Engineer ethics essay
Overview & Objectives
1. The case of Willy Just 2. The Ford Pinto 3. The Challenger Shuttle 4. Ethics in Practice: What are we to do?
Ethics in Practice
The Case of Willy Just
Ethics in Practice The Case of Willy Just “A shorter, fully loaded truck can operate much more quickly. A shortening of the rear compartment will not disadvantageously affect the weight balance, by overloading the front axle, because a correction in the weight distribution takes place automatically through the fact that the cargo in the struggle towards the back door during the operation is preponderantly located there…To facilitate cleaning, an eight to twelve inch hole should be made in the floor and provided with a cover that can be opened from the outside. The floor should be slightly inclined, and the cover equipped with a small sieve. Thus all fluids will flow to the middle, the thin fluids will exit during the operation, and the thicker fluids can be hosed out afterwards.” —Excerpt fromamemowrittenby theengineerWillyJust
Ethics in Practice
The Case of Willy Just • Can you conceive of an ethical defence that could be
offered on behalf of Willy Just?
• Could his conduct be morally justified by any of the ethical frameworks we employed in the trolley car cases?
• Virtue Ethics? • Deontology? • Utilitarianism?
Ethics in Practice
The seemingly significant nature of roles Our reasons for acting in a given way can conflict, depending on their source
e.g. professional, moral, prudential, legal,…
We each occupy a number of roles, which bring with them specific rights, duties, etc. • In taking on certain roles, we also take on certain
obligations
Ethics in Practice
The Ford Pinto A subcompact car released in the US in 1970
Design Aims • Produce a small and light car (under 900 kilos) • Low cost (under $2,000) • Competitive in terms of fuel consumption, service costs, and
reliability • Took 25 months from drawing board to on-road (43 months
was the norm at the time)
ETHICS IN PRACTICE
THE FORD PINTO CASE
Ethics in Practice
The Ford Pinto In the ‘70s, over 2 million Pintos were sold in the U.S. alone
But, it had one fundamental design issue: When rear-ended at over 20 mph (32kph), the gas tank – which was located behind the rear axle – was liable to rupture, often resulting in an explosion. And, as the doors would crumple, passengers would very likely be trapped inside.
Ethics in Practice
The Ford Pinto Ford engineers proposed a number of possible solutions 1. A shock-absorbent plastic barrier ($4) 2. A nylon bladder inside the tank ($5-$8) 3. Placing the tank above the rear axle
All were successfully tested, but none were implemented
Ethics in Practice
The Ford Pinto Can you conceive of an ethical defence that could be offered on behalf of the Ford engineers?
What could the Ford engineers have done, when management refused to improve the safety of the Pinto?
What were the moral responsibilities of the engineers? What was their duty of care?
Ethics in Practice
The Challenger Space Shuttle
Ethics in Practice
The Challenger Space Shuttle Background concerns • Loss of public interest in the U.S. Space Program • Political pressures • Industrial consideration • Launch previously delayed
Conditions on day of launch (28 Jan. ‘86) • Cold: -2c
Ethics in Practice The Challenger Space Shuttle Cause: An O ring sealing the field joint of one of the solid fuel rocket boosters, made more brittle by the cold, failed.
Day before launch • Project engineers , concerned that the O rings would not
withstand such cold conditions, strongly recommended that the launch should be delayed
• They were overruled by management, many of whom were themselves trained engineers
Ethics in Practice
Questions for all of us.
When there are safety concerns, what is an engineer’s moral responsibility? • How are we to weigh moral and prudential reasons when
they are in conflict? • How are we to resolve conflicts between personal and
professional ethics? And, between sectional interests and public interests?
Is ethics endlessly demanding?