Engineering Ethics Theories Explained

BEKU 4583
ENGINEERING ETHICS
UNDERSTANDING ETHICAL
PROBLEM
(MORAL PRINCIPLE)
Ir. Dr. MN Othman | 2013 | REFERENCE: Charles B. Fleddermann, Engineering Ethics, 3rd
edition, Person Prentice Hall, 2012
A BRIEF HISTORY OF ETHICAL THOUGHT
• The moral and ethical theories that we will be applying in
engineering ethics are derived from a Western cultural tradition.
(Middle East and Europe)
• It is derived both from the thinking of the ancient Greeks as well as
from ancient religious thinking and writing, starting with Judaism
and its foundations.
• Greek philosophic ideas were melded together with early Christian
and Jewish thought and were spread throughout Europe and the
Middle East during the height of the Roman Empire.
CONT.
• Many great thinkers have turned their attention to ethics and
morals and have tried to provide insight into these issues through
writings.
• Philosophers such as Locke, Kant, and Mill wrote about moral and
ethical issues.
• They acknowledge that moral principles are universal, regardless of
their origin, and are applicable even in secular setting.
• In discussing engineering ethics, there is a large body of thinking –
philosophical, legal, and religious – to draw from.
• However, even though there are religious and legal origins of many
of the moral principle that we will encounter in our study of
engineering ethics, it is important to acknowledge that ethical
conduct is a fundamentally grounded in concern for other people.
ETHICAL THEORIES
• In studying engineering ethics, there are several theories that will
be considered.
• The relatively large number of theories doesn’t indicate a weakness
in theoretical understanding of ethics or a “fuzziness” of ethical
thinking.
• Rather, it reflects the complexity of ethical problems and the
diversity of approaches to ethical problem solving that have been
developed over the centuries.
• Each theory stresses different aspects of a problem.
• Frequently, different theories yield the same solution.
What is a Moral Theory ?
• A moral theory defines terms in uniform ways and links ideas and
problem together in consistent ways [Harris, Pritchard and Rabins,
1985]
• This is exactly how the scientific theories used in other engineering
classes function.
• Scientific theories also organise ideas, define terms, and facilitate
problem solving.
• We will use moral theories in exactly the same way that engineering
theories are used in other classes.
• There four ethical theories that will be considered here.
CONT.
• Utilitarianism seeks to produce the most utility, defined as a
balance between good and bad consequences of an action, taking
into account the consequences for every one affected.
• Duty ethics contend that there are duties that should be performed
regardless of whether these act lead to the most good.
• Right ethics emphasises that we all have moral right, and any action
that violates these right is ethically unacceptable.
• Virtue ethics regards actions as right that manifest good character
traits (virtues) and regards actions as bad that display bad that
display bad character traits (vice).
UTILITARIANISM
• Holds that those actions are good that serve to maximise human well-
being.
• The emphasis is not on maximising the well-being of the individual, but
rather on maximising the well-being of society as a whole, and as such it is
somewhat of a collectivist approach.
• Is fundamental to many types of engineering analysis, including risk-
benefit analysis and cost-benefit analysis.
• The Greatest Happiness Principle:

• “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness,
wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness” –John Stuart
Mill
• Happiness = pleasure, and the absence of pain

• Unhappiness = pain, and the absence of pleasure
UTILITARIANISM (CONT.)
• It should be noted that there are many flavors of the basic term of
utilitarianism.
• Two of these are act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.
• Act utilitarianism focuses on individual actions rather than rules. The best
known proponent of act utilitarianism was John Stuart Mill (1806-1873),
who felt that most of the common rules of morality (eg. Don’t steal, be
honest, don’t harm others) are good guidelines derived from centuries of
human experience.
• Rule utilitarianism differs from act utilitarianism in holding that moral rules
are most important. As mentioned previously, these rules include “do not
harm others” and “do not steal”. Rule utilitarians hold that although
adhering to these rules might not always maximise good in particular
situation, overall, adhering to moral rules will ultimately lead to the most
good.
• Hostage Dilemma Thought Experiment:
• Terrorists are holding you and fifty other people as hostages inside a building.
The only exit has been blocked and three of the hostages have been strapped to
the door, attached to explosives. The terrorist leader offers you a choice. Either
(i) you can activate a detonator that will blow up the exit, killing the
three hostages strapped to it but allowing the others to escape, or
(ii) (ii) you can decline and the terrorists will kill everyone.
• You believe (and have good reason to believe) that the terrorist leader is
sincere. What should you do?
• Some people would argue that:
• “It is terrible that everyone will be killed, but I have no right to kill
anyone myself. I am responsible for my own actions, the terrorist is responsible
for his. If he kills everyone, then that is his evil, not mine. But if I activate
the detonator, then I will have committed an act of evil. Therefore, I am
morally obligated to take option (ii).”
• Exploitation: The ancient Romans used slaves as gladiators,
forcing them to fight to the death for entertainment. Is it right to
force a small number of people to be gladiators if it gives millions
of people pleasure? Would it be morally acceptable to pay people
to fight to the death?
• Ruthlessness: President Truman ordered atomic bombs to be

dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, knowing that many
thousands of non-combatants would be killed, in order to save
more lives by ending the war. Assume that the decision did result
in fewer lives lost. Was it morally right?
• Paternalism: Suppose that banning certain kinds of fast food and

snack foods would result in millions of people living longer,
healthier lives. Would such a ban be morally justified?
• Answer:
• One of the most controversial examples of utilitarianism was the dropping
of the atomic bomb on Japan during WWII.
• Many debate that this force of action was unnecessary, as many innocent
civilians died. However, the Japanese were working towards developing a
similar weapon that could have been used on the United States unless the
US hadn't intervened. This also helped America to stop other countries
from getting involved and ended the war between Japan. The death of
innocent civilians might have been greater if the bombs hadn't been
dropped.
• So although America killed thousands of Japanese, it was in exchange for

the greater good and for the greatest amount of people. It stopped the
war between Japan and America, before other countries could get
involved.
DUTY ETHICS AND RIGHT ETHICS
• Are similar to each other.
• A major proponent of duty ethics was Imanuel Kant (1724-1804),
who held that moral duties are fundamental.
• Deontological (duty-based) ethics are concerned with what people
do, not with the consequences of their actions.
• Do the right thing.
• Do it because it's the right thing to do.
• Don't do wrong things.
• Avoid them because they are wrong.
• A list of duties : be honest, don’t cause suffering to other people,
be fair to others, etc.
• These actions are our duties because they express respect for
persons, express an unqualified regard for autonomous moral
agents, and are universal principles [Martin and Schinzinger, 2000)
CONT.
• Rights ethics was largely formulated by John Locke (1632-1704).
• Statement : humans have the right to life, liberty, and property.
• Duty ethics and right ethics are really just two different sides of the
same coin.
• In duty ethics, people have duties, an important one of which is to
protect the rights of others.
• In right ethics, people have fundamental rights that others have
duty to protect.
Right and duty ethics are mirror images of each other
"You have the right to live, I have a duty not to kill you; and if I have a duty not
to deceive you, you have the right not to be deceived".
Rights Corresponding Duties
Kelly has a right to live Others have a duty not to kill Kelly
Kelly has a right to free action Others have a duty not to coerce
Kelly
Kelly has a right to free speech Others have a duty not to prevent
Kelly from speaking freely
Kelly has a right not to be Others have a duty not to be
deceived deceived Kelly
Kelly has a right not to be stolen Others have a duty not to steal
from. from Kelly
Kelly has a right to kept Others have a duty not to break
promises. their promises to Kelly
Kelly has a right to non Others have a duty not to deny
discrimination. Kelly opportunities based on
race, gender,creed or sexual
preferances.
Kelly has a right to property. Others have a duty not to bar

Kelly opportunities for free and
fair competition for property
and its use
CONT.
• As with utilitarianism, there are problems with the duty and rights
ethics theories that must be considered.
• First the basic rights of one person (or group) may conflict with the
basic rights of another group.
• The second problem with duty and rights ethics is that these
theories don’t always account for the overall good of society very
well.
Presidential Decision-Making: Utilitarianism vs
Duty Ethics
• Utilitarianism
1 To measure pleasure and pain in order to help them achieve the
greatest good for the greatest number. Their goal was to maximise
happiness. Positive outcomes should be greater than negative results
(200,000 vs 1,000,000)
2 However, failed in its attempt to calculate the amount of pleasure and
pain across society. This kind of assessment is ultimately too complex
and subjective
• Duty ethics
1 Ethics is a rational process. Everyone must use his or her intelligence to
determine what is morally appropriate, since human beings’ foremost
characteristic is reason. Once an appropriate ethical stance is
determined by reason, it becomes one’s duty to act ethically on the
basis of what one has concluded rationally.
2 Should judge your actions as if your behavior were a model for all
humanity. People to create communities where persons were endowed
with dignity and respect and would be treated as responsible, valuable
citizens.
VIRTUE ETHICS
• Fundamentally, virtue ethics is interested in determining what kind
of people we should be.
• Virtue is often defined as moral distinction and goodness.
• In virtue ethics , actions are considered right if they support good
character traits (virtues) and wrong if they support bad character
traits (vices).
• If a behavior is virtuous in the individual’s personal life, the
behavior Is virtuous in his or her business life as well.
Personal vs. Corporate Morality
• Is there a distinction between the ethics practiced by an individual
and the ethics practiced by a corporation ?
• Put another way, can a corporation be a moral agent as an
individual?
• In the strictest definition of moral agency, a company cannot be a
moral agent, and yet companies have many dealing with individuals
or groups of people.
• Just because it isn’t really a moral agent like a person doesn’t mean
that a corporation can do whatever it pleases.
Which Theory to Use ?
• How do we decide which theory is applicable to a given problem ?
• In solving ethical problems, we don’t have to choose from among
these theories.

Engineering Ethics Theories Explained

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Ethics Theories Explained

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BEKU 4583

• The Greatest Happiness Principle:

• Happiness = pleasure, and the absence of pain

• Some people would argue that:

• Ruthlessness: President Truman ordered atomic bombs to be

• Paternalism: Suppose that banning certain kinds of fast food and

• So although America killed thousands of Japanese, it was in exchange for

Rights Corresponding Duties

Kelly has a right to property. Others have a duty not to bar

You might also like