Christian: "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise"
(Holy Bible, King James Version, St. Luke 6:31).
Jewish: "What is hateful to yourself do not do to your fellow man" (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbath 31a).
Muslim: "No man is a true believer unless he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself" (Hadith, Muslim, imam 71-72).
Buddhist: "Hurt not others with that which pains yourself." (Udanavarga, v. 18)
Hindu: "Let not any man do unto another any act that he wisheth not done to himself by others" (Mahabharata, Shanti Parva, cclx.21).
Confucian: "Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you" (Analects, Book xii, #2).
individual rights for employment, which would lead to better economic conditions for their families. Thousands more could protest and say that their lives will be directly enhanced by the improved road conditions. Whose individual rights are more important and who is qualified to make that judgment?
From a professional standpoint, the question should be asked, “Is the best and most ethical course of action the one that puts individual rights above all else?
Since by its very nature, engineering advancements typically benefit large groups of people in all aspects of life, engineers tend to gravitate to towards the utilitarian perspective. However, the respect-for-persons approach should not be discounted and there are many aspects which should be considered whenever faced with an ethical decision
3. Ethical Relativism
Bribery in many international cultures is an accepted part of everyday business, and in many situations is thought of as a local custom. An engineer assigned to an international contract might find it easy to justirjl bribing local officials for operating permits by rationalizing that since bribery is both an accepted custom and an expectation of the culture, then bribing local officials in this case is ethical. This is an example of ethical relativism, which is the viewpoint that all morals and ethics are relative to a particular religion or cultural custom, and thus there is no universal truth. In essence, if a culture feels that a particular come of action is correct, then society’s acceptance of this tradition or custom makes that act morally justifiable.
On the surface, the general concept of relativism might seem to be an attitude that promotes tolerance and a greater understanding of foreign cultures.
While embracing cultural differences and the promotion of diverse viewpoints are especially important for those engineers working in a global setting, it is equally important to understand the impact of ethical relativism, especially in an engineering context. Misguided applications of relativism can provide individuals, cultures, nations, and companies with avenues to promote unethical and abusive acts under the guise of the statement, “Well, it is all relative!”
It is very tempting to rationalize a particular engineering decision because of a cultural norm. Many other countries do not have the stringent environmental and occupational health and safety standards that are required of companies in the United States. As a result of the cost savings, many U.S. companies have built industrial complexes overseas. Is it ethical then to build a plant in a foreign nation with reduced safety measures because this is a cultural norm? This relativistic attitude caused the deaths of thousands in Bhopal, India when lacking safety measures in a Union Carbide plant caused the accidental release of cyanide gas into the surrounding community.
Cultural forces are extremely important considerations, especially in international engineering projects. It will be paramount to understand local customs, and the challenge engineers face is incorporating culturally different business practices without compromising their ethical principles. It will be very tempting to apply the “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” principle, but the ethical and professional engineer will recognize the impending relativist dilemma, and then be able to find options to circumnavigate this potential minefield. The responsibility of engineers to promote the health, safety, and welfare of the public is not relative, and applies in every situation, regardless of the culture or custom.
*
To Dam Or Not To Dam? *,In 1994, China undertook its biggest construction project since the Great Wall’s completion during the Ming dynasty, the Three Gorges Dam. In an attempt to harness the tremendous power of the Yangtze River, China’s leadership decided to build the 1.4 mile long dam across the river, which was one of China’s most awe-inspiring landscapes. The dam, which will be the world’s largest hydroelectric dam, is scheduled to be partially online in 2003, with the intent to be fblly operational by 2009. Once completed, the dam will provide China with almost 10% of its total energy requirements and will provide for flood control along the Yangtze River, which will possibly save thousands of lives. The new waterway will allow cargo ships and cruise liners the ability to navigate 1500 miles inland, deep into the heart of China, having a tremendous impact on the economies along the river.
Once the Yangtze is dammed, the river will create a reservoir that is 390 miles long and 575 feet deep. When the reservoir is full, it will submerge 395 square miles, including 30 million acres of cultivated land. Approximately 30 cities, 140 towns and 1352 villages will be lost, and innumerable archeological &
cultural sites will be destroyed. An estimated 1.2 million people, mostly from rural areas, will be resettled.
Environmentalists have strongly criticized the Three Gorges Dam project for not only the tremendous impact it will have on animal and marine life, but human life as well. The Sierra Club maintains that the water supply of the city of Shanghai, with a population of eight million, will be seriously affected by salt- water intrusion. The river already used as a dumping site for raw sewage and
toxic waste, once dammed will not be able to maintain an effective ability to self- cleanse. With plans for major urban areas to be built along the river, the level of pollution will only increase, creating not only a human health hazard but animal and marine life dangers as well. Many endangered animal species will be threatened by the construction, specifically the Siberian White Crane and Yangtze River dolphin.
The environmental impact of the Three Gorges Dam extends far beyond the immediate riverbanks of the Yangtze, and even beyond Chinese borders.
There is scientific concern that once the Yangtze River flow is substantially reduced, it will not dump adequate levels of fresh water into the East China Sea, causing the temperature of the Sea of Japan to rise. During peak times at the mouth near Shanghai, the Yangtze delivers 30,000 cubic meters per second of fresh water to the East China Sea. The Yangtze fresh water, which currently dilutes the salinity of the Sea of Japan, would be drastically reduced once the dam is in operation. The surface layer salt content of the Sea of Japan would increase due to the reduction in fresh water, causing sea surface layer temperatures to rise, which would heat the atmosphere over Japan.
On the other hand, China accounts for one fourth of the world’s population, and is constantly in need of more energy sources, which will lead to improved food production. The Three Gorges Dam will generate as much electricity as 18 nuclear power plants. However, the construction of the dam will negatively impact over a million people, and potentially severely impact not only the immediate Chinese environment, but that of neighboring countries as well.
1. Do you think the dam should have been constructed? Why?
2. How would the utilitarian viewpoint differ from the respect-for-persons approach?
3. What if the Sea of Japan is affected in the future? If the goal is to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number, then how do we measure this in complicated cases such as this?
ETHICAL DECISION MAKING AND THE DESIGN PROCESS
In Chapter One, you were introduced to the basic steps of the engineering design process: “Among the fundamental elements of the design process are the establishment of objectives and criteria, synthesis, analysis, construction, testing and evaluation” and “It is a decision-making process which is often iterative.”
These design elements apply not only to decisions concerning the physical design process, but they also apply to the ethical decisions that oRen occur throughout
the design process as well. Let’s look at the design steps and see how they might apply to a materials engineer.
Suppose you are a joint replacement designer for a major biomedical devices corporation. Through your job, you are solely responsible for the development of a new ceramic/plastic joint design that has revolutionized the hip joint replacement industry. Typically hip replacement joints have to be replaced every 7-10 years, but your new design has at least doubled the replacement interval and could eliminate it all together.
At a professional conference, a rival biomedical firm approaches you. They offer to double your salary if you will work for them, plus they offer a generous stock option package. You are tempted but you suspect the offer is based primarily on the rival company’s desire to hire you because of your invention of the new replacement joint. You explain to them that your current employer owns the patent on the new replacement joint design, and you would not be able to divulge your current employer’s proprietary information if you took their offer.
The rival company assures you they have no intention of violating U.S. patent laws but they would like you to work in their international division. They tell you it is not illegal to develop a slightly modified version of your design for markets outside of the United States. In addition, they point out that they will make the replacement joints available to third world nations at significantly reduced prices (compared to your current employer’s prices.) If you work for this new company, your new design has the potential to help millions of people worldwide, especially those in underdeveloped and poverty-stricken nations. What should you do?
This is a complicated ethical decision and one that cannot be made without an in-depth analysis of all the information available. So where to begin? We can use the engineering design elements to guide us to a decision.
1) The establishment of objectives and criteria:
This step is often the hardest to both recognize and verbalize. In ethically murky waters, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish what the real debate concerns. Should the utilitarian view of the greater good be paramount or do individual rights take precedence? Should you remain loyal to your company? Just what are your professional responsibilities?
The main objective for this decision is whether or not it is ethical for you to take company proprietary information (that you were personally responsible for developing), and using it for another potential employer.
In this particular example, you would also want to check on the legal consequences as well.
2) Synthesis:
This step is essentially the information gathering process. To make any decision whether technical or ethical, you want to make sure you have all the relevant information. Knowing where to look is often a major stumbling block, and experience is a valuable commodity in this area.
For this example, you would want to review the legal terms of your company’s patent, any other company intellectual property policies, any non-compete contract clauses that may apply, and U.S. versus international patent law.
It is important when researching your predicament to take a close look at company policies regarding ethical and/or potentially unsafe actions by company personnel. Many companies such as Lockheed Martin have very proactive policies regarding potential ethical dilemmas, and many companies encourage open communication through such methods as hot- line phones or ombudsmen to help employees “do the right thing” without fear of reprisal.
3) Analysis:
Once you have gathered all of the pertinent information, you would want to analyze it to the greatest extent possible. Just as in typical engineering design, you need to formulate all of your available options. Then you want to look at the benefits and drawbacks to each, keeping in mind the basic ethical frameworks that were previously discussed.
The analysis of our example is complicated. The utilitarian view points to the greater good, i.e. if you work for the rival company, more people are likely to benefit from worldwide distribution of the hip replacement joint.
The respect-for-persons viewpoint is not so clear. You could say that the individual rights of third world persons are violated who are not given equal access to the new replacement joints. However, the rights of the company are violated if you give their trade secret to another company.
Just some of the decision options for our example are:
o Do nothing and continue in your current job.
o Quit and work for the rival company exactly as they asked.
o Negotiate with your current company for a higher salary and better benefits.
o Negotiate with the rival company for a more clear job description that would not require you to divulge any proprietary information.
4) Construction:
In this step, you construct a detailed solution to your problem. Previous analysis will hopefully show you that there are many avenues, some which will be more ethical than others. However, for complicated ethical decisions, the answer is not always easy to see, even after all the data has been analyzed.
In this particular example, there is no clear decision, which is often the case. The decision that you make will be dependent on your morals and your particular life situation at the time.
5 ) Testing and evaluation:
Just as this step is critical in the design of any new material, testing and evaluation is just as important in deciding a particular ethical course of action. For ethical decisions, the most useful form of testing and evaluation is to talk to other people and get their perspectives concerning not only the situation in general, but especially the chosen solution. While this may seem like a simple step, for many, it can be the most difficult.
Often many people will make decisions in isolation for fear of appearing weak or not in control of a particular situation. Though sometimes difficult, it is crucial to discuss an ethical dilemma with someone who is not close to a situation to gain their insights, and possibly show you some options that you previously did not consider.
In our example, there are many people who could help in evaluating the best course of action. A patent or intellectual property lawyer would be an excellent source of information, especially for any potential legal issues.
Your professional society is another resource for information (see the next section for a more in-depth discussion.) Objective peers not related to either company would be helpful, or you can always contact a former college professor or some other industry expert for additional guidance.
Important professional decisions such as detailed in our example should never be made without input fiom qualified, objective sources.
PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES
AND
CODES OF ETHICSAlmost all fields of engineering have a professional society that they can look to for guidance in a number of areas: technological advancements, career advice, employment trends, current issues in design, etc. The major professional engineering societies go a step further in the field of ethics and provide their members with ethical guidance in the form of formal codes, discussion forums,
case studies (including real world examples), and general guidance for possible ethical dilemmas that an engineer may encounter.
For every engineer who graduates from an accredited engineering institution, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) provides the initial Codes of Ethics of Engineers based on the following principles:
Engineers uphold and advance the integrity, honor and dignity of the engineering profession by:
I. using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of human welfare;
11. being honest and impartial, and servicing with fidelity the public, their employers and clients;
111. striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession; and
IV. supporting the professional and technical societies of their disciplines.
From these principles, engineering ethical fbndamental canons were developed that should apply to all practicing engineers, regardless of field or licensing (see inset.) It is interesting to note that first fundamental canon, to hold