Ethics

Abstract

Ethics in engineering guides decision-making by evaluating motivations behind choices rather than prescribing absolute correctness. Ethical analysis incorporates consequentialist, non-consequentialist, and agent-centered frameworks to assess dilemmas like the trolley problem. Engineers must recognize diverse perspectives, ensuring ethical responsibility in designing impactful technologies while navigating professional obligations and personal values.

In this section, you will learn about applying these three classifications of ethical frameworks to examples of real-world engineering dilemmas. Case studies include the trolley problem, material selection trade-offs (such as choosing between sustainable but costly materials and cheaper, less sustainable alternatives), and ethical decision-making in professional responsibilities, such as whether to report safety concerns or protect a colleague. Through these examples, you will explore how different ethical perspectives influence decision-making and the complexities of balancing moral, professional, and societal considerations in engineering practice.

The learning outcomes for this activity are that by the end of this activity you will be able to:

Estimated time to complete: 20 minutes

Introduction

Ethics is a field of study that explores people's motivations when they determine what they believe to be morally right and wrong. It is important for engineers to understand ethics and act in an ethical manner because:

1. Engineers have an impact on the world: Engineers build products and services that are used by people and have the potential to cause both harm and good.
2. You want to live by your own values: For your personal satisfaction, you will want to identify what you believe to be the right and wrong way to behave, especially when your work impacts the lives of others. (This is not to say that one value system is universally correct; you should establish your personal set of values and what you consider to be important.)
3. Professional bodies demand it: Many engineering bodies require compliance with an ethical code of conduct to achieve chartership. For example, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Engineering Council have published their “Statement of Ethical Principles,” which engineers should abide by.

Why is considering ethics useful?

Most engineering decisions do not have an obviously correct or incorrect solution. Instead, they involve tensions between multiple options with advantages and disadvantages. For example, if you are designing a product, you may need to choose between wood, which is environmentally friendly but expensive, and plastic, which is less sustainable but cheaper. Unfortunately, an ethical analysis of an engineering decision will not provide an objective method to determine the “correct” course of action. However, it does offer a way to explore a range of viewpoints to ensure all relevant considerations are taken into account during the decision-making process.

Most people want to do the “right thing,” but one person's value system may differ from another's, leading to varying views on what is morally correct. These differences arise from differing motivations. Understanding ethics allows engineers to objectively analyze a range of motivations, even if they are different from their own.

As humans, we tend to assume our values and beliefs are correct and our motivations are good. However, others—particularly those affected by your engineering decisions—may be motivated by different principles. Understanding and empathizing with diverse perspectives will enable you to rigorously and objectively evaluate your decision-making process. This can help in negotiations with stakeholders, demonstrating that your ideas are well-considered and, on balance, beneficial. Additionally, by understanding the potential impact of your engineering decisions, even when they produce an overall benefit, you can better consider how to appropriately address or compensate those who may be harmed.

It is also worth noting that an ethical analysis of an engineering dilemma is not solely about the decision itself. It focuses on understanding the motivations behind the decision.

The Trolley Problem

The trolley problem is a quintessential ethical thought experiment. It is well-known and used primarily for illustrative purposes. While the dilemma may not be realistic, it is worth understanding, as it is often referenced in discussions about ethics.

In the trolley problem, a train is headed towards a group of five people. Without intervention, the train will kill the five people. You are standing by a lever that can divert the train, which will instead kill only one person. Do you pull the lever? By choosing to pull the lever, you may save lives, but your direct action will be responsible for killing one person.

In an ethical analysis, the outcome you choose is less important than the motivations driving the decision. What are you thinking about when you make the decision?

• Is the outcome driving your behavior?
• Are you thinking about your actions causing the death of a person?
• Are you considering your legal responsibility or liability?
• Are you worried about what others will think of you?

The trolley problem can be extended. Consider instead the “fat man variation.” There are still five people on the track, but instead of standing by a lever, you are on a bridge next to a fat man. By pushing the fat man off the bridge in front of the train, you will save the five people. Does this scenario change your motivations? What if the fat man was a known villain? What if the person you must push off the bridge was someone you cared deeply about, such as your father or mother?

Remember, ethical analysis is less about the decision you make and more about the motivations behind that decision.

Ethical Frameworks

There are many ethical frameworks that can be used to analyze an ethical dilemma. These frameworks are not mutually exclusive and can be used in combination. The frameworks can be categorized into three types:

• Consequentialist
• Non-consequentialist
• Agent-centered

In this section, we will consider how these broad categories are defined and how they can be applied to an ethical analysis, with a limited number of examples of frameworks. This is not intended to be an exhaustive review of all ethical frameworks.

Consequentialist

A consequentialist ethical framework is motivated by the outcome of a decision. An example of a consequentialist framework is Utilitarianism (associated with the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham), which holds that the morally correct choice is the one that maximizes the most good for the greatest number of people. In the trolley problem example, a utilitarian would be motivated to save the five people and sacrifice the one. A limitation of this ethical framework is that it can justify actions that are morally contentious if they result in significant benefits for a large number of people.

Non-consequentialist

Non-consequentialist theories focus on the moral correctness of the act itself, rather than the outcome. An example of a non-consequentialist framework is deontology, which is associated with the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Deontology holds that the morally correct choice is the one that adheres to strict rules, regardless of the consequences. In the trolley problem example, a deontologist would be motivated to follow the rule of not killing people, even if it means sacrificing the five people. A limitation of this ethical framework is that it can lead to morally questionable outcomes if the rules are poorly defined or if they conflict with one another.

Agent-centered

Agent-centered ethical frameworks consider the morally correct course of action to be motivated by one's own moral values, worldview, and personal beliefs. An example of an agent-centered ethical framework is virtue ethics, developed by Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Aristotle. The distinction between non-consequentialist and agent-centered frameworks lies in the source of the moral rules. In a non-consequentialist framework, the rules about what is morally "right" are extrinsically derived, for example, from societal or legal norms. In contrast, an agent-centered framework bases the motivations driving a decision on personal principles and virtues.

Example of Applying Ethical Frameworks

Consider the following scenario:

A friend shows up at your door. They tell you they are fleeing from the police and ask you to tell the police officers you haven't seen them. There is no time to find out what happened or if they are guilty. What do you do? More importantly, from an ethical perspective, how do you make the decision?

What should you do? Should you give up your friend to the police or lie to the police to help your friend? This situation can be analyzed using the three different types of ethical frameworks we have discussed. Remember: Ethical frameworks won't tell you the morally correct course of action. They are used to determine the range of motivations different individuals may have when considering what to do.

• Consequentialist: A consequentialist will consider what will happen if they make this decision. What will be the consequences for themselves, for their friend, and for anyone involved in the reasons why the friend is fleeing? A utilitarian, for example, would aim to ensure their decision minimizes harm for as many people involved as possible.
• Non-consequentialist: A non-consequentialist would consider which rules to follow in the situation. They might believe that lying to the police is inherently wrong or weigh how others might judge them if they choose not to protect their friend.
• Agent-centered: A person motivated by virtue ethics would reflect on which of their personal values is most important. Do they value honesty more strongly, or does loyalty take precedence?

In each of these ethical approaches, the actions taken may be the same, but the motivations behind the actions will differ. Ethical analysis won't determine the morally correct course of action. Instead, it identifies the range of motivations behind decisions. Conflicting ethical treatments of the same situation can lead to the same outcome. Additionally, it is likely that most people consider multiple motivations when making a decision.