Engineering Ethics can be defined as the rules and guidelines that engineers adhere to as a moral obligation to their profession and the world. Engineering is a professional career that impacts lives.
Therefore, Engineering is a profession, similar to law, medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy. A distinguishing feature of all these professions is that their practitioners are highly educated.
Engineers are hired by clients (and employers) specifically for their specialised expertise. Generally, the client knows less about the subject than the engineer.
Therefore, engineers have ethical obligations to their clients because the client often cannot assess the quality of the engineer’s technical advice.
These obligations are part of engineering ethics, the set of behavioural standards that all engineers are expected to follow. Engineering ethics are an extension of the ethical standards we all have as human beings.
Engineers have a long tradition of ethical behaviour that is widely recognised. Public opinion polls consistently list engineering among the most ethical professions.
Also Read: Engineering Tutorials: The Complete Tutorials for Engineers
Recommended Articles
Table of Contents
Interaction Rule
Engineers rarely work as lone individuals; we generally work in teams. Further, the products of our labour – automobiles, roads, chemical plants, computers – impact society as a whole.
Therefore, we need a set of interaction rules outlining the expected behaviours among the engineer, other individuals, and society as a whole.
The interaction rules go both ways: the engineer has obligations to society (e.g., to be honest, unbiased, hardworking, and careful), and society has obligations to the engineer (e.g., to pay for work performed, to protect intellectual property).
Interaction rules can be classified as etiquette, law, morals, and ethics as follows:
Etiquette
Etiquette consists of codes of behaviour and courtesy. It addresses issues such as how many forks to place on the dinner table, proper dress at weddings, seating arrangements, and party invitations.
Although we generally learn these rules from our everyday experiences, they have been codified in various ways.
The consequences of violating etiquette rules generally do not result in jail time. In some cases, etiquette can have important impacts.
Within the engineering world, proper etiquette is demonstrated by showing respect to employers and clients, avoiding embarrassment of colleagues, answering the phone professionally, and so forth.
Law
Law is a system of rules established by authority, society, or custom. Unlike etiquette, violations of the law carry penalties such as imprisonment, fines, community service, death, dismemberment, or banishment.
Each society has its consequences for law violations. In Middle Eastern societies, robbers may have a hand amputated, whereas Western societies favour imprisonment.
Because severe penalties may result from violating the law, the law must be clearly identifiable so everyone can know the boundaries separating legal and illegal behaviour.
Also Read: Problem Solving | All Skills You Need To Know
Morals
Morals are accepted standards of right and wrong that are usually applied to personal behaviour.
We derive moral standards from our parents, religious backgrounds, friends, and the media (television, movies, books, and music). Many moral codes are recorded in religious writings.
Despite the wide variety of cultures and religions in the world, there is agreement on many moral standards. Most cultures consider murder and stealing to be immoral behaviour.
From the view of cultural evolution, we can say there is a strong selective pressure against these behaviours.
Societies that did not develop moral codes against these behaviours degenerated into anarchy and disappeared.
For some behaviours, there is no universal agreement as to whether they are immoral. Activities such as gambling, dancing, and consumption of alcohol, meat, coffee, and cigarettes are considered immoral in some cultures and religions but not in others.
From the view of cultural evolution, we can say there is no strong selective pressure against these activities.
Societies can remain viable while tolerating these activities, although some would argue that a society that bans them is stronger.
Moral rights are just claims that belong to all humans, regardless of whether these rights are recognised by the government.
Civilisation recognises that simply being human endows us with rights; we need not do anything to earn them.
For example, most of the civilised world believes that because prisoners are human beings, they should not be tortured, regardless of the cruelty of their crime.
Ethics
Ethics consists of general, abstract concepts of right and wrong behaviour drawn from philosophy, theology, and professional societies.
Because professions draw their members from many cultures and religions, their ethical standards must be secular.
Most professional societies have a formal code of ethics to guide their members.
Comparison of Interaction Rules
From the above discussion, we have a complex web of interaction rules governing our behaviour. In some cases, all the interaction rules agree.
For example, murder is illegal, immoral, unethical, a violation of human rights, and certainly bad etiquette.
In general, lawmakers try to formulate laws that are consistent with morality. However, there can be conflicts between the law and morality for the following reasons:
- The legal system has not considered the situation.
- Encouraging some moral standards to be made law should be unenforceable.
- Laws must be impartial and treat everyone the same.
- The Laws must govern observable behaviour.
- Laws must be enacted by immoral regimes.
Also Read: What is Research Methodology?: The Ultimate Engineer’s Guide
Settling Conflict
A major purpose of interaction rules is to avoid conflicts between members of society. For example, a law tells us which side of the road to drive on. Without it, there would be many lethal conflicts.
Inevitably, human interactions result in conflicts. To settle the conflict, it is necessary to discern its source, which may stem from moral, conceptual, application, or factual issues.
Moral issues
A moral issue is involved if the issue can be resolved only by making a moral decision. For example, when automobiles were first introduced onto roads, a moral decision had to be made on whether limits should be placed on their speeds.
One side of the issue would argue that motorists should go as fast as they wish, either for their pleasure or to save time for their business.
The other side of the issue would argue that excessive speeds place other motorists and pedestrians at risk.
Moral considerations favour speed limits, for people’s lives are more valued than the pleasures or business interests of speed-seeking motorists.
Conceptual Issues
A conceptual issue arises when the morality of an action is agreed upon, but there is uncertainty about how it should be codified into clearly defined law, rule, or policy.
For example, society has agreed that innocent motorists should be protected from those who drive too fast.
The conceptual issue is: What speed is too fast? To resolve the conceptual issue, too fast may be defined as “highway speeds that exceed 80 Km/H under favourable driving conditions or speeds likely to result in an accident under adverse driving conditions such as fog, snow, ice, or rain.”
Application Issues
An application issue results when it is unclear if a particular act violates a law, rule, or policy. Suppose a motorist is going 60 Km/H on a road posted for 50 Km/H. During light rain, the motorist skids off the road and is involved in an accident.
The police officer who arrives at the accident scene must decide whether to cite the motorist for excessive speed; in other words, the application issue is whether the light rain constitutes an adverse driving condition.
Factual Issues
A factual issue arises when there is uncertainty about morally relevant facts. It can usually be resolved by acquiring more information.
Factual issues are more clearly defined and can generally be resolved regardless of upbringing and cultural background.
Also Read: What is an Architect? | All You Need To Know
Moral Theories
As much as we would like to have a “moral algorithm” that always leads us to the correct answer, such an algorithm does not exist.
If it did, we could program computers to make moral and ethical decisions. Instead, we have moral theories that provide a framework for making moral and ethical decisions.
Sometimes these theories lead to different answers, but often they lead to the same answer.
To illustrate moral theories, consider this example: A civil engineer works for the city as a building inspector.
As a large building is being erected, he is responsible for ensuring it complies with the city code.
The code protects the public by specifying proper construction materials and methods suitable for a particular city.
For example, buildings in Dar Es Salaam are constructed in accordance with a code that allows them to withstand earthquakes.
The building inspector is offered a $10,000 bribe to overlook some shoddy construction that would cost the contractor $50,000 to correct. Should the engineer accept the bribe?
It does not take a great moral theorist to determine that the answer is no. Each moral theory arrives at this answer through slightly different paths.
Also Read: Engineer | Definition and History You Should Know Right Now
Ethical Egoism
Ethical egoism is a moral theory stating that an act is morally provided you act in your enlightened self-interest.
For example, if a mugger were to attack you with a knife, and you killed him in self-defense, this would not be immoral.
Societies that structure themselves to harness our natural desire to act in self-interest are more successful. (The recent collapse of communism attests to this.)
However, ethical egoism is not a license for selfish behaviour. In the long term, selfish behaviour is not rewarded; selfish people have few friends and are not likely to be promoted in a company.
In our building inspector example, if he were to take the bribe, there is always a chance he would be caught.
Imprisonment and the loss of his job are certainly not worth $ 10,000. Therefore, he can argue it is in his self-interest not to take the bribe.
Not all ethical and moral issues involve a single individual. In cases where many people or societies are involved, we must consider the broader moral theories of utilitarianism and rights analysis.
Rights Analysis
According to rights analysis, moral actions equally respect each human being. This is often summarised in the Golden Rule:
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Many cultures use the Golden Rule; however, it does not work in every case.
If it were strictly followed, a manager (who himself would not want to be laid off) could not lay off workers, even if it were required for the company’s health.
Because not all rights are equally important, a hierarchy has been established. They are listed below from most important to least important:
- Right to life, physical integrity, and mental health.
- The right to maintain one’s level of purposeful fulfilment (e.g., the right not to be deceived,
cheated, robbed, or defamed). - The right to increase one’s level of purposeful fulfilment (e.g., the right to self-respect, to
nondiscrimination, and to acquire property)
To perform rights analysis:
- Determine the target audience.
- Evaluate the seriousness of the infringement of the rights according to the above list.
- Choose the course of action that imposes the infringement of the least serious rights.
Making Moral Decisions When Moral Theories Diverge
In our building inspector example, we determined that he should not take the bribe, regardless of the moral theory we applied. This is an example of convergence. However, this is not always the case.
Sometimes, moral theories do not agree—they diverge. When applied to society, utilitarianism represents one extreme: Do the best for society regardless of the consequences to the individual.
Rights analysis represents another extreme, in which individual rights are protected regardless of the impact on society.
Society must determine how it will strike a balance between these two extremes. To illustrate how moral theories can diverge, consider highway construction.
Engineers decide on the most efficient route between two points to reduce construction costs and allow motorists to travel between population centres efficiently. Often, the most efficient route goes through some homes.
The government will condemn those homes under “eminent domain” and reimburse the homeowners at fair market value.
The rights of the individual homeowners are violated. Perhaps they have strong emotional ties to their home and do not want to sell.
However, society benefits from constructing the road because people can move more quickly between population centres, trucking costs are reduced, and fuel is saved. In this case, society has chosen the utilitarian approach.
As another example of diverging moral theories, consider a situation where a sickly brother has a rare disease that will certainly be fatal if he does not receive a kidney transplant.
His healthy brother has a closely matching tissue type, so the transplant would be successful.
All other relatives do not have closely matching tissue types, so their transplanted kidneys
would fail.
The healthy brother never liked his sickly brother and refused to give him the kidney. The utilitarian approach would forcibly demand that the healthy brother donate a kidney to his sickly brother, as total happiness is greater with this option.
The sickly brother would be helped much more than the healthy brother would be harmed. In contrast, a rights analysis would honour the right of the healthy brother not to be dismembered.
In this case, society has chosen the rights analysis approach. Although there are no algorithms to tell us exactly what to do, a reasonable approach to making moral decisions when moral theories diverge is to use utilitarianism unless an individual’s rights are seriously violated.
Also Read: Engineering Disciplines: A Complete Guide
The Ethical Engineer
Most professional societies have prepared ethical codes for their members. The purpose of these codes is to guide engineers on ethical behaviour.
A distillation of these codes provides the following guidelines:
- Protect the public safety, health, and welfare.
- Perform duties only in areas of competence.
- Be truthful and objective.
- Behave in an honourable and dignified manner.
- Continue learning to sharpen technical skills.
- Provide honest, hard work to employers or clients.
- Inform the proper authorities of harmful, dangerous, or illegal activities.
- Be involved with civic and community affairs.
- Protect the environment.
- Do not accept bribes or gifts that would interfere with engineering judgment.
- Protect confidential information of the employer or client.
- Avoid conflicts of interest.
A conflict of interest is a situation in which an engineer’s loyalties and obligations may be compromised because of self-interest or other loyalties and obligations.
This can lead to biased judgments. Suppose an engineer was responsible for selecting bearings for an engine that her employer is constructing.
It so happens that her father owns a bearing company that the engineer will inherit when her father dies.
This situation makes it very difficult for the engineer to make an unbiased selection of bearings because she has an obvious conflict of interest. She and her family would benefit by selecting her father’s bearings.
Even if her father’s bearings are the best for the job, the selection of these bearings gives the appearance of impropriety. Therefore, the situation must be avoided.
The engineer should inform her boss that she has a conflict of interest and that another engineer should make the bearing selection.
Informing authorities of harmful, dangerous, or illegal activities is often called whistle-blowing. An engineer involved with an organisation conducting these activities has a conflict of interest.
He has obligations to protect society, but he also has obligations to his fellow workers and employers.
The need to protect the public is paramount. However, when performing his public duty, the whistleblower must be prepared to pay the consequences.
He may lose his job or be given a flunky job. He may have difficulty finding new employment because potential employers may be unwilling to hire a whistleblower.
If the engineer has a family, the effects of lost income could be devastating. If he keeps his job, he is likely to be ostracised by his coworkers.
Before blowing the whistle, the engineer should try every possible method to persuade the wrongdoers to correct their ways. It takes a lot of strength and courage to do the right thing.
Although the consequences of being a whistle-blower may be severe, the consequences of knowing you are unable to do the right thing can also be severe.
It is best to avoid this situation whenever possible and work with an honourable company. No code of ethics can cover every possible ethical situation.
Perhaps the simplest guideline is to imagine that you have been selected by the Nipashe as Engineer of the Year.
A reporter follows you around and records all your activities, which are published daily. Because most of us have an inherent sense of right and wrong, this should lead us to correct ethical behaviour.
Also Read: Best Engineering Books For Engineers
Engineering Ethics: Conclusion
As professionals, Engineers are expected to behave ethically. Ethical rules are among the interaction rules that govern the relationship between individuals and society; other interaction rules are classified as etiquette, law, and morals.
Generally, there is consistency among these interaction rules, but occasionally they conflict.
The purpose of interaction rules is to eliminate conflict; however, it is impossible to eliminate all conflicts, so the source of conflict must be identified.
Conflicts can arise from moral, conceptual, application, or factual issues.
Factual issues are very concrete and can generally be settled regardless of a person’s upbringing and background.
In contrast, moral issues tend to be abstract. The resolution of moral conflicts depends upon a person’s upbringing and background.
When addressing moral issues, various moral theories may be employed. Ethical egoism holds that actions are moral if they serve your enlightened self-interest.
Utilitarianism holds that the most moral action is the one that benefits the most people. Rights analysis holds that actions are moral if they do not violate individuals’ rights.
Often, these three moral theories converge, indicating that one action is correct. However, sometimes they diverge, making it difficult to select a moral action. Each society deals with problems differently.
Some philosophers recommend using utilitarianism unless an individual’s rights are seriously impaired.
That’s all.
