Introduction to

Ethical Thinking for Engineers

ENGR 101 2021
Lecture 12
Kim Rutter
1
Why ethics matters to engineers
Our society needs professionals who “do the right thing”

2
“Engineers’ work affects all
New Zealanders, every day.
Engineers create the
foundation for New Zealand’s
social, environmental and
economic fabric. ”
EngineeringNZ
3
Royal Academy of Engineering UK
Big Ethical Questions for Engineers
• ????

Who decides?
5
Everyday Ethical Questions for Engineers
Engineering practice
• Public safety and welfare
• Environmental protection
• Honesty in research and
testing
• Integrity of data
• Misrepresentation of
expertise
Workplace practice
• Breaching client
confidentiality
• Bribery and fraud
• Harassment and bullying
• Fairness/ discrimination
• Conflicts of interest
6
Everyday Ethical Questions for Engineering
Students
Academic Integrity Social Responsibility
• Cheating • Harassment and bullying
• Social loafing • Fairness/ discrimination
• Honesty in research and
testing
• Integrity of data

7
Defining Ethics

8
Values
• Ethical values
• Directly relate to personal beliefs about what is right and
proper:
• Honesty, promise-keeping, fairness, compassion, respect for
others
• Non-ethical values
• Ethically neutral (not unethical)
• Relate not to morality but to desire:
• Eg wealth, power, status, happiness, beauty
• Pursuing non-ethical values is not wrong, as long as it
does not violate ethical values 9
Morals
• Personal and societal standards of behaviour
• A function of
• Values
• Personality
• Cultural and societal norms
• Religion (or lack thereof)
• Family
• Peer pressure
• Education
• Observed behaviour of others and observed consequences
of that behaviour
• Fear of consequences
10
Ethics: The Study of Moral Principles
• What ought to be done
• What character a person ought to be
• What values and morals a person ought to adopt

11
Ethics and the Law
• Ethics: what a person ought to do
• Law: what a person is required to do by the state

• Law establishes minimum standards of conduct

• Note: laws evolve with culture

– some laws of the past are regarded today as morally wrong
(slavery) and have been repealed

12
13
“There are two aspects to ethics. The first involves the ability
to discern right from wrong, good from evil and propriety from
impropriety. The second involves the commitment to do what
is right, good and proper.”
Michael Josephson, “Making Ethical Decisions”

The Goal: Applied Ethics

Use existing principles to make ethically sound decisions

• Personal sense of right and wrong

• Understanding of ethical theories
• Systematic decision making process
14
What Makes an Action “Right” or “Wrong”?
- Ethical Theories Simplified
• Rule-Based Thinking
• Do the “right” thing
• Ends-Based Thinking
• Get the “best” outcome
• Virtues-Based Thinking
• Be a “good” person
15
Virtues-Based Thinking: Be a Good Person
• Acts are ethical if they are what a “virtuous” person would
do in the same circumstances.
• A virtuous person would act with (for example) integrity, honesty,
courage, compassion and self-regard. (ethical values)
• Extremes are to be avoided however (Aristotle’s Golden Mean).
For example courage is a virtue, but too much is recklessness,
and too little is cowardice
• Shortcomings: Assumes everyone values the same virtues, and
acts accordingly.

16
Rule-Based* Thinking: Do the Right Thing
• An act is ethical if certain ethical rules are obeyed, regardless
of the situation and potential outcomes
• Rule-based thinking is absolutist

*aka deontology, duty-based thinking

17
Rule-Based Thinking
• Strength: Simple to understand
– if we follow the rules, we are ethical; if we break them, we are unethical

• Weakness: What are the rules? Who decides?

– Obey “universal” moral laws?
 It is wrong to kill innocent people
 It is wrong to steal
 It is wrong to tell lies
 It is right to keep promises
– Obey the “word of God”?
– Obey the law?
18
Rule-Based Thinking: What are the Rules?
• Rule: Follow the law
• Rule: People have fundamental rights that other people have
a duty to respect
• Rule: Actions must be just and fair
• Rule: Treat others as you would wish to be treated (the
Golden Rule)
• Rule: Follow your professional code of ethics
• Rule: Obey company/organisational policies
19
Rule-Based Thinking
• Strength: Simple to understand
– if we follow the rules, we are ethical; if we break them, we are unethical

• Weakness: What are the rules? Who decides?

– Obey “universal” moral laws? (Kant)
– Obey the “word of God” (Divine Command)?
– Obey the law?

• Weakness: What if the rules conflict with virtues and values?

What if they conflict with each other? And what about the
consequences?
20
 Ends-Based* Thinking: Get the Best Outcome
• Weigh competing actions according to their consequences
• Acts are ethical when they achieve the best outcome
– “The ends justifies the means”

• Flexible, not absolute

• Shortcoming: how to judge the “best” outcome?
– Best for me?
– Best for my family?
– Best for most people?
21
*aka teleology, consequentialism
Best for who? 22
Ends Based Ethics: Utilitarianism
• Acts are ethical when they achieve the greatest good for the
greatest number
• “It is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the
measure of right and wrong” Jeremy Bentham 1776
– Assess good and bad outcomes
– Consider the short and the long term
– Consider the individual and all effected stakeholders

• Cost-benefit analysis
23
Consequence Based Ethics: Utilitarianism
• Shortcomings:
– Only considers the overall happiness/suffering, not the distribution.
– Difficult to quantify “happiness” and “suffering”.

24
The Pinto Problem:
Monetised Utilitarian Approach
Option 1: Redesign the gas tank
• 12.5 million automobiles
sold
• Final cost per car to
implement redesign $11

• Total cost $137 million

Option 2: Ship the car as is
• Death by burning for 180 buyers
• Serious burns for another 180 buyers
• 2,100 vehicles burned beyond all repair

• Value of Statistical Life (VSL, USA, 1970) = $200,000 (approx.

$2 mill today)
• Cost of a serious burn = $67,000
• Average resale = $700 (lost if car destroyed)
The Pinto Problem:
Monetised Utilitarian Approach
Redesign the gas tank Do nothing
• 12.5 million automobiles • 180 deaths x $200,000
sold • 180 injuries x $67,000
• Cost per car to implement • 2,100 burned out cars x
redesign $11 $700

• Total cost $137 million • Total cost $49 million

What Makes an Action “Right” or “Wrong”?
Ethical Theories Simplified
• Rule-Based Thinking
• Do the “right” thing
• Ends-Based Thinking
• Get the “best” outcome
• Virtues-Based Thinking
• Be a “good” person
28
Blending Ethical Theories
• People do not have to align themselves with a single theory
– do not have to choose between being a strict deontologist or a strict
teleologist
– Rule Consequentialism
 Follow the rules, but when they conflict, choose based on the consequences
 Shortcoming: as with utilitarianism, what happens to the “lesser number”?

• Use the theories as tools to make ethical decisions you can

defend.

29
“There are two aspects to ethics. The first involves the ability
to discern right from wrong, good from evil and propriety from
impropriety. The second involves the commitment to do what
is right, good and proper.”
Michael Josephson, “Making Ethical Decisions”

The Goal: Applied Ethics

Use existing principles to make ethically sound decisions

• Personal sense of right and wrong

• Understanding of ethical theories
• Systematic decision making process
30
The Eight Step Method of Ethical Decision
Adapted from Langenderfer and Rockness
STEPS
1. Identify the facts
2. Identify the ethical issues and the
stakeholders involved
3.Identify the ethical principles, rules
and values related to the situation
4. Identify possible courses of action
5. Apply principles, rules and values to
each possible course of action
6. Evaluate the consequences of each
remaining course of action
7. Discuss alternatives/ take advice
8. Make a decision
Making
Descriptive criteria
Define the scope of the problem
List the significant stakeholders and the way in which they
could be affected
Consider how these guidelines influence individuals, the
company, the profession and society in general
List the alternatives of what can and cannot be done
Determine whether there is a clear course of action.
Discard those that are unacceptable.
Identify the possible outcomes of alternatives (both
positive and negative). Consider impact vs likelihood.
Talking with a trusted person can help gain greater
perspective regarding alternatives
If you can’t, repeat steps 4 - 7
31
In other words:

• Is the action legal?

• Is it right?
• Who will be affected, and how?
• Does it fit with the values and ethics of my company/my
profession/me?
• How will I feel afterwards?
• Will it reflect poorly on the company/my profession/me?
Homework reading before Lecture 13:
Rule-Based Thinking

33
Rule-Based Thinking: Rules about Rights
Rule: People have fundamental rights that other people have a
duty to respect (legal requirements are the minimum)
• Examples are the right to:
– Free consent - Be told the truth
– Privacy - Life and safety
– Freedom of conscience - Freedom of speech
– Due process - Freedom of choice
• Shortcomings: It is not always possible to simultaneously
uphold the rights of all parties
34
The Problem of Conflicting Rights
• Conflicting rights lead can lead to ethical dilemmas:
– Right to free speech vs right to be told the truth
– Right to privacy vs right to security

35
“Cyber security is a huge public safety concern. On the one hand, the FBI is confronted with its current dilemma of
gathering evidence in a terrorism case. On the other hand, Apple is considering the strategic implications of a world in
which strong encryption is ubiquitous but [not available] to consumers of American products.
There are no easy answers to this problem, and both sides are acting out of genuine interpretation of the law and their
duties.” Huffington Post
36
 Rule-Based Thinking: Rules about Justice
Rule: Actions must be just and fair (legal requirements are the
minimum)
– Distributive justice (equity): Different treatment of people should not
be based on arbitrary characteristics (discrimination, equal pay for equal
work)
– Procedural justice (impartiality): Rules should be clearly stated and
consistently and impartially enforced
– Compensatory justice (fairness)
 Individuals should be compensated for injury by the party responsible
 Individuals should not be held responsible for matters over which they have no
control
• Shortcomings: It is not always possible to be equitable to all stakeholders
37
The NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990

• The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 protects the civil and
political rights of all New Zealanders.
• It is the legal “bottom line” for rights and justice in NZ.
• The Act covers the following categories of rights and freedoms:
– Life and security of the person
– Democratic and civil rights
– Non-discrimination and minority rights
– Search, arrest and detention
– Criminal procedure, and
– The right to justice.
38
 Rule-Based Thinking: The Golden Rule
Rule: Treat others as you would wish to be treated
• "None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for
himself."
• 40 Hadith Nawawi 13

• “Do to others as you would have them do to you”

• Luke 6:31, Matthew 7:12

• “This is the sum of the Dharma [duty]: do naught unto others which would cause
you pain if done to you.”
• Mahabharata 5:1517

• Shortcomings
• Assumes your needs and wants are the same as everyone else’s
• Does not distinguish between competing stakeholders

39
This rule is simple:
Treat others as you wish them to treat you
Could it be considered a universal law? It
certainly transcends religion and culture,
and has universal appeal.
It is based on respect and empathy, but
there are shortcomings:

It assumes the values, needs and wants of all parties are the same as yours.
It can also result in paternalistic and colonialist thinking, with decision makers assuming
they know what is best for other stakeholders
A better alternative could be: Treat people the way they wish to be treated
However this does not solve the problem of different affected groups (stakeholders)
wishing for different outcomes
40
Rule-Based Thinking: Professional Codes of Ethics
Rule: Follow your professional code of ethics.
• All engineering professional bodies in NZ and internationally have codes
of ethics that all members must follow:
• Engineering NZ Code of Ethical Conduct
• IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Code of Ethics
• ACM/IEEE Software Engineering Code of Ethics
• IET (Institution of Engineering and Technology) Rules of Conduct (UK)
• EngAust Code of Ethics and Guidelines on Professional Conduct (AUS)
• RAE Statement of Ethical Principles (UK Royal Academy of Engineering)
• ASCE Code of Ethics (American Society of Civil Engineers)
• AIChE Code of Ethics (American Institute of Chemical Engineers)
• ASME Code of Ethics (American Society of Mechanical Engineers)
41
EngineeringNZ Code of
Ethical Conduct

42
43
Rule-Based Thinking: Company Policy
Rule: Obey your organisation’s code of ethics and other policies.
• A requirement of your employment. Typical NZ engineering company
examples are: Think of a company you would like to work for:
• WSP Opus can you find its ethical behaviour policies online?
• https://www.wsp.com/en-US/who-we-are/corporate-responsibility/ethics-integrity

• Meridian Energy
• https://www.meridianenergy.co.nz/assets/Investors/Governance/Policies/Code-of-Condu
ct-APPROVED-27-May-2020.pdf
• Fisher and Paykel Healthcare
• https://www.fphcare.com/nz/our-company/sustainability/ethics-and-legal-compliance/

• Fulton Hogan
• https://www.fultonhogan.com/our-story/our-values-and-behaviours/
44