Engineering Ethics (applying UPB to engineering)

[Boohickey11]

I've been thinking about IEEE and the ethics of engineering we were taught in college. One thing I've noticed is that engineers who were a part of large government spending/killing projects are praised.

 

See http://spectrum.ieee.org/geek-life/profiles/where-are-todays-engineering-heroes

 

It made me think that maybe us UPB engineers need to come up with a REAL structure of ethics for engineers; one that would NOT praise those who create weapons of war that could be used for indiscriminate war (as opposed to 'just war').

 

If there are any engineers on the forum who are interested please contribute to this discussion. I want any relative feedback from anyone but I think engineers will have a better understanding of what ethical standards they are faced with in today's engineering environment.

 

Perhaps a question to begin the discussion:

 

What is the ethical relationship between an engineer and that which he designs/creates? For instance, a gun can be used violently and ethically (self-defense) but a nuclear bomb cannot be used ethically in war. However, in the distant future, what if we used nuclear explosive devices for asteroid mining or something of that nature? Is the engineering of a dangerous thing (that can be used unethically) a violation of UPB? Was the act of designing the first atomic bomb unethical in and of itself or was the (known) intended use of the bomb what makes it a (possible) violation of UPB?

 

I also want to say that I don't want this discussion to keep only to such grand topics as nuclear weapons but to also applied (probably more effectively) to more common engineering ethical dilemmas that an engineer is likely to face day to day in his career! It's easier to be ethical when it is obvious.

[AnarchoCarpetalist]

For instance, a gun can be used violently and ethically (self-defense) but a nuclear bomb cannot be used ethically in war. However, in the distant future, what if we used nuclear explosive devices for asteroid mining or something of that nature? Is the engineering of a dangerous thing (that can be used unethically) a violation of UPB? Was the act of designing the first atomic bomb unethical in and of itself or was the (known) intended use of the bomb what makes it a (possible) violation of UPB?

That's a really interesting dilemma. It could be argued (although it's a tough issue and I'm not taking a firm stand either way) that the invention of nuclear weapons actually prevented and is preventing a lot of large scale conflicts because of Mutually Assured Destruction. One could argue that a nuke could be in a sense ethically used if it's just the intimidation of the weapon and not the actual detonating of it. Of course I would never advocate for actually using a nuclear weapon under any circumstance, but just carrying one to show that you will not tolerate being aggressed against MAY in some cases be justified.

[hannahbanana]

I think an issue that engineers can face in such a topic is just how far you're willing to look back in applying UPB. For the case of a bomb or missile, there would be the engineers designing the actual bomb, but what about the engineers who helped build the GPS that is used to guide the missile? Or the engineer who helped build the satellite that uses the GPS? Technically none of them "pulled the trigger" so to speak, so I'm not sure how you could hold one accountable and not another.

However, I do know it is a real concern that engineers face, and I know many who turned down high paying jobs specifically because they felt like it was too close to actually carrying out some violent action.

[Boohickey11]

Ahh, some interesting points already.

 

First, as far as the topic of nuclear weapons I would refer anyone to Rothbard:

An article here.

A youtube video here.

 

An even more thorough examination is here by Walter Block.

 

I'm still reading the article by Block but so far so good. It seems it may contain much of the tools we'll need to apply real ethics to engineering.

[Boohickey11]

I don't want this forum to drift into the nuclear weapons discussion so if you guys would like we can move that to another thread. It may also already have had a thread previously, I haven't checked.

 

I think for the application of ethics to engineering we need to ask ourselves what actually is the roles of ethics in engineering. Anyone involved in engineering can tell you that when one designs a system safety is always kept in mind but that it is foolish to think that something can be 100% safe. Can we apply UPB to designing to safety standards? (rhetorical)

 

Since ethics is all about how we interact with other people let's look at the people the engineer interacts with:

-His self

-Stockholders

-His boss

-His colleagues

-Employees he supervises

-His clients

-His end-customers (customers of the client)

Please tell me if I missed any!

 

Perhaps one way to look into this issue is to think of a consulting company. This company (which could exist in a anarcho-society) would be paid to examine companies and ensure they are following an ethical code. Companies may want this stamp of approval as it would help attract investment, good employees, customers, cheaper insurance rates, etc.

 

Let's try to think of what aspects of an engineering firm and its employees behavior might relate to ethics that are outside the scope of law and contracts.

 

[Boohickey11]

ISO Code of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics

 

A couple of links directly related to ethics in today's engineering environment.

From the other side of the pond...

http://www.raeng.org.uk/policy/engineering-ethics

[Boohickey11]

There's nothing like opening a can of worms!

 

I'm expanding my search of material related to this topic to the history of liability in fields of specialized knowledge. I want to find out a general history of thought in regards to when architects and engineers were found liable (or not) in any disasters or civil torts going back at least as far back as ancient rome. If anyone knows of some good sources for this information I would greatly appreciate it. I'm interested in what the arguments were in the different times and places.

 

I've found this link so far in a quick search but I'm hoping to find a source that has already covered this topic; it's about roman law and liabilites.

[AnarchoCarpetalist]

 

If anyone knows of some good sources for this information I would greatly appreciate it. I'm interested in what the arguments were in the different times and places.

Read Water Wars by Diane Raines Ward. It goes into a lot of information on the ethics of engineering certain water systems and their effects on the long term health of the environment and the people. It also has a couple parts about some engineers being prosecuted for engineering a certain water structure wrong or something. Sorry, it's been quite a while since I read it, but I remember it had a lot of examples of engineering ethics in it.

[Boohickey11]

Here is an article I have found that goes over the change in liability in western law tradition.

http://www.sefi.be/wp-content/abstracts/1222.pdf

 

Abstract:

 

In the contemporary legal systems, liability for technological activities that generate risks and harm for others is limited and conditional in various ways. Full (non-limited) and absolute (non-conditional, strict) liability for such activities is often believed to be both ethically indefensible and a deviation from the historical norm. Both beliefs are mistaken and stand in the way of sound evaluation and decision-making about desirable changes in current liability legislation. Legal liability that is less subject to limits and conditions such as “fault” is desirable not merely for ethical reasons but also to control the risks and side effects of technology and to promote sustainability. It is therefore of great importance that future scientists and engineers have correct knowledge of the ethical basis for and historyof legal liability for technological activities. This knowledge should therefore be included in the science and engineering curricula, as part of the “necessary knowledge for social responsibility of scientists and engineers” that was described in [14] and [15].

 

After a brief summary of the ethical underpinnings of full and non-conditional liability, which  were  discussed  elsewhere  ([13],  [16])  a  partial  sketch  of  the  history  of  legal liability  is  provided.  This  history  shows  that,  up  till  the  beginning  of  the  industrial revolution, legal liability was non-limited and not subjected to conditions such as “fault”. The limited and conditional forms of liability, which dominate the contemporary legal systems, were introduced only during the 19th century.