eeiccourses-au15. Web view(Utilitarian, Rights, ... Also, it is often said that rights imply duties-in particular, ... a main participant in an event]

Preparation Material for Ethics

A Framework for Thinking Ethically

Learning Objectives:Students completing the ethics unit within the first-year engineering program will be able to:

1. Define the term ethics2. Identify potential sources of a person’s code of ethics.3. State why professions like engineering have their own code of ethics4. Explain how the codes are used.5. Use a structured approach to evaluate an ethical dilemma that a student or

professional engineer may encounter.

We all have an image of ourselves - of how we are when we act ethically or are "at our best." We probably also have an image of what an ethical community, an ethical business, an ethical government, an ethical engineering practice or an ethical society should be. Ethics really has to do with all these levels, a) acting ethically as individuals, b) creating ethical organizations and governments, and c) making our society as a whole ethical in the way it treats everyone.

What is Ethics?Simply stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that tell us how human beings ought to act in the many situations in which they find themselves-as friends, parents, children, citizens, business people, teachers, professionals, and so on.

It is helpful to identify what ethics is NOT: Ethics is not the same as feelings. Feelings

provide important information for our ethical choices. Some people have highly developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something wrong, but many people feel good even though they are doing something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us it is uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.

Ethics is not religion. Many people are not religious, but ethics applies to everyone. Most religions do advocate high ethical standards but sometimes do not address all the types of problems we face.

Ethics is not just following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical standards, but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt, as some totalitarian regimes have made it. Law can be a function of power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may have a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas, and may be slow to address new problems.

1


Ethics is not following culturally accepted norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, but others become corrupt -or blind to certain ethical concerns (as the United States was to slavery before the Civil War). "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" is not a satisfactory ethical standard.

Ethics is not science. Social and natural science can provide important data to help us make better ethical choices. But science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Science may provide an explanation for what humans are like. But ethics provides reasons for how humans ought to act. And just because something is scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to do it.

Why Identifying Ethical Standards is Hard?There are two fundamental problems in identifying the ethical standards we are to follow:1. On what foundation do we base our ethical

standards?2. How do those standards get applied to specific

situations we face?

If our ethics are not based on feelings, religion, law, accepted social practice, or science, what are they based on? Many philosophers and ethicists have helped us answer this critical question. They have suggested at least five different sources of ethical standards we should use.

Five Sources of Ethical Standards(Utilitarian, Rights, Fairness, Common Good & Virtue)

The Utilitarian ApproachSome ethicists emphasize that the ethical action is the one that provides the most good or does the least harm, or, to put it another way, produces the greatest balance of good over harm. The ethical corporate action, then, is the one that produces the greatest good and does the least harm for all who are affected-customers, employees, shareholders, the community, and the environment. For example, ethical warfare balances the good achieved in ending terrorism with the harm done to all parties through death, injuries, and destruction. The utilitarian approach deals with consequences; it tries both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm done.

2


The Rights ApproachOther philosophers and ethicists suggest that the ethical action is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This approach starts from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they have a right to be treated as ends and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral rights -including the rights to make one's own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth, not to be injured, to a degree of privacy, and so on-is widely debated; some now argue that non-humans have rights, too. Also, it is often said that rights imply duties-in particular, the duty to respect others' rights.

The Fairness or Justice ApproachAristotle and other Greek philosophers have contributed to the idea that all individuals should be treated equally. Today we use this idea to say that ethical actions treat all human beings equally-or if unequally, then fairly based on some standard that is defensible. As an example, consider we if pay people more based on their harder work or the greater amount that they contribute to an organization, and say that is fair. But there is a debate over CEO salaries that are hundreds of times larger than the pay of others; many ask whether the huge disparity is based on a defensible standard or whether it is the result of an imbalance of power and hence is unfair.

The Common Good ApproachGreek philosophers have also contributed to the notion that life in community is a "good" that is shared and beneficial for all (or most) members of a given community in itself and our actions should contribute to that life. This approach suggests that the interlocking relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all others-especially the vulnerable-are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls attention to the common conditions that are important to

3


the welfare of everyone. This may be a system of laws, effective police and fire departments, health care, a public educational system, or even public recreational areas. The issues of should taxes support education could be framed as a common good debate.

The Virtue ApproachA very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are dispositions and habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity, integrity, fairness, self-control, and prudence are all examples of virtues. Virtue ethics asks of any action, "What kind of person will I become if I do this?" or "Is this action consistent with my acting at my best?"

Each of these approaches can help us determine which behaviors can be considered ethical.

What is Engineering Ethics?

Many professions, engineering included, have codes of ethics which are intended to assist members of the profession. Engineers take seriously their responsibility – not just for the quality of the jobs – but for the safely and well-being of the public. The National Society of

Professional Engineers (NSPE) has been the profession’s most respected voice on the practice of ethical engineering. The following is extracted from the NSPE Code of Ethics found at http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics. This short summary is intended to give you a sample of one resource available to you as an engineering student

and later as a practicing engineer. Please review it carefully.

Codes of ethics are created in the context of real life and in the face of existing ethical ambiguity. For this reason, codes of ethics created in response to actual or anticipated ethical conflicts are easier to understand in their application to real problems.

4

http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics

http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics


How Are Good Decisions Made?

Making good ethical decisions requires exploring the ethical aspects of a decision and weighing the considerations that should impact our choice of a course of action. Having a method for ethical decision making is absolutely essential. When practiced regularly, the method becomes so familiar that we work through it automatically without consulting the specific steps.

The more novel and difficult the ethical choice we face, the more we need to rely on discussion and dialogue with others about the dilemma. Only by careful exploration of the problem, aided by the insights and different perspectives of others, can we make good ethical choices in such situations.

We have found the following framework for ethical decision making a useful method for exploring ethical dilemmas and identifying ethical courses of action.

5


Methodology for Resolving Ethical Dilemmas

A. Identifying Potential Actions and Consequences

1. Students and professionals at work will face many ethical dilemmas. These arise when there are multiple stakeholders whose interests need to be served. When the interests of stakeholders conflict, an ethical dilemma which must be resolved exists, good ethical practice requires that potential consequences of any resolution should be determined before applying it. The methodology taught in this module emphasizes: Identifying the issues and points of ethical conflict for a given ethical dilemma, to provide a convincing ethical analysis, it is necessary to move beyond naming the issue (e.g., data ownership and access, plagiarism, etc.) to describing the nature of the moral conflict. Note that identifying the points of ethical conflict is often one of the hardest jobs in ethical analysis.

2. Identifying the interested parties or stakeholders, think of interested parties in progressively larger groupings, like in the figure provided in the previous page illustrating how people, groups and entities are related to each other. Frequently, consideration of the interested parties will bring more issues to mind.

3. Identifying the duties or obligations of the protagonist [protagonist. leading figure: a main participant in an event] to each interested party before an action is taken.

4. Identifying the potential actions and their consequences, and identify possible actions and those consequences that have a good probability of occurring, or those that may not have such a high probability of occurring, but would have very serious implications. When considering consequences, be sure to consider, in turn, each of the interested parties and the probable consequences of the proposed action on those parties. When considering actions and consequences to the protagonist, keep in mind that consequences may be positive or negative.

For each case, consider primarily the obligations of the protagonist toward the various interested parties. It is sometimes tempting to dismiss the obligation of the protagonist when some other person fails to live up to his/her moral obligation. Also be sure to state why the professional has that duty. Keep in mind that given the right context and consequences, lack of technical competence can become a moral issue. Referring to your profession’s code of ethics will then help clarify the obligations of people in your profession.

When applying the four criteria, it is often helpful to have an organizing form or worksheet. A sample worksheet is illustrated following the next section.

6


B. Selecting the “Best” ActionFor each moral conflict or ethical dilemma encountered, there are four criteria used to judge the potential response:

1. Whether the response addresses each of the issues and points of ethical conflict. 2. Whether each interested party’s legitimate expectations are considered. 3. Whether the consequences of acting are recognized, specifically described and

incorporated into the decision. 4. Whether each of the duties or obligations of the protagonist are described and

grounded in moral considerations. Moral considerations can be guided through approaches defined earlier by asking questions such as:

a. Which option will produce the most good and do the least harm? (The Utilitarian Approach)

b. Which option best respects the rights of all who have a stake? (The Rights Approach)

c. Which option treats people equally or proportionately? (The Justice Approach)

d. Which option best serves the community as a whole, not just some members? (The Common Good Approach)

e. Which option leads me to act as the sort of person I want to be? (The Virtue Approach)

This allows the protagonist to make the decision based on an organized approach and the best available information. Once all of these are considered and the dilemma’s relevance to applicable codes of ethics and past cases are weighed in, an educated, well-thought decision can be reached, and hopefully one that is just.

7


Ethical Dilemma WorksheetIssues and Points of Ethical Conflict (include any assumptions)

Interested Parties or Stakeholders

Duties or Obligations of the Protagonist to Stakeholders The protagonist is _____________________Stakeholder 1 Obligations to Stakeholder

Stakeholder 2 Obligations to Stakeholder




Potential Actions and Their Consequences (Positive and Negative)Action A Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Action B Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Action C Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Action D Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Selected Action and Rationale (Include all applicable references including the NSPE Code of Ethics when applicable.)

8


Example Application of Method and Worksheet

Please consider the following Case Description

A woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: “No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Although each individual may see the case somewhat differently, a Completed Worksheet might look something like the following.

Ethical Dilemma WorksheetIssues and Points of Ethical ConflictShould Heinz steal the drug from the pharmacy? Ethical issues include obedience to authority, role of self-interest in the decision, moral correctness verse law, responsibility to others. Interested Parties or StakeholdersHeinzHeinz’s wifeDruggistFriends of Heinz and wifeLaw Enforcement Duties or Obligations of the Protagonist to Stakeholders The protagonist is __Heinz____________Stakeholder 1 - Heinz Obligations

Support spouse in sickness and in healthBe a law abiding citizen

Stakeholder 2 – Heinz Wife ObligationsHelp Heinz do the right thing

Stakeholder 3 - Druggist ObligationsHave business that continues to make a profit so he can make other new drugsServe the public

Stakeholder 4 – Friends of Heinz and Wife ObligationsHelp Heinz

9


Support the law

Stakeholder 5 – Legal System ObligationsAdminister the Law

Potential Actions and Their Consequences (Positive and Negative)Action A – Heinz Steals Drug Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Wife livesHeinz is happy

Wife now must figure out how to live without Heinz’s supportFriends feel badHeinz goes to jail

Action B – Heinz does not steal drug

Positive Consequences Negative ConsequencesLegal system is in tackHeinz does not go to jail

Friends feel badWife diesHeinz get depressed due to loss of wife

Action C Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Action D Positive Consequences Negative Consequences

Selected Action and Rationale (Include reference to NSPE Code of Ethics when applicable.)Some possible answer you might give depending on your perspective:

Heinz should not steal the medicine because he will consequently be put in prison which will mean he is a bad person. Rationale – Virtue Approach, Heinz acts as the sort of person he wants to be.

Heinz should not steal the medicine because prison is an awful place, and he would more likely languish in a jail cell than over his wife's death. Rationale – the Justice approach, Heniz thinks this treats people equally and proportionally.

Heinz should steal the medicine because everyone has a right to choose life, regardless of the law. Rationale – Rights approach, Heinz thinks this best respects the rights of all who have a stake.

10


The following are credited as sources of this material:

Bebeau, Muriel J. (1995). Moral Reasoning in Scientific Research. Cases for Teaching and Assessment. Indiana University.

The Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science at Case Western Reserve University. Website. Available at http://temp.onlineethics.org/.

National Society of Professional Engineers Ethics Website. Available at http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/index.html

“A Framework for Thinking Ethically.” ETHICS 1, no. 2 (Winter 1988).http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/framework.html

11

http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/index.html

http://temp.onlineethics.org/

Documents

eeiccourses-au15. Web view(Utilitarian, Rights, ... Also, it is often said that rights imply duties-in particular, ... a main participant in an event]