Ethics
Objectives:
1. What are ethics?
2. What ethical theories and frameworks can impact our analysis of ethical behavior
examples to demonstrate these frameworks you are already learning
3. Professional ethics
“Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public in the performance
of their professional duties.”
ASCE Code of Ethics
1. What are ethics?
Ethics: a set of values or group of moral principles that are right and good
a code or principles of behavior or conduct governing an individual or group
Engineering Ethics: activity or discipline aimed at understanding the moral values that should
guide engineering practice
(only since late 1970s has systematic attention to ethics been devoted by engineers
and others, as spurred by a national engineering ethics project sponsored by the U.S.
Government (NSF, NEH) in 1978-1980)
Why study ethics? to increase your ability as engineers to responsibly confront moral issues
raised by technological activity
not always in short term best interest, and bring long-term into decision making
ethics are imprecise, complex, and in a given situation may conflict
vague = which moral considerations to apply to a situation and in what “hierarchy”
conflicting moral reasons are common, resulting in a moral dilemma
disagreement over how to interpret, apply, and balance moral reasons in particular situations
Illustrative “Thinking” Exercise
You and your best friend graduate from high school and decide to take a cruise the
summer before starting college at Yale University in the fall. While on the boat, tragedy strikes
and the boat begins to sink. Your friend is severely injured, but you both manage to get into a
life boat. You float in the ocean, with only a little water and sharks circling. Your friends asks
you to promise that if for some reason you are rescued that you will see that all their money is
donated to the local Country Club. You agree. Your friend dies, and as you wait to die you
begin to see life differently. By a miracle, an oil tanker rescues you. You make it back, but
decide to donate the money to the Burn Ward at the local children’s hospital instead. Was your
decision ethical?
Why or why not?
Questions to ask yourself to determine “Is a Decision Ethical?”
Is it legal? Does it conform to policies and codes? Is it honest?
Does it pass the benefit/harm test? Whom does it harm? Whom does it benefit?
Can these be justified? -> cost/benefit analysis; risk assessment
Does it treat everyone equally? equitably? If not, can the differences be justified?
(think about affirmative action, American Disabilities Act)
Does it deny anyone his or her rights? (sometimes these collide?)
Can I live with my decision? Does it rest comfortably on my conscience?
Can it pass the test of public scrutiny? Could I disclose it fully without hesitation to my
supervisor, my family, or to a reporter from the New York Times?
do ethical principles apply to non-humans?
Environmental Ethics - Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic: “A thing is right when...”
The Valdez Principles: to modify company policies to incorporate environmental ethic
2. Ethical theories and frameworks that can impact an analysis of ethical behavior
examples to demonstrate these frameworks you are already learning
Four Principal Ethical Theories:
1. Rights Ethics - act is morally right when it respects rights relevant to a situation
Examples: rights for “life, liberty, pursuit of happiness”
other rights: private property, privacy, freedom of speech, fair trial, ...
human rights and non-human rights?
2. Duty Ethics - act it right when it conforms with duties
Examples: uphold promise, be fair, respect personal freedom
duty to protect the weak, duty to comply with laws, ...?
duty to do job to best of ability
3. Utilitarianism - right action consists entirely in producing good consequences
Interpretation: good intentions, outcomes, results; “ends justify means”
Example: most good for most people is optimal
4. Virtue Ethics - persons are morally good when their character is virtuous and
expressed in action, attitude, and relationships (oldest, prominent in classical Greek thought and
religion). Example Virtues: honesty, fairness, conscientiousness, etc.
Note that you may or may not agree with all of the above ethical theories. More specifically, you
may generally agree with the overall theory, but individuals often disagree about what are
specific rights, duties, and virtues.
Four Secondary Theories:
1. Ethical Egoism - act is correct when it maximizes one’s own interests
2. Corporate Egoism - act is acceptable when it maximizes the interest of a corporation
3. Ethical Relativism - act is right when it is approved by a group (conforms to laws)
4. Divine-command ethics - act is correct when it is approved by God
Situational ethics vs Absolutism
Situational ethics means that depending on the specific circumstances, different rights,
duties, values, etc. may apply. Absolutism implies that regardless of a situation, the basic ethical
foundations remain the same. For example, most people would agree that killing is wrong /
unethical. However, absolutism implies that it is always wrong. Therefore, a person who was
absolutist would not be in the military and would not use deadly force to defend themself.
Alternatively, situational ethics would allow that killing in some situations IS ethical. For
example, the idea of justifiable homicide, such as in self-defense. Or defense of ones country in
time of war. Again, neither view is either right or wrong. Ethical theory can support either
argument.
Stages of moral development:
It is generally recognized that people tend to transition between different levels of moral
understanding throughout their lifetime. As small children, we don’t innately understand right
from wrong, do not know what laws govern society, etc. As we learn, our views evolve over
time. These so-called “stages of moral development” are often classified as follows:
1. obedience or punishment
2. marketplace morality
3. conformity
4. law and order
5. social contract
6. universal human rights
7. integrity - whole environment ethic
Alternatively, Kohlberg grouped moral development into 3 MAIN levels:
pre-conventional
= self benefit, avoid punishment, defer to authority or power
conventional
= conform blindly to societal norms or customs
post-conventional
= autonomous, reasoned positions beyond self interest
Steps to confront moral dilemma:
1. Identify relevant moral factors and reasons
what are the conflicting responsibilities, competing rights, and clshing ideals involved
2. Gather all available information that is relevant to the moral factors involved
3. Rank the moral considerations in order of importance (if possible)
4. Consider alternative courses of action to resolve the dilemma, considering the FULL
implications of each
5. Talk with others to get alternative perspectives on the dilemma
6. Arrive at a reasoned judgment by weighing all moral factors on the basis of your information
Ethics of Rules and Rights vs Ethics of CARE
Case Studies
1.
2.
3.
4.
What would a person at each stage of moral development do?
What do societal values require in this case?
What do professional ethical standards require in this case?
What would you do?
To “solve” case study homework problems, you must be willing to tolerate some uncertainty in
making difficult moral judgments....but be able to adequately express and defend your views.
Also, realize that in your career as an engineer you should aim to integrate your personal
convictions into your professional activities.
3. Professional Ethics
This section discusses some of the key facets of professional ethics. Specifics for each of these
areas are provided in the professional codes of ethics from the National Society of Professional
Engineers (NSPE) and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Duty to the Public and Clients
“Being ethical also means being honest. In carrying out large and complex assignments, we
confront issues that aren’t purely technical. There are business and financial ramifications to
consider in our projects, and sometimes we must suppress our engineering egos in favor of the
client’s interests.” Joel Cerwick, vice president Burn’s & McDonnell
Avoid conflict of interest: no favoritism, based on personal biases, during engineering practice.
This can include things such as influencing decisions that will yield personal gain.
“The Architecture and Engineering Firm and its client cannot forget their duty to the general
public. We design facilities that are used by people who rely on the engineer’s skill, diligence
and ethics for their safety. Sometimes governmental organizations are our clients -- which means
that the pulbic at large is our ultimate client.” John Riley, vice president, Burn’s & McDonnell
Do not perform a task for which you are not qualified.
It is important not to “fake” knowledge. What you don’t know could result in a failure of your
project, loss of human life, cost over-runs, etc.
Engineering disasters in history have frequently been linked to ethical judgments regarding the
balance of safety and risk
Challenger
Exxon Valdez oil spill
3 Mile Island, Chernobyl
asbestos use
Chemical plant in Bhopal
cigarettes
Key professional ethics are:
1. hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public
2. perform services only in areas of competence
3. issue public statements only in objective and truthful manner
4. act in professional manner for each client and avoid conflicts of interest
5. not compete unfairly with others
6. act in a manner to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity, and dignity of the profession
7. enhance personal development of self and others
“..there are, under peer review for people found to have blatantly violated [the code of ethics],
economic penalties associated with the kinds of sanctions that the profession can apply. In
extreme cases the engineering society can remove an engineer from the society, and when the
word gets out they will basically be black-listed.” Stratmoen, S. “The Ethics of Engineering.”
Iowa Engineer, March 1991, p. 18-19.
Three Principles
There are three different principles that engineers sometimes use to guide their decision making.
Different engineers subscribe to different principles. None of these is exclusively right or
wrong... just different points of view.
1. Engineers should not impose their moral views on society; they should let society decide what
projects are undertaken.
“guns for hire” view
“should we...accept the hazards of pesticides in order to feed hungry people? Stop
building a dam and thus protect an endangered fish? These are political questions: it is...a little
frightening to see citizens abdicate their responsibilities by assigning them to the realm of
engineering ethics.”
“...each person is entitled to legal representation, is it not equally important the each
legitimate business entity...should have access to expert engineering advice? ...engineers will
sometimes labor on behalf of causes in which they do not believe”
2. Engineers should refuse to work on projects which conflict with their moral values.
engineers should not be neutral...refuse to work on certain projects...use their skills only
for projects of positive value to humanity
implies that moral values are personal and not professional
may therefore be disagreements about what is “good for humanity”
3. Engineers should refuse to work on projects that increase risk unless the public is informed
about the risk and given the opportunity to consent to the project.
engineering as social experimentation, and always involving risk
adequately informing the public: neither the extreme views of one or two
secrecy in engineering?
the building of atomic weapons...
decision making (such as the Ford Pinto)
even given full disclosure, can the public fully appreciate the balance of costs:benefits,
risks:rewards that enter in to engineering decisions?
Ethical Issues Associated with Whistle-Blowing
loyalty to a corporation is a non-issue?
what is good about loyalty? is it always good to be loyal? if not, when?
what should you do if loyalties conflict?
NSPE Code states “..will serve with devotion his employer, his clients, and the
public”...these sometimes DO conflict
Whistle-Blowing: the act by an employee of informing the public on the immoral or illegal
behavior of an employer or supervisor (obligation to public overrides obligation to employer?)
may be other, better solutions to the problems than whistle-blowing
problem: how to maximize safety or reduce un-safety to a minimum
preclude the need for whistle-blowing
On a scale of 1 to 7 rank the frequency you believe these ethical issues
arise for practicing engineers, where 1 = never and 7 = very frequently
On a scale of 1 to 7 rank the seriousness of these problems,
1 = not serious at all, 7 = extremely serious
Compare your ratings to the average results when consulting engineers were polled.
Your ratings
Consulting
Engineers
Frequency
Serious
Frequency
Serious
Rating
Rating
Rating
Rating
Technical Incompetence or
misrepresentation of
competence
4.14
5.95
Conflicts of interest
3.70
5.60
Failure to protect public health,
safety or welfare
2.88
6.12
Improper relations with clients,
contractors, etc.
3.12
5.40
Poor quality control or quality
of work
4.72
5.69
Failure to protect the
environment
3.19
5.36
Ethical Issue
Koehn, E. “Ethical Issues Experienced by Engineering Students and Practitioners.” 1992.
JPIEEP, Vol 119(4): 402-408.
References
Atchison, G.J. 1991. Environmental Science U St 223, Iowa State University, Class Notes.
Baum, R. J., Ed. 1980. Ethical Problems in Engineering. Volume 2: Cases. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, NY.
Bench Mark, Aug 1990, Burns and McDonnel, “Ethics”.
Bovay, H.E. 1992. “Ethics: A Necessary Foundation of a Professional.” The Bent, Summer 1992, p. 21-25.
Johnson, D. G. 1991. Ethical Issues in Engineering. Prentice Hall.
Killingsworth, R. A. and D. J. Twale. 1994. Integrating Ethics into Technical Curricula. J. of Prof. Issues in
Engr. Edu and Practice. 120(1): 58-69.
Koehn, E. 1994. Ethical Issues Experienced by Engineering Students and Practitioners. J. of Prof. Issues in Engr.
Edu and Practice. 119(4): 402-408.
Madsen, P. “The Ethics of Teaching Engineering.” Notes from presentation at the NSF Engineering Education
Scholars Workshop
Martin, M.W. and R. Schinzinger. 1996. Ethics in Engineering. Third Edition. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
McCuen, R. H. 1994. Constructivist Learning Model for Ethics Education. J. of Prof. Issues in Engr. Edu and
Practice. 120(3): 273-278.
Nair, I. 1997. “Ethics in Engineering II.” Materials presented at the NSF Engineering Education Scholars
Workshop, Carnegie Mellon University.
Porter, J.C. 1993. Ethics in Practice. J. of Prof. Issues in Engr. Edu and Practice. 119(1): 46-50.
Stratmoen, S. “The Ethics of Engineering.” Iowa Engineer, March 1991, p. 18-19.