Relative importance of the various functions of codes of ethics
The perspective of engg as social experimentation clearly emphasizes the primary role ‘supportive function’ of the codes of ethics. This is so because, only this support enables engineers, speak out clearly and openly their views, to those affected by engg projects. The, ‘inspiration and guidance’ and ‘educative’ functions are also important in promoting mutual understanding and in motivating engineers to act with higher moral standards. The ‘disciplinary’ function in engg codes is of secondary importance. Those with unethical conduct when exposed are subject to law. Developing elaborate paralegal procedures within professional societies duplicates a function which can be done better by legal system. At best, codes should try to discipline engineers in areas which are not covered by law. The worst abuse of codes has been to restrict honest moral effort in the name of ‘preserving profession’s public mage’ and ‘protecting status quo’. The best way to increase trust is by encouraging and aiding engineers to speak freely and responsibly about public safety.
CODES OF ETHICS – ROLES OR FUNCTIONS
1. Inspiration and Guidance: Codes provide positive stimulus for ethical conduct and helpful guidance by using positive language. Codes should be brief to be effective and hence such codes offer only general guidance. Supplementary statements or guidelines to give specific directions are added by a number of societies or professional bodies. 2. Support: Codes give positive support to those seeking to act ethically. An engineer under pressure to act unethically can use one of the publicly proclaimed codes to get support for his stand on specific moral issues. Codes also serve as legal support for engineers. 3. Deterrence and discipline: Codes can be used as a basis for conducting investigations on unethical conduct. They also provide a deterrent for engineers to act immorally. Engineers who are punished by professional societies for proven unethical behaviour by revoking the rights to practice as engineers are also subjected to public ridicule and loss of respect from colleagues and local community. This helps to produce ethical conduct even though this can be viewed as a negative way of motivation. 4. Education and mutual understanding: The codes can be used for discussion and reflection on moral issues and thereby improve the understanding of moral responsibilities among all engineers, clients, public and good organizations. 5. Contributing to the profession’s public image: Codes present the engineering profession as an ethically committed society in the eyes of the public thus enhancing their image. 6. Protecting…
6 Cell Organelles
Wilfredo R. Rodriguez H.Think back to your high school biology class. Do you still remember the names and functions of all those little cell parts? A little foggy on the…
ENGINEERING CODES OF ETHICS
Engineering Codes of Ethics have evolved over time EARLY CODES • Codes of personal behavior • Codes for honesty in business dealings and fair business practices • Employee/employer relations NEWER CODES • Emphasize commitments to safety, public health and environmental protection • Express the rights, duties and obligations of members of the Profession • Do not express new ethical principles, but coherently restate existing standards of responsible engineering practice • Create an environment within the Profession where ethical behavior is the norm • Not legally binding; an engineer cannot be arrested for violating an ethical code (but may be expelled from or censured by the engineering society) Are Engineering Codes Needed? NO: – Engineers are capable of fending for themselves – Common law is available to defend in ethical disputes – Offended public can seek redress through courts Are Engineering Codes Needed? YES: – Engineers have few or no resources to defend themselves in an ethical dispute – Common law is available in reality only with great difficulty – Conversely, the public has similar problems in seeking redress through legal channels Objections to Existing Engineering Codes of Ethics: – Relatively few engineers are members of engineering societies. – Non-members don’t necessarily follow the ethical codes. – Many engineers either don’t know that the codes exist, or have not read them. Which ethical codes apply? – Depending upon your discipline and organizational affiliations, you may be bound by one, two or even more ethical codes: • Discipline related (ASME, IEEE, ASCE, IIE etc.) • National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) • Employee codes (corporation, university, etc.)…
ACCOUNTABILITY
Responsible people accept moral responsibility for their actions. Accountability is the willingness to submit one’s actions to moral scrutiny and be open and responsive to the assessment of others. It…
MORAL AUTONOMY
People are morally autonomous when their moral conduct and principles of action are their own. Moral beliefs and attitudes must be a critical reflection and not a passive adoption of the particular conventions of one’s society, religion or profession. Moral beliefs and attitudes cannot be agreed to formally and adhered to merely verbally. They must be integrated into the core of one’s personality and should lead to committed action. It is wrong to think that as an employee when one performs ‘acts’ serving company’s interests, one is no longer morally and personally identified with one’s actions. Viewing engg as a social experimentation helps to overcome this flawed thought and restores a sense of autonomous participation in one’s work. As an experimenter, an engineer is exercising the specialized training that forms the core of one’s identity as a professional. A social experiment that can result in unknown consequences should help inspire a critical and questioning attitude about the adequacy of current economic and safety standards. In turn, this leads to better personal involvement with work.
RELEVANT INFORMATION
Conscientiousness is blind without relevant factual information. Moral concern involves a commitment to obtain and assess all available pertinent information. Another dimension to factual information is the consequences of what one does. While regarding engg as social experimentation points out the importance of context, it also urges the engineer to view his or her specialized activities in a project as part of a larger whole having a social impact that may involve a variety of unintended effects. It may be better to practice ‘defensive engg’ (Chauncy Starr) or ‘preventive engg’ (Ruth Davis).
CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
Conscientious moral commitment means sensitivity to the full range of relevant moral values. Sensitivity to responsibilities that is relevant. Willingness to develop the skill and expend the effort needed to reach the best balance possible among these considerations. Conscientiousness means consciousness because mere intent is not sufficient. Conceiving engineering as social experimentation restores the vision of engineers as guardians of the public interest in that they are duty bound to guard the welfare and safety of those affected by engg projects.
Conditions defining Informed or Valid Consent
a. The consent is given voluntarily b. The consent is based on information a rational person would want, together with any other information requested and presented to them in understandable form. c. The consenter was competent to process the information and make rational decisions. d. Information has been widely disseminated. e. The subject’s consent is offered by proxy by a group that collectively represents many subjects like interests, concerns and exposure to risk. ‘Engineering experiments are not conducted to gain new knowledge unlike scientific experiments’. Is this distinction necessary? This distinction is not vital because we are concerned about the manner in which the experiment is conducted, such as valid consent of human subjects being sought, safety measures taken and means exist for terminating the experiment at any time and providing all participants a safe exit. Features of morally responsible engineers in social experimentation Conscientiousness: A primary obligation to protect the safety of human subjects and respect their right of consent. Relevant information: A constant awareness of the experimental nature of any project, imaginative forecasting of its possible side effects and a reasonable effort to monitor them. Moral autonomy: Autonomous, personal involvement in all steps of the project. Accountability: Accepting accountability for the results of the project.
CONTRASTS WITH STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
1. EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL: In standard experiments, members are in two different groups. Members of one group receive special experimental treatment. The other group members, called ‘control group’ do not receive special treatment, though they are from the same environment in all other respects. But this is not true in engineering, since most of the experiments are not conducted in laboratories. The subjects of experiments are human beings who are outside the experimenter’s control. Thus it is not possible to study the effects of changes in variable on different groups. Hence only historical and retrospective data available about various target groups has to be used for evaluation. Hence engineering as a social experimentation seems to be an extended usage of the concept of experimentation. 2. INFORMED CONSENT: has two elements, knowledge and voluntariness. The subjects (human beings) should be given all the information needed to make a reasonable decision. Next, they must get into the experiment without being subjected to force, fraud or deception. Supplying complete information is neither necessary nor in most cases possible. But all relevant information needed for making a reasonable decision on whether to participate should be conveyed. Generally, we all prefer to be the subject of our own experiments rather than those of somebody else.
