Building an ethical toolbox. Engineering 10 Spring 2008

Being ethical is more than just reacting “the right way”. Requires knowledge Requires deliberation about available options Should try to be objective A kind of problem solving!

Ethical problems are like design problems. Most interesting ones don’t have unique solutions. Even without a single “best” answer, many answers won’t work. Some answers are better than others.

Ethical problems are like design problems. Good solutions must: Achieve desired performance or end. Conform to specified criteria. Be consistent with background constraints.

Standards for identifying what is right or wrong? What I feel like doing? What I think I can get away with? What everyone else is doing? What is permitted by the law or the existing regulations? Not what we mean by “ethical”!

Standards for identifying what is right or wrong? Useful to have a framework for evaluating right and wrong. Not just depending on my gut, but reasoning. Tool for talking through solutions with others (+ taking others into account). Attempt to achieve objectivity.

Ethical theories as frameworks for reasoning. Different accounts of what makes an action good or bad. Some disagreement about “boundary” cases, but substantial agreement about many other cases. Alternative approaches to ensuring that you’ve considered all the important details.

Three big ethical theories: Utilitarian ethics (“consequentialist”) Kantian ethics (“deontological”) Virtue ethics (Aristotle, Confucian thinkers)

Utilitarian ethics. The right thing to do = the action that maximizes happiness and minimizes unhappiness. Each person’s happiness counts as much as anyone else’s. (“Happiness” and “unhappiness” may involve more than pleasure or pain.)

Utilitarian ethics. Evaluating my choices: How does doing X contribute to happiness (and for whom)? How does doing X contribute to unhappiness (and for whom)? Is this the choice that produces the best balance of happiness, unhappiness?

Clicker question: Is it ethical to take my friend’s money (without his knowledge) to buy lottery tickets? A. Never! (That’s stealing) B. No. (It could hurt our friendship) C. Depends on whether we win. D. Don’t know.

Utilitarian ethics. Should I take my friend’s money (without his knowledge) to buy lottery tickets? Happiness - if we win and both become millionaires (very small chance) Unhappiness - if we don’t win (big chance), risk losing our friendship. NO (more likely to decrease happiness)

Utilitarian ethics. Healthy person at the hospital for a routine blood test turns out to be a perfect match for five patients who need organ transplants to live. Happiness of one vs. happiness of five A problem case where this tool might not be so useful!

Kantian ethics. The right thing to do = an action done from a maxim I could will to be a universal law. (i.e., how would it be if everyone chose actions this way?)

Kantian ethics. The right thing to do = an action done from duty (rather than mere inclination). (Motive more important in assessing right and wrong than the outcome of your action.)

Kantian ethics. The right thing to do = an action that always recognizes others as ends, never as mere means. (Persons are not just tools.)

Kantian ethics. The right thing to do = an action that does not undermine the rational capacity, whether in yourself or in others. (Autonomy, capacity to choose as supremely valuable.)

Why the rational capacity matters. 1. My ends have value because they serve my interests, likings, needs. 2. These ends don’t have objective worth of their own.

Why the rational capacity matters. 3. A rational being who takes something as good accepts that there is a reason it is good. 4. The reason my ends are good is that I choose them (i.e., my choosing them confers value on them)

Why the rational capacity matters. 5. If I value my particular ends, I must also value my capacity for rational choice (the thing that confers value on my ends). 6. Valuing my capacity for rational choice implies that I value the capacity for rational choice (whether in myself or others).

Clicker question: I need to pay a debt today. Can I borrow the money from someone with the promise that I’ll pay it back tomorrow, even though I know I can’t? A. No. (That’s lying!) B. Maybe (if the amount of money you’re borrowing isn’t too big). C. Don’t know.

Kantian ethics. I need to pay a debt today. Can I borrow the money from someone with the promise that I’ll pay it back tomorrow … even though I know I can’t pay it back tomorrow (so the promise is really a lie)?

Lying promise to get quick cash. Can I universalize my plan of action? (What if everyone made lying promises to get quick cash? Would my promise still work to get me the money? Probably not.)

Lying promise to get quick cash. Am I treating the other person merely as a means to accomplish my end? (As a source of quick cash to pay off my debt. My friend the ATM machine.)

Lying promise to get quick cash. Am I respecting the other person’s autonomy? (Giving him all the information to freely decide whether to give me money or not? Not if I lie about repaying tomorrow.) CAN’T DO IT!

Kantian ethics. A scared professor comes into the room and hides in the closet. The axe- murderer bursts into the room and asks, “Did the professor come in here?” Can I lie to the axe-murderer? A problem case where this tool might not be so useful!

Virtue ethics. The right thing to do = what a person performing his or her function well would do in these circumstances. Aristotle: the function of a human being is rational action. (The function of an engineer … ?)

Virtue ethics. Achieving the appropriate balance (e.g., courage is the proper balance between the extremes of being afraid of everything and being afraid of nothing) No chance this plane will crash vs. extremely high chance it will crash.

Virtue ethics. Not a matter of following a rule or maximizing utility. Training, experience, time important in cultivating virtues. Becoming virtuous means finding pleasure in activities that accord with your proper functioning.

Virtue ethics. What is the role of a properly functioning engineer? (in a company, a profession, the larger society) What is the role of a properly functioning engineering student?

Why different approaches to ethics? Different frameworks can help with problem cases Different frameworks focus on different things that matter (outcomes, autonomy, functioning well in our roles, etc.) Discussing our decisions -- and reasons -- with others helps us to be more objective.

Strategy for case studies Who are the interested parties, and what are their interests? What are the potential consequences (good and bad) of the different courses of action?

Strategy for case studies What are the obligations of the person trying to make a decision (to other interested parties and to herself)? What are the main points of conflict between these obligations? How might these be balanced?

Before next time: Read “Lab Partners” case study. In your Ethics Discussion group (on Blackboard), discuss: Interested parties Possible consequences Lab instructor’s obligations Main conflicts between obligations,interests What lab instructor should do and why

Before next time: In the online discussion: Share your ideas Engage with the ideas of others (by asking questions, suggesting alternatives, etc.) Explain your reasoning as clearly as you can

Before next time: Shoot for at least nine thoughtful posts (per person) in the discussion. Posts don’t need to be long! The discussion should help you prepare to write your own response to the case (as a “quiz” in Blackboard, due 11:59 PM Friday, May 2)

Next time: Ethical issues that are especially important for engineering students (i.e., for YOU, right now)