is important not to be too closed. We cannot think about
everything we do all the time, but at the same time we cannot remove
awareness, responsibility, and critical thinking from our lives. In other
words, we need to be open and closed at the same time. There are some
risks of closure particularly related to a profession like engineering. In
chapter 1, it was said that the competence that defines the engineer is a
reason for why she has to take responsibility. But the opposite could perhaps
also be true. We need to think carefully about what competence leads to,
since competence is often related to power. Some have said that "power
corrupts and that absolute power corrupts absolutely". In positions of
power, there is an in-built mechanism that changes the agent. The person
in power might think that she is special and that she is always, or at least
often, right. Similarly there is a risk that when we learn more and more, we
become increasingly confident, which can make it difficult for us to accept
new knowledge or alternative perspectives. Understanding the pitfalls of
power and competence is important for engineers. Maybe, after some time
we all become camels (see the section about Nietzsche in chapter 10), while
the lion and child aspects are also necessary.
So, even though we could become more confident of ourselves with
increasing competence, power, and experience, there is a need for awareness.
Are our new habits acceptable? Is there something in the world that has
changed, causing us to need to reflect upon our actions? Is there any new
information that deserves our attention? Perhaps we become aware of new
ethical aspects ... and then what do we do with it? Take responsibility, or
try to avoid it? And when we have taken responsibility and decided to do
something about it, what would we do? For this purpose, we need critical
thinking. The circle - awareness, responsibility, critical thinking, and
action - repeats itself.
""
::,
...
......""
<(
~
~
1---
z
w
o
::,
I-
v'>
o
z
<(
""
0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
I-
"
230
Chapter 14 Action and beyond
STUDY QUESTIONS
1
What is weakness of will?
2
What is an ethical roadmap?
What are the cynical, tragic, and comical ways of relating to ideals?
What does it mean when we say that the cycle with awareness,
responsibility, critical thinking, and action repeats itself?
3
4
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
cc:
0
I
>-
::,
«
w
..
I
>-
Chapter 14 Action and beyond
231
Chapter 15
Assignments
and case studies
Awareness: assignment for chapters 1-2
Read chapters 1 and 2 before doing the assignment. Prepare an example of
ethics from one of the three domains of engineering practice that you think
would be interesting to discuss with your colleagues or fellow students. Try
to introduce something eye-opening, unexpected, perhaps fun, or shocking.
Maybe something that you were made aware of not long ago, something that
you recently thought about, or something you would want to make others
aware of. Maybe something that is always in front of us but is invisible behind the "wall of obviousness". Dig where you stand, the closer the ethical
issue is to you, the better.
a:
::,
....
<(
The Kista construction accident:
case study for chapters 3-5
1
cc
r....
__,
rz
w
0
::,
r-
"'
0
z
<(
cc
0
:c
....
::,
<(
w
:r:
....,;,
At 16 :20 on 15 July 2008, the steel structure meant to support a concrete floor
in a new section of the mall in Kista, outside Stockholm, collapsed. A steel
beam was deformed by the pressure, and about 200 tonnes of concrete fell
down onto Hanstavagen, a road beneath the construction. Two workers
fell down with the concrete; one of them died instantly while the other was
seriously injured. A car on the road was hit by the concrete but the driver
survived, probably as a result of the car being reinforced.
233
r
The involved actors were:
•
•
•
•
Forsen Projekt: project management and coordination of the work
Cremona: designer of the steel construction
Ramboll: subconsultant to Cremona
Ruukki: manufacturer of the steel construction.
Designing the beam
The designer from Cremona said that there was a lot of time pressure and
stress in the project. In order to construct the concrete elements, a blueprint
for a beam was needed. In a specification from Ramboll, the web of the
beam was set to 25 mm. The designer at Cremona changed the measure from
25 mm to 7 mm, in order to illustrate that the blueprint was preliminary.
Such a thin web "does not exist". "When I was young and inexperienced
and happened to set such a measure, they always called and said that this
does not exist", the designer said.
The drawing was obviously preliminary also because it was undated.
According to the quality control system of Cremona, all finished and
released blueprints should have a date; otherwise there was no difference
between preliminary and completed blueprints. But the blueprint was still
sent to Ruukki.
For the blueprint to be valid, a first control (by the designer) and a
secondary control (by the responsible designer) had to be carried out. In
the police investigation, two versions of a self-check list that the designer
had written were found. In the first copy, the self-control box was checked,
but in the second one the box was unchecked.
cc
::,
1-
Manufacturing
Ruukki did not suspect that the beam was improperly designed and produced
the beam according to the blueprint. Should they have noted that the drawing
was undated and preliminary? Should they have understood that a 7 mm
beam does not exist? Apart from being thin, the blueprint was also lacking
a reinforcing plate between the flanges of the beam, which should have
indicated that the beam was constructed and designed incorrectly.
234
Chapter 15 As signments and case st udies
<t:
cc
...,
II~
1-
z
w
0
~
Iv'\
0
z
<t:
a:
0
I
I~
<t:
w
I
I-
"
Assembly
0
N
M
Simplified drawing of the beam that was too weak.
:::,
"'
....
<t:
"'
r....
r-
z
UJ
"'
The beam was delivered to the construction site supervised by Forsen
Projekt. The project team received the beam, the project manager did not
suspect anything and ordered it to be installed.
The widow of the deceased worker told the district court that her
husband had told the supervisor several times that the beam was too weak.
The supervisor had ignored him, according to the widow. According to the
supervisor, no one had told him that the beam was too weak: "When a beam
arrives at a construction site, it has been checked five times. I had no reason
to believe that anything was wrong."
When the concrete elements were put on the steel construction, the traffic
on Hanstavagen below the Kista Mall was temporarily stopped. But when the
last element was in place, the workers let the cars pass again. The concrete
collapsed when the second car passed. An inspector at the Swedish Work
Environment Authority said: "My view is that it was wrong to let cars pass .
You have to create a tunnel under the construction in order to secure it." This
had not been done.
:::,
r-
"'
C
z
<t:
a:
0
....:::,I
<t:
1
2
3
4
Who was responsible for the accident and why?
Did the involved parties try to avoid responsibility and, if so, how?
Did the designer at Cremona breach the honour code of The Swedish
Association of Graduate Engineers and in that case how?
What should the involved parties have done differently?
Chapter 15 Assignments and case st udies
235
GMO salmon: case study for chapter 6
2
This case study is about genetic technology, a central area within engineering
ethics. To get an overview of genetically modified food, and some prospects
for the future, search online. Genetic modification in foodstuff is an
important area that is not only widely used but also widely debated. This
case concerns the genetic engineering of salmon for food production.
On 19 November 2015, the American governmental agency FDA
approved the company AquaBounty's genetically modified salmon (AAS,
AquAdvantage Salmon) for commercial breeding and consumption. The
AAS has a growth hormone from a Pacific Chinook salmon and a gene
taken from ocean pout (an eel-like fish). AAS has already been sold in
Canadian supermarkets. Should this salmon be allowed to be bred in your
county and/or its meat be sold on the domestic market?
Furthermore, conventional breeding (without genetic modification) has
also resulted in fast-growi ng salmon species. Imagine that one uses CRISPR
technology (look for information about this) to breed a fast-growing
salmon (which grows as fast as the AAS) combining a number of naturally
occurring genetic modifications (from salmon species). Since the CRISPR
technology allows for "gene editing" that is not possible to distinguish from
natural processes of genetic modification, would this still be seen as genetic
modification? What would be the ethical implications of this? In which
ethically relevant ways does this salmon differ from the AAS?
Think critically about this by freely choosing a model for critical
thinking (see chapter 6).
Bribery: an exercise in casuistry (chapter 6)3
Lisa is the section manager of a factory. These imagined cases deal with
Lisa's relationships with supplier X. Lisa's company has no written code of
conduct for how to behave in supplier relationships. This is what is stated
in Swedish law:
cc
::,
...
...
<(
cc
w
I-
...
z
w
0
...
::,
v"I
0
z
<(
a:
An employee who receives, accepts a promise of or demands a bribe or
other improper reward for the performance of his duties, shall be sentenced for taking a bribe to a fine or imprisonment for at most two years. 4
236
Chapter 15 Assignment s and case studies
0
I
I-
::,
<(
w
...
I
Q
1
Lisa has bought a large number of products from supplier X. A seller
- Robin - from the supplier passes by and gives Lisa a pen with the
supplier's logotype with an estimated value of 50 SEK. Should Lisa
accept the pen? Why/why not?
2
J.isa has bought a large number of products from supplier X. Robin
says that he can help Lisa become a member of the local golf club.
Lisa has to pay the entry fee and annual fees herself. Lisa has long
wanted to become a member but has not yet found anyone to
recommend her. Should Lisa accept the offer? Why/why not?
3
Lisa has bought a large number of products from supplier X. Robin
invites Lisa to a study trip to South America where one of the
supplier's factories is located. There will be some time for fishing
and fun. Robin's company pays. Lisa's manager will probably say
that it is OK for Lisa to go, but many others at Lisa's company
would be opposed to this kind of offer. Should Lisa go on the
trip? Why/why not?
4
Lisa has not yet purchased any products from supplier X but has
made a survey and found that the products from supplier X are
better and more reasonably priced than other vendors' products.
Robin invites Lisa to a trip to South America to get to know each
other, "no strings attached". Robin's company pays. Should Lisa go
on the trip? Why/why not?
s
Lisa has not yet purchased any products from supplier X. Robin
offers a trip to South America for Lisa and her family if Lisa switches
supplier to supplier X, even though the products from supplier X
arc worse and more expensive than their competitors. Should Lisa
accept the offer? Why/why not?
"'
::,
....
<(
er:
.....
....
...,
=
....z
.....
0
::,
....
"'0
z
<(
""
0
I
....
6
Lisa has bought a larger number of products from her supplier X.
At one point, Lisa and Robin eat dinner with their respective life
partners. It turns out that they have many common interests, such
as fishing and golf. Should Lisa cultivate a private relationship with
Robin and their Life Partners? Why/why not?
::,
<(
u.J
....
I
"
Chapter 15 Assignments and case studies
237
r
Autonomous cars: case study for chapters 6-8
As a chief developer of autonomous cars at the company I-Car, you are
forced to think about ethical issues. You have read about the trolley problem
in chapter 2 . In the figure below another version is shown.
a
b
C
Accident scenarios with autonomous cars.
• Scenario a: The car is approaching a group of people at high speed.
There are two alternatives: 1) The car continues straight and kills 10
people, but the driver and the person on the pavement survive. 2)
The car swerves onto the pavement and kills the person standing
there but the rest survive.
• Scenario b: The car is approaching a person at high speed. There are
two alternatives: 1) The car continues straight and kills the person on
the road. The driver survives. 2) The car swerves into a concrete wall
killing the driver but saving the person on the road.
• Scenario c: The car is approaching a group of people at high speed.
There are two alternatives: 1) The car continues straight and kills ten
people but saves the driver. 2) The car swerves into a concrete wall,
killing the driver. The ten people on the road survive.
a:
....::,
""a:w
....
....
,_
~
z
w
C
::,
....
V'I
As a chief designer, you are responsible for finding an algorithm that will
guide the cars' behaviour in an accident, similar to the accidents above. An
algorithm is "a rule or set of rules". An example of an algorithm based on
ethical egoism is: "Always try to save the driver's life." The algorithm needs
238
Chapter 15 Assignments and case studies
C
z
""a:
0
I
....::,
""
w
I
,....
0
to address the above problems (scenarios a-c) as well as other problems that
might arise in an accident, for example, if animals are involved.
You have two tasks. Your supervisor has studied a course in engineering
ethics and knows that, from an ethical perspective, it is important to
accurately formulate goals and design criteria for the technology to be
developed. She has formulated the three following goals (A- C). They are
equally important to your superior (who has also consulted with upper
management), but she tells you that you are free to make trade-offs between
them as long as you justify these trade-offs.
•
Goal A. The algorithm should lead to profitability for the company,
in other words, a car that will include the algorithm needs to be
appreciated by customers.
•
Goal B. The algorithm must be based on knowledge of ethical theory.
This is important since the company is active with corporate social
responsibility.
•
Goal C. The algorithm will be disclosed in public, so it needs to be
acceptable from the perspective of different relevant stakeholders.
When I-Car explains which algorithm it has chosen, the company
should not feel ashamed about it. It should not lead to any public
scandal. Also, the company does not want to "hide" the algorithm they do not want to repeat the Volkswagen scandal.
a:
::,
><(
a:
Your superior wants a list of algorithms that correspond to the above goal B
(link to ethical theory). Your first task is to create five different algorithms
informed by (based on) ethical theory. You should very briefly explain
which ethical theory each algorithm is based on and how. So, an answer
could look like this:
>>~
>-
z
UJ
c:,
::,
>v,
c:,
z
<(
My first suggestion, the algorithm "Always try to save the driver's life",
is based on ethical egoism, which is a theory that prescribes maximizing
the good consequences for "me", where "me" in this case is the driver.
a:
0
I
>::,
<(
UJ
I
&
This task corresponds to step 2 in the five-step technology development
process explained in chapter 6.
Chapter 15 Assignments and case studies
239
r
Your second task is to choose one of these algorithms and recommend
its implementation in the autonomous cars developed by I-Car. You need
to argue that this algorithm fulfils the three goals better than the other
algorithms you have suggested. This task corresponds to relevant aspects
of steps 3- 5 in the five-step technology development process explained in
chapter 6. Therefore please think carefully about these three steps when
you argue for your algorithm. Give reasons/arguments that support your
algorithm, and think about what kinds of critical arguments will be raised
against your algorithm and find counter-arguments to these. The second
task is most likely also informed by your knowledge of decision-making
models in chapter 6.
A robot to love: case study for chapters 9-11
This assignment concerns companion robots with sexual abilities. Prepare
by watching two videos available on YouTube: Rise of the Sex Robots and
Robot Love in Japan 5 .
The assignment consists of answering a set of questions: Should the
development and sale of companion robots with sexual abilities be restricted
(in your country)? Or should they be sold freely in all varieties and forms
on the market? Or some alternative in-between? Why/why not? If so, how?
To answer the questions you may be inspired by the following aspects:
Can one have a "true" relationship with such a robot? Do you think that
such robots will change gender roles and perceptions of gender? Do you
think that the use of such robots will lead to social isolation? Do you think
that such robots can be useful and ethically acceptable for treating those
with social and emotional blockages, for elderly care, or for disabled people?
Why/why not? Do you think that such robots could reduce sex crimes since
::,
1-
sexual criminals use/abuse such robots rather than other humans?
<t:
cr:
=
II~
1-
Nuclear waste: case study for chapters 12-13
6
z
=
a
::,
Iv'\
Nuclear power has been used for decades, and it is seen as a climate-neutral
way to generate electricity. Check www.nei.org for overviews of the role of
nuclear power for various countries and for learning about plants under
construction.
240
Chapter 15 Assign ments and case stud ies
a
z
<t:
cr:
0
I
1-
::,
<t:
~
>-
z
~
0
:::,
>-
"'
0
z
«
"'
0
:r:
>-
::,
«
Nuclear power is not without problems. Accidents in power plants, such
as in Fukushima, remind us of the risk of this technology. Further, there
is still no perfect solution to deal with hazardous nuclear waste. Or is it a
resource? Geological disposal facilities (GDFs) where the waste will be stored
for 100,000 years are now on the drawing board or under construction. In
the US, it will perhaps be the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository,
and in France it will be close to the city of Bure. In Sweden, The Swedish
Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company (SKB) is responsible for
dealing with radioactive waste from nuclear power plants in a safe way. SKB
is currently pursuing Forsmark as an alternative (where there is already a
nuclear power plant), and in Finland the Onkalo repository is currently
under construction on the west coast of Finland (near a nuclear power
plant). In these Nordic countries, there are concerns about what will happen
to the end of life storage in the case of new ice ages. Watch the movie Into
Eternity about the Finnish geological disposal facility Onkalo.7
Focusing on the Swedish situation, it is expected that nuclear waste
will be moved to the GDF at Forsmark when the facility is ready. The time
span of storage is set to about 100,000 years. Following the KBS-3 method
developed in Sweden, the waste, moulded into fuel pellets, will be stored
in canisters five metres tall made out of copper five centimetres thick. The
waste will be placed 500 metres underground in a mine-like facility. The
canisters will be embedded in bentonite clay, which will protect the capsules
from corrosion and minor rock movements. The tunnels will be sealed. So,
the nuclear waste is separated from the rest of the ecosystem by means of
three layers: copper, bentonite clay, and rock.
However, some researchers have argued that corrosion will cause the
capsules to deteriorate within about 1,000 years. They refer to a Swiss report
that has studied the behaviour of copper in conditions similar to GDF.
There was corrosion after 17 years. However, the study was not conclusive.
The main matter of debate is whether copper corrodes in an oxygen-free
environment, which the repositories will be. Researcher Peter Szakalos
is certain that it does. SKB maintains that it does not. If there is leakage,
environmental organizations claim that there is a risk of significant
environmental damage. Environmental organizations such as OSS argue
that rather than using KBS-3, it is better to use a "forgiving technology",
Chapter 15 A ssign ments and case stud ies
241
a technology causing minimal damage if something goes wrong. KBS-3 is
not a forgiving technology, since the groundwater could become polluted
if the capsules disintegrate.
Current alternatives to KBS-3 are:
• DRD: Dry rock deposit (the nuclear waste is stored and monitored
constantly). This obviously requires human beings and is thus not
a passive technology, something that can just exist for itself in line
with the mission of SKB.
• Deep borehole disposal, 2- 4 kilometres down, lower than the
groundwater level.
• Transmutation. Use of the nuclear waste in future fourth-generation
reactors, which produce less quantities of waste with much shorter
longevity (say 1,000 years) but more active waste.
You should argue for an ethically defensible way of dealing with nuclear
waste. Most probably, you will discuss GDF and the three mentioned
alternatives to it (and other alternatives you might think about) and argue
that one of those options is the best from an ethical perspective.
Interview study: assignment for chapters 1-13
This assignment is aimed at learning about ethics from a professional
engineer by carrying out an interview with him or her. You are free to
interview friends, family. It is possible to interview retirees as well. The
interview should consist of two parts:
a:
1
General discussion about the interviewee's professional life. Is
ethics important in her work life? Why/why not? Ethics in various
stages of the career. What is her view of ethics in engineering and
technology development? Aim to understand and discuss the ethical
implications of her work and ideas using the theories and concepts
used in the book, awareness, responsibility, avoiding responsibility,
critical thinking, decision-making models, professional ethics,
consequences, duties and rights, virtues, freedom, relationships,
242
Chapter 15 Assignments and case st ud ies
::,
I<(
a:
w
,I~
,-
z
w
a
::,
,-
v"I
a
z
<(
a:
0
I
I-
::,
<(
w
I
l-
o
fairness/justice, environmental ethics. Be an active discussant,
constructively and critically engaging with the respondent.
2
One "critical event". Ask about one or more critical events where
ethical aspects have been important. A critical event means
something that happened, an episode where someone acted
unethically or ethically (or in a grey zone), where someone talked
about ethics, where a promise was broken, an ethical dilemma
perhaps. What happened and why? How did they "solve" the
situation? Please ensure that the interviewee knows that you will ask
this question before the interview, so that she has some time to think
about a critical event. Think about, and analyse, this critical event by
means of theory from this book.
11
Just do it": assignment for chapter 14
In this assignment, you should create an ethical roadmap for yourself,
consisting of a description of the current situation, your proposed normative
ideals, and a description of how to get there. Focus on what you see as the
most relevant aspects for you,
This roadmap should proceed from the "professional" side of you: you
as a student or you as a current or future engineer. But it may also include
other "non-professional" issues you want to maintain, improve, or change.
Technical development project and thesis work
a::
::,
....
<l'.
er.
w
>....
_,
>-
z
w
0
::,
>-
"'
0
z
<l'.
er.
0
I
>::,
<l'.
w
:r:
0
In most project courses aiming to develop new technology or applications,
there is a need to think about ethics, even though the project does not
concern ethics as such. Similarly, when you write your bachelor's or
master's thesis, it is important to reflect upon ethical issues. Whether it is
a research problem that needs to be solved or a more practical problem in
an organizational setting, there might be some ethical issues related to the
work on the thesis. Developing a new application, a new material, a new
organizational form, or carrying out a survey has an ethical impact. You
will undoubtedly have a number of alternative solutions to a problem of a
technical or organizational nature, and each of those alternatives comes
Chapter 15 Assign ments and case stud ies
24 3
r
with a different set of ethical impacts. To perform such an assessment, you
can use the ethical process presented in this book.
Apart from the ethical impact of the alternative you are proposing (and
the alternatives you choose not to propose), there are also ethical impacts
relating to the process of project work, how to organize work fairly, how
to value contributions, how to treat each other with respect, and so on.
This is mostly included in the category of "working together with others"
in this book, and you could think about the various alternative ways of
identifying and solving these issues with the critical thinking frameworks
discussed in the book. In research directly involving people (for example,
when you interview people about a particular technology implemented in
their workplace), there are particular ethical concerns.
Often, these concerns are boiled down to four principles - harm to
participants, lack of informed consent, invasion ofprivacy, and deception.
You could for example argue that the participants in the Milgram
experiments (see chapter 4) were subject to stress and anxiety when
administering the electrical shocks. The harm to participants principle
would thus have been breached. What is at stake is a conflict between
producing good science for the many and harming a few participants in
the research process - a classical conflict within consequentialist theories.
The harm to participants principle is therefore important, but it needs to
be considered in contrast to other valid ethical concerns. Lack of informed
consent is related to discourse ethics as well as to autonomy - that the
research subjects should know and freely accept their participation in the
research. Research should furthermore not cause an invasion of privacy
(for example, divulging information about the identity and opinions of
a research subject to the general public), which is directly linked to the
deontological theories surveyed in the book. However, is the duty not to
breach the privacy of the participants absolute or prima facie? The last
principle concerns deception, which may be linked to deontology as well
as a respect for the autonomy and dignity of the research subject. Telling
the truth about your research is a way not to treat the other as a mere
means to an end. When we conduct an ethical assessment of research
work, it is important not to see these four principles as monolithic but
also think about which other potential principles are at stake. This book
244
Chapter 15 Assign ments and case stud ies
""
::,
I<(
""
w
II~
1-
z
w
0
::>
1-
v"I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
I-
::>
<(
w
I
l-
o
can therefore be used as a complement to the usual way of describing
research ethics.
The assignment is thus: think critically about the ethical impact of the
project you are working on, in terms of your solution as well as the process
to get there.
::,
"'
....
<(
cc
>....
>-
z
w
c:,
::,
>-
"'
c:,
z
<(
cc
0
I
....
::,
<(
Chapter 15 Assig nments and case stud ies
245
Notes
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Source: https://nypost.com/2016/05/2 5/
lying-engineer-ta kes-no-ja iI-plea- af ter- faulty-bu ildi ng-kilIed-baby/
2 Ogburn (1996).
3 Gustafsson (1988).
4 MacIntyre (1984).
5 Wittgenstein (1968). For the early work of Wittgenstein, see Wittgenstein (1922).
6 https://www.ft.com/content/c7fdf95c-Oe95-1 1e4-a1 ae-00144feabdc0
7 Bauman (1989).
8 Philipson (2004).
9 Hume's work on Hume's law is ava ilable online: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/
Treatise_ of_Hu ma n_Nature/Book_ 3:_ Of_morals/Part_ 1/Section_ 1
10 This example is taken from a video about Hume's law: https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=eT7yXG2aJdY. The other short videos in the same BBC series are well worth
watching.
11 Collste (2010).
12 Gustafsson (201 1).
CHAPTER 2. AWARENESS
cc
::,
,_
""
"'
,_
,_
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,_
"'0
z
""
"'0
:,:
,_
::,
""
w
:,:
,_
~
For some other examples of how eng ineers, such as Dilbert and Tony Stark from Iron
Man, are portrayed in media, see: https://looking inthepopularculturemirror.wordpress.
com/2015/0 5/31/media-po rtraya ls-of-engineers/
2 Ellul (1964).
3 Winner (1980).
4 Joerges (1999).
5 Zizek (1997).
6 The subsequent discussion is heavily inspired by Verbeek (2011).
7 Heidegger (1977).
8 Foot (1978).
9 Akrich (1992).
10 For more inspiration, read about the Citizen and Vigilante apps at http://reillytop10.
com/2017/12/03/the- citizen-app/
11 https ://www.usa today.com/story/money/ca rs/2014/04/02/
barra-gm-recall-senate/7195135/
12 From "Appelmelodin". Lyrics and music: Lollo Asplund.
CHA PTE R 3. RESPONSIBILITY
Similar cases have occurred since (for a documentary in Swedish, from 2015, see
http://sverigesradio.se/sida/avsnitt/650702?programid=909). You can find the song at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 603j KNjvBjQ.
2 www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160630135848.htm.
3 Ihde (2002, p. 106).
CHAPTER 4. AVOIDING RESPONSIBILITY
1 To go deeper, read "Beyond t he pleasure principle" and "The Ego and the Id" (Freud 1991).
2 This is a secular version of Pascal's wager whether or not to believe in God, when we
cannot be sure if God exists. Pascal's recommendation would be to believe in God
even if we cannot be sure he exists. Read Pasca l's work in English translation here:
https://web.a rchive.org/web/20061014231859/http://www.classica IIibra ry.org/pasca I/
pen sees/pen sees03.htm
3 Singer (2009).
4 Critchley (2007).
5 Milgram (1997).
6 See, for example, Haslam et al. (2014).
7 Based on a vignette from Loo (2001). This vignette is analysed in Ljungblom 8 Lennerfors
(2018).
8 Asch (1956).
9 The different types of rationalization are summarized well in Ashforth 8 Anand (2003).
10 Sykes & Matza (1957).
11 https://blog.caranddriver.com/volkswagen-claims-tdi- defea t-device-is-legal-in-europe/
CHA PTE R 5. RESPONSIB ILITIES OF PROFESS IONAL ENG INEERS
1 It is available here: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/greek/greek_oat h.htm l
2 Hoover (1951), p. 132-133.
3 See Taylor (1911).
4 https://www.ewb- uk.org/who-we-are/strategy/
5 The whole box is taken from https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/p7-8.html
6 This paragraph is based on Maja Fjaestad's article "lngenjorernas hederskodex",
http://www.ingenjorshistoria.se/area/inghist/igenjorernas_hederskodex
7 The whole box is a quote from: https://www.sverigesingenjorer.se/Globa l/
Dokumentbibliotek/Hederskodex%20ENG%20t ill%20webb.pdf
8 Based on Davis (1991).
a:
::,
,_
<t:
a:
w
CHA PTER 6. CR ITI CAL THINK ING
1 Quote from Appiah (2006, p. 16).
2 From Haidt et al (1993).
3 Nussbaum (2015).
4 Collste (2010).
5 The case is slightly adapted from Nabilah Deen's case about Jack.
https://www.scu.edu/eth ics/focus-area s/mo re/eng ineeri ng-eth ics/
eng ineeri ng- eth ics- cases/u ni ntended-effects/
,-.
,_
~
,-.
z
w
0
::,
,-.
VI
0
z
<t:
a:
0
:r
,_
::,
<t:
w
:r
.....
0
248
Notes
r
6 van de Poel & Royakkers (2007).
7 Kavathatzopoulos (n.d.).
8 van de Poel (2000) and van de Poel & Royakkers (2011).
9 Laaksoharju (2014).
10 Hirschman (1970).
11 Berner (1987).
12 The following is based on van de Poel & Royakkers (2011).
13 Habermas (1990).
14 Bird (2002).
15 A simple int roduction is available here: htt ps://www.encyclopedia.com/science/
encyclopedias-aIman acs-t ranscripts-and- maps/constructive-technoIogy-assessm ent
16 As (1978).
17 Schumacher (1973).
18 lmamichi (2009).
CHAPTER 7. CONSEOUENT IALI ST ETH ICAL THEOR IES
;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/americas- best-selling- cars-andtrucks- are- bu ilt- on- lies-the- rise- of-fa ke- engine- noise/2015/01/21/6db09a10- a0ba-11 e4b146- 57 78 32eafcb4_story.htm I?noredirect= on&utm_term=.b20a cf222801
2 Smit h (1981).
3 Friedman (1970).
4 ht tps://www.swa rthmore.ed u/n ews- events/
Iisten-softwa re- eng ineer-j eff-ka ufma n-08-effective-a ltru ism
5 From The Methods of Ethics, http://www.laits.utexas.edu/polt heory/sidgwick/me/index.
html.
6 Lazari-Radek & Singer (2014).
7 Festinger (1957).
8 Bent ham (1996).
9 Singer [1981).
10 Singer [2009).
11 https://beta .sveri gesingenjorer.se/lon/lonestatisti k/
12 Bentham [1996).
13 Mill [1998).
14 This is heavily inspired by an example in Hansson (2009).
15 van de Poel (201 1).
16 Hansson (2003). Quote f rom Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosophy of
Technology, sect ion 3.3.4.
I<(
w
"'
+-
+~
CHAPTER 8. DU TIE S AND RIGHTS
+-
z
w
0
::,
+-
"'0
z
<(
"'0
:r:
+-
::,
<(
w
:r:
l-
Asimov (1950).
2 Kant's Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals is available online
https :// w ww.ea rlym oderntexts.co m/assets/pdfs/ka nt 1785. pd f
3 https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdf s/kant1785. Page 24.
4 https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdf s/kant1785. Page 29.
5 https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdf s/kant1785. Page 30.
6 Nietzsche (1974, section 335).
o
Notes
249
7 Ross (1988).
8 Based on a vignette developed by Loo (2001). This vignette is analysed in Ljungblom Et
Lennerfors (2018).
9 See for example http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
10 Gregg (2012).
CHAPTER 9. VIRTUE ETH ICS
See Plato's The Republic, which is available on line: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.
html.
2 An application of the three concepts of the soul to technology-based entrepreneurship
and innovation may be found in Lennerfors (2015). In this book, t here is also an explanation of the theoretical aspects of the t ripartite structure of the soul.
3 Braut igan (1967).
4 See the Nichomachean Ethics, which is available online: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristot le/
nicomachaen.html
5 Anscombe (1958).
6 Inspired by Chappell (20 15).
7 lsen Et Levin (1972).
8 Based on a vignette developed by Loo (2001). This vignette is analysed in Ljungblom Et
Lennerfors (2018).
9 Sivaraksa (2009). The section on the four noble truths is an abridged and updated version
of Lennerfors (2015a).
10 See for example Glassman (2002).
CHAPTER 10. ETHICS OF FREEDOM
1 Mumford (1934).
2 Inspired by ht t ps://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/06/
no-death -and-an-enha need-Iife-is-the-future-tra nsh uman
3 Kierkgaard (2004). This section is based on Fors & Lennerfors [2016).
4 Heidegger [2008).
5 Inspired by http://aporia.byu.edu/pdf s/dix-heidegger_and_peer_pressure.pdf
6 Badiou (2001).
7 Levinas (1969).
8 Krawczyk & Barthold (2018).
9 Heidegger [2008).
10 Mill (1982).
11 https://www.theguardian.com/com mentisfree/2016/dec/27/
et hnicity- en gi neering-black-mi nority-eth nic
cc
::,
I<(
cc
w
,I~
,-
z
CHAPTER 11. RELAT IONAL ETH ICS
1 See Kohlberg [1981).
2 Gilligan (1982). This section is inspired by an unpublished manuscript written by Thomas
Taro Lennerfors and Per Fors.
3 Jaggar (1992).
4 Noddings (2013).
w
0
::,
Iv"\
0
z
<(
""0
:r:
I-
:,
<(
w
:r:
l-
o
2 50
Notes
5 Watsuji (1996).
6 L0gst rup (1997).
7 Mauss (2002).
CHAPTER 12. JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS
1 Brosnan & de Waal (2003).
2 See t he Politics, which is available online: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.ht ml
3 https://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-1 0-page-anti- diversity-screed-1797564320
4 Rawls (1971).
5 Nozick (1974).
CHAPTER 13. ENVIRONMENTAL ETH ICS
https://web.archive.org/web/20120510181127/ht tp:f/cnwm r.com/nss-folder/
automotiveenergy/DUSTO/o20PDFO/o20VERSION.pdf.
2 http://carfixtips.com/urban-myth- or-truth- the-hummer-vs- pr ius- environmenta I- debate/
3 White (1967).
4 Carson (2002).
5 Ehrlich (1968).
6 Meadows et al. (1972).
7 Jonas (1984).
8 The UN Report Our Common Future is available online: https://www.un.org/documents/ga/
res/42/ares42-187.ht m
9 The SDGs are available here: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300
10 Regan (1983).
11 Leopold (1949).
12 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/16/
new-zea land-river-g ra nted-sa me-lega I-ri ghts-as-h uman-bei ng
13 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/21/
ganges- and-ya mu na-rivers- gra nted-sa me-lega I- rights-as-human- beings
14 Na:!SS (1989).
15 Na:!ss & Haukeland (2002).
CHAPTER 14. ACT ION AND BEYOND
1 Schumacher (1973).
2 Franklin (1951).
<Xe
::,
....
""a:
....
....
u.,
~
>-
z
w
0
::,
,-
"'0
z
""
<Xe
0
:r:
>::,
""
w
:r:
..
>-
CHAPTER 15. ASSIGNMENTS AND CASE STUDIES
This case was developed together wit h my colleague Lars Degerman, Department of
Engineering Sciences, Uppsala University.
2 Fredrik Sandstrom at Uppsala University (Biology Education Cen tre) has developed an
ethics role play about t he AAS. Together, we developed an assignment about whet her
or not the breeding of t he sa lmon should be approved by a government agency. This
case study is a simplified version of the mentioned assignment. Magnus Lundgren at
the Department of Cell and Molecular Biology has contributed to the assignment about
CRISPR.
Notes
251
3 This is inspired by the case Accepting Gifts and Amenities in a collect ion of engineering
ethics cases, available at http://sites.bsyse.wsu.edu/pitts/be120/Handouts/cases/
case72.htm
4 Brottsbalken, 2 avd. 10 kap. 5 a§_
5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 6vNOcs_-RSs&oref=, ht tps://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=YzzDLujpat48:t=603s
6 This case study was supported by discussions wit h Mattias Lantz, Department of Physics
and Astronomy, Uppsala Un iversity.
7 https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=ZUO-Mhb40Vo
cc
::,
....
<(
cc
w
,,-
,_
~
z
w
0
::,
,-
v"I
0
z
<(
a:
0
I
,_
::,
<(
w
I
....
0
2 52
Notes
Image sources
p. 19
p. 99
p. 99
http://world-action.net/archives/4179.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Land messer#/media/File:AugustLandmesser-Almanya-1936.jpg
The lncredib/es. Screenshot from https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=_R8Gt rKtrZ4
Pictu res from Shutterstock: p. 10 (Stefano Buttafoco), 20, 27, 35, 47, 52, 59, 65 (Shanti
Hesse), 73 (spatuletail), 77 (Alexander Tolstykh), 81 (Everett Historical), 87, 103, 114,
120, 132 (Rena Schild), 138, 148, 151 (Sadik Gulec), 162, 171, 181 (Ned Snowman), 187,
201 , 213,219, 226 (pio3). Photographer stated in cases of specific copyright.
Pictu res p. 22, 92, 198,216,235 and 238:Jonny Hallberg.
p. 198
Based on http://cultu ralorganizing.org/
the- problem-with-th at-eq uity-vs-eq ua Iity-grap hic/
p. 238
Based on https://goo.g l/XPzsqF
cc
::,
t--
<!
cc
w
t-t--
-'
t--
z
w
c::,
::,
t--
v,
c::,
z
<!
cc
0
:r:
t--
::,
<!
w
:r:
..
t--
r
References
Akrich, M. (1992). The description of technical objects. In W. Bijker Et J. Law (eds). Shaping
technology/Building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, p. 205-224.
Anscombe, G.E.M. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33(124), p. 1-19.
Appiah, A.K. (2006), Cosmopolitanism. New York: W.W. Norton.
Arendt, H. (2006). Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of evil. New York:
Penguin Books.
As, B. (1978), Hersketeknikker. Kjerringrad, 3, p. 17-21.
Asch, S. (1956), Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against
a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70, p. 1- 70.
Ashforth, B.E. Et Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption in organizations. In
R.M. Kramer Et B. Staw (eds), Research in organizational behavior. Vol. 25. New York:
Elsevier, p. 1-52.
a:
::,
....
<t:
a:
,_
....
,_
~
z
~
::,
"'
,_
V,
"'z
<t:
a:
0
I
,_
::,
<t:
Asimov, I. (1950). I, robot. New York: Doubleday.
Badiou, A. (2001), Ethics: An essay on the understanding of evil. New York: Verso.
Bauman, Z. (1989), Modernity and the Holocaust. London: Polity.
Bentham, J. (1996). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Berner, B. (1987). Far ingenjoren ha civilkurage? In J. Lentz Et L. Wadso (eds). lnte var sak?
Om etik och moral i ingenjorskonsten. Lund: Bokbo, p. 33- 51.
Bird, F.B. (2002), The muted conscience: Moral silence and the practice of ethics in business.
Westport, CN Et London: Quorum Books.
Brautigan, R. (1967), All watched over by machines of loving grace. USA: Communication
Company.
Brosnan, S.F. Et de Waa l, F.B.M. (2003), Monkeys reject unequal pay. Nature, 425,
p. 297-299.
Carson, R. (2002). Silent spring, Boston: Mariner Books.
Carter, R.E. (2013). The Kyoto school: An introduction. Albany: State University of New York
Press.
Chappell, S.- G. (2015), Lists of the virtues. https://www.openstarts.units.it/bitstream/1007
7/12215/1 /05_EO/o26P_2015_2_chappelI.pdf.
Collste, G. (2010), lnledning till etiken. Lund: St udentlitteratur.
Critchley, S. (2007). Infinitely demanding: Ethics of commitment, politics ofresistance.
London: Verso.
Davis, M. (1991). Thinking like an engineer: The place of a code of ethics in the practice of
a profession. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 20[2) [Spring). p. 150-167.
Ehrlich, P.R. (1968), The population bomb. New York: Ballantine Books.
Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Knopf.
Festinger, L. (1957), A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Foot, P. (7978). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect in virtues and
vices. Oxford: Basil Blackwell (first published in Oxford Review, no. 5, 1967.)
Fors, P. & Lennerfors, T.T. [2016), Gamification for sustainability: Beyond t he
ludo-aesthetica l approach. In P. Zackariasson & M. Dymek (2016), The business of
gamification: A critical analysis. London: Routledge.
Franklin, B. (1951), Autobiography. New York: Heritage Press.
Freud, S. (1991), On metapsychology. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New
York Times Magazine, 13 sept.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Glassman, B. (2002). Infinite circle: Teachings in Zen. Boston: Shambala.
Gregg, B. (2012), Human rights as social construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press,s. 188- 190.
Gustafsson, C. (1988). Om foretag, moral och handling. Lund : Studentlitteratur.
Gustafsson, C. (2011). Production ofseriousness. Basingstoke: Pal grave Macmillan.
Haber mas, J. (1990), Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge: Polity.
Haidt, J., Koller, S.H. & Dias, M.G. (1993), Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat
your dog? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4). p. 613-628.
Hansson, S.O. (2003), Eth ica l criteria of risk acceptance. Erkenntnis, 59(3), p. 291-309.
Hansson, S.O. (2009), Teknik och etik. Stockholm: KTH. https://people.kth.se/"'soh/
tekn iketi k. pdf.
Haslam, S.A., Reicher, S.D. & Birney, M.E. (2014). Nothing by mere authority: Evidence
that in an experimental analogue of the Milgram paradigm participants are motivated
not by orders but by appeals to science. Journal ofSocial Issues, 70(3), p. 473-488.
https ://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.11 l 1/josi.1 2072.
Heidegger, M. (1977), The question concerning technology and other essays. New York:
Harper & Row.
Heidegger, M. (2008), Being and time. New York: Harper Perennial.
Hirschman, A.O. (1970), Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridg e, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hoover, H. (1951). The memoirs of Herbert Hoover, Volume 1. New York: The MacMillan
Company. https ://hoover.a re hives.gov/sites/d efa ult/fi les/resea rch/ebooks/b 1vl _f u11.pdf.
Ihde, D. (2002), Bodies in technology. Minnea polis: University of Minnesota Press.
256
References
..."'
"'
........
::,
<(
w
~
.....
2
w
0
::,
.....
v"\
0
2
<(
""0
...
:r:
::,
<(
w
:r:
...
0
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>VI
0
z
«
"'0
:r:
>-
::,
«
lmamichi, T. (2009). An introduction to eco-ethica. Plymout h: UPA Publishing.
lsen, A.M. & Levin, P.F. (1972]. Effect of feeling good on helping: Cookies and kindness.
Journal of Personalit y and Social Psychology, 21(3), p. 384-388.
Jaggar, A. (1992), Fem inist ethics. In L. Becker & C. Becker (eds]. Encyclopedia ofethics.
New York: Garland Press, p. 363- 364.
Joerges, B. (1999), Do pol itics have artefacts? Social Studies ofScience, 29(3), p. 41 1- 431.
Jonas, H. (1984), The imperative of responsibility: in search for an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Kavathatzopoulos, I. (n.d.]. OLE: A tool for support of ethical decision making. Uppsala
un iversitet. Available at : http://www.it.uu.se/ed ucation/phd_studies/phd_cou rses/
gel 014/TREl 4A/olel 4.pdf
Kierkegaard, S. 2004. Either/or: A fragment of life. London: Penguin.
Kohlberg, L. (1981), Essays on moral development. Vol. I: The philosophy of moral
development. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.
Krawczyk, V. & Barthold, C. (2018). The compassion for anima ls: A filmic exploration of
industrial linear rhythms. Culture and Organization, 24(4). p. 268-284.
Laaksoharju, M. (2014), Designing for autonomy. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.
Lazari-Radek, K.D. & Singer, P. (2014). The point of view of the universe: Sidgwick and
contemporaryethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lennerfors, T.T. (2015a). A Buddhist future for capitalism? Revising Buddh ist economics
for t he era of light capita lism. Futures, 68, p. 67-75.
Lennerfors, T.T. (201 Sb). Eros, thymos, logos: A study of the spirit of entrepreneurship and
innovation at Stena. Goteborg: BAS.
Leopold, A. (1949), A Sand County almanac. New York: Oxford University Press.
Levinas, E. (1969), Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne
University Press.
Ljungblom, M. & Lennerfors, T.T. (2018). Virtues and vices in project management ethics:
An empirical investigation of project managers and project management st udents.
Project Management Journal, 49(3), p. 5-16.
Loo, R. (2001), Tackling ethical dilemmas in project management using vignettes.
International Journal of Project Management, 20(7). p. 489- 495.
L0gstrup, K. (1997). The ethical demand. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
MacIntyre, A. (1984), After virtue: A study in moral theory. Notre Dame, IN: University of
Notre Dame Press.
Mauss, M. (2002). The gift. London: Routledge.
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W.W. (1972). The limits to growth:
A report for The Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. London: Earth
Island.
Milgram, S. (1997), Obedience to authority: An experimental view. London: Pi nter & Martin.
Mill, JS. (1982), On liberty. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Mill, J S. (1998), Utilitarianism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mumford, L. (1934). Technics and civilization. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company.
References
2 57
N~ss, A. (1989). Ecology, community, and lifestyle. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
N~ss, A. 8: Haukeland, P.I. (2002). Life's philosophy: reason & feeling in a deeper world.
Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Nietzsche, F. (1974), The Gay Science. New York: Vintage.
Nietzsche, F. (2006), Thus spoke Zarathustra. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Noddings, N. (2013), Caring: A relational approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley,
CA: University of Cal ifornia Press.
Nozick, R. (1974), Anarchy, state, and utopia. Oxford: Blackwell.
Nussbaum, M. (2015), Transitional anger. Journal of the American Philosophical
Association, 1(1). p. 41 - 56.
Ogburn, W.F. (1996), Social change with respect to cultural and original nature. New York:
B.W. Huebsch.
Philipson, S. (2004), Etik och faretagskultur. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
van de IPoel, I. (2000), Ethics and engineering design. In University as a bridge from
technology to society. Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Technology
and Society, 6- 8 September, "La Sapienza". University of Rome: IEEE, p. 187-1 92.
van de IPoel, I. (2011). Nuclear energy as a social experiment. Ethics, Policy & Environment,
14(3), p. 285-290.
van de IPoel, I. & Royakkers, L. (2007). The eth ica l cycle. Journal of Business Ethics, 71,
p. 1- 13.
van de IPoel, I. & Royakkers, L. (2011), Ethics, technology, and engineering: An introduction.
Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Rawls, J (1971), A theory ofjustice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Regan, T. (1983), Animal rights. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Ross, W.D. (1988), The right and the good. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Said, E.W. (1995). Orienta/ism. London: Pengu in.
Sandel, M.J. (2009), Justice: What's the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux.
Schumacher, E.F. (1973), Small is beautiful: Economics as if people mattered. New York:
Harper Perenn ial.
Singer, P. (1981), The expanding circle: Ethics and sociobiology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Singer, P. (2009). The life you can save. New York: Random House.
Sivaraksa, S. (2009), The wisdom ofsustainability: Buddhist economics for the 21srcentury.
Maui, HI: Koa Books.
Smith, A. (1981), An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Chicago:
University of Ch icago Press.
Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. E.N. Zalta (ed.). Stanford, CA: Metaphysics Research
Lab, Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University. Internet
resource, plato.stanford.edu.
Sykes, G.M. & Matza, D. (1957), Techniq ues of neutralization : A theory of delinquency."
American Sociological Review, 22(6), s. 664- 670.
258
References
a:
::,
><(
a:
w
>>-
....
~
z
w
0
:::,
....
v'I
0
2
<(
c,:
0
I
>::,
<(
w
I
....
0
Taylor, F.W. (19 11), The principles ofscientific management. New York: Harper & Brother.
Verbeek, P.-P. (2011]. Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of
things. Ch icago: University of Chicago Press.
Watsuji, T. (1996). Watsuji Tetsuro's Rinrigaku: Ethics in Japan. New York: State University
of New York Press.
White, L. (1967), The historical roots of our ecological crisis. Science, 155, p. 1203- 1207.
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1). p. 121- 136.
Wittgenstein, L. (1968). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London: Kegan Paul, Trench,
Tubner.
Zizek, S. (1997). The plague of fantasies. London: Verso.
~
>-
z
~
0
::,
>VI
0
z
«
"'0
:r:
>-
::,
«
:r:
>-
"
References
25 9
Index of persons
Akrich, Madeleine 29
Anscombe, Elizabeth 149
Arendt, Hannah 135
Aristotle 146- 149
As, Berit 105
Asch, Solomon 63
Asimov, Isaac 131
Badiou, Alain 167, 168
Bauman, Zygmunt 17
Bentham, Jeremy 117-119, 217
Berner, Boel 98
Bird, Frederick 103
Brecht, Bertold 58
Carter, Robert 154
Collste, Goran 18, 89
Confucius 130
Critchley, Simon 60, 228, 229
Ellul, Jacques 26
cc
:::,
....
<(
cc
w
....
....
=
Festinger, Leon 111
Freud, Sigmund 58, 102, 145
Friedman, Milton 11 5
~
z
w
0
:::,
....
V,
Gi lligan, Carol 179
Gustafsson, Claes 13, 19
0
z
<(
cc
0
:r:
....
:::,
<(
w
:r:
....
"
Habermas, Jurgen 102, 103
Hansson, Sven Ove 123
Heidegger, Martin 28, 167, 169
Hirschman, Albert 98
Hume, David 18
Hursthouse, Rosal ind 149
Ihde, Don 50
lmamichi, Tomonobu 109
lsen, Paula 152
Jaggar, Al ison 179
Jonas, Hans 213
Kant, Immanuel 133-135
Kaufman, Jeff 116
Kavathatzopoulos, lordanis 93
Kierkegaard, S0ren 165, 166, 227
Koh lberg, Lawrence 177, 178
Laaksoharju, Mikael 97
Lans, Hakan 151
Leopold, Aldo 218
Levinas, Emmanuel 168, 183
Levin, Paula 152
Locke, John 137
L0gstru p, Kn ud 185
MacIntyre, Alasdair 14, 150
Marx, Karl 163
Matza, Gresham 65
Mauss, Marcel 185
Mengele, Joseph 73
Milgram, Stan ley 61
Mi ll, John Stua rt 119, 170
Mumford, Lewis 162
Musk, Elon 151
261
r
N~ss, Arne 219
Nhat Hanh, Thich 157
Nietzsche, Friedrich 135, 162- 164
Noddings, Nel 180
Nozick, Robert 204, 205
Nussbaum, Martha 88
Ogburn, William 12
Pehlivan, Menzer 150
Plato 143-146
Poel, Ibo van de 92, 93, 95
Porsche, Ferdinand 73
Rawls, John 203
Regan, Tom 217
Ross, William David 136
Royakkers, Lambert 92, 93, 95
Said, Edward 171
Sartre, Jean-Paul 167
Schumacher, Ernst Friedrich 108, 227
Sidgwick, Henry 11 6
Singer, Fred 152
Singer, Peter 59, 117, 217
Sivaraksa, Sulak 155, 156
Smith, Adam 115
Snowden, Edward 131
Sackman, Ralph W. 185
Sumner, Wil liam G. 86
Sykes, David 65
Taylor, Frederick W. 76
Watsuji, Tetsuro 183
White, Lynn 212
Winner, Langdon 26
Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1s
Wollstonecraft, Mary 179
Zizek, Slavoj 27
a:
,_::,
""
a:
w
....
....
w
I
>0
262
Index of persons
Index of topics
acrasIa 145, 226
action 21 , 29. See also chapter 14
aesthetic way of life 165
agency 170
altruism 115, 116
animals 44
anthropocene 214
appropriate technology 108
authenticity 166-1 68
authorities 61
autonomy 72, 170- 172
autonomy matrix 93-95
average utilitarianism 122
awareness 19. See also chapter 2
bad fa ith 167
bribes 32, 62, 236
Buddhism 130, 154-157
~
>-
z
w
0
:::,
>-
"'0
z
«
cc:
0
:r:
>-
::,
«
w
:r:
>-
..
capitalism 36
care, ethics of 179, 180
casuistry 107
categorica l imperatives 133
choice 44
Christianity 129,1 62,212
code of conduct 33, 78-80
cognitive dissonance 117
Collste's decision-making process 89, 90
commod ity fetishism 183
compensatory j ustice 195
competitors 32
concepts 14-1 8
conform ism 63
Confucian ism 154, 183, 184
consequentialism. See chapter 7
constructive technology assessment (CTA) 105
consumption 35
conversation 102-105
co-workers 31
critica l thin king 20. See also chapter 6
CTA (constructive technology assessment) 105
cultural lag 12
death 169
decision 89, 90
deep ecology 219, 220
demands 60
deontology. See chapter 8
descriptive 18
determination 57
discourse ethics 102- 105
distributive j ustice 195
division of labour 64
duty ethics. See chapter 8
effective altruism 116
egoism 18, 115
eightfold path 155-157
emotion 86, 88
Eng ineers Without Borders 76
environmental ethics. See chapter 13
equa lity 196
equa lity of opportunity 196
equa lity of outcome 196
263
ethical cycle 92, 93
ethical roadmap 227
ethical technology assessment, eTA 105
ethical technology development 95- 97
ethics 13-21
etiquette 18
eudaimonia 147-150
EVIL 98- 100
existentialism 161
expanding circle 11 7
expected va Iue 123
extrinsic value 17
fairness 145. See a/so chapter 12
family matters 36
feminist ethics 179
five training rules 130
four noble truths 155
freedom. See chapter 10
freedom from 46, 47
freedom to 43- 45
free time 37
free wi ll 58
gamification 166
golden mean 147
golden rule 130
good 17
happiness 119, 121, 147
harm principle 170
hazard 122
hedonistic utilitarianism 118
Hume's law 18
hypernorms 31
hypothetical imperative 133
idea l utilitarianism 120
identity 72
ideology 27, 108, 220
impact 47
imperative 133
264
Index of t opics
implement technology 12
ingen ium 75
instrumental value 17
intrinsic/inherent value 17
justice 145. See also chapter 12
karma 154
knowledge 44
land eth ics 218
laws 21, 22, 129
legal responsibility so
libertarianism 170
loyalty 163
luck ega litarianism 198
management 33
master suppression techniques 105, 106
maxima listic ethics 18
micro norms 31
minima listic ethics 18
monism 85
morality 15
moral responsibi lity 50
need 197, 198
normative 18
norms 16, 103
open question argument 11 8
particularism 116
peer pressure 63
personal conviction 55
personal ethics 13, 35-38
phronesis 147, 150
planned obsolescence 46
plura lism 85
popular culture 38
power 77, 185, 201, 230
practica l syllogism 109
a:
::,
....
<(
a:
w
,_
I-
,__
~
z
w
C
::,
IV>
C
z
<(
a:
0
I
....
::,
<(
w
I
....
0
precautionary principle 124
preference satisfaction 11 9
prescriptive 18
prima facie 136
principles 17
probabilistic consequentialist analysis 122
profession 71-76
proscri ptive 18
prudence 54
rationa lity 11 6, 133
rational izations 65-67
reason 86
relational ethics. See chapter 11
relations 30- 34
relationships 179
religion 54, 129, 130
resources 46, 58
responsibility 20. See also chapters :3-5
retributive just ice 195
right 17
rights 137- 139
risk 122-124
rule consequentialism 121
ru Ies 16, 129, 130
safety 123
script 29, 97
slave moral ity 162
social media 166
sovereignty 131
strict egalitarianism 196
structural violence 155
students 34
suffering 155-157
supererogatory action 11 s
suppliers 32
sustainability 214- 2-i?
synthetic model for critical thinking
100- 102
technique 26
techniques of neutralization 65
technocracy 145
technology 11, 12, 26- 30
teleology 146
ten com mandments 129
time 60
tradition 131
transhumanism 164
trolley problem 28
trust 186, 187
universa lization 103, 133
utilitarianism 116
values 17
veil of ignorance 203
virtue ethics. See chapter 9
v-rules 149
wa ll of obviousness 19
weakness of will 145, 226
work together with others 13, 30- 34
a:
...<
...,_
:,
a:
w
...,
,_
z
w
0
:,
,_
V,
0
z
<
a:
0
...
I
:,
<
Index of topics
265