1. Engineering as Social Experimentation “To undertake a great work, and especially a work of a novel type, means carrying out an experiment. It means taking up a struggle with the forces of nature without the assurance of emerging as the victor after the first attack. - Louis Marie Henri Navier (1785 – 1836)

2. Role of Experimentation in the Design Process Preliminary tests or simulations of concepts Components and modules tested prior to detailed design Cycle of test and modification through production Beyond specific elements of design, each project taken in a totality can be viewed as an experiment

3. Contributors to Experimental Nature of Projects Project carried out in partial ignorance –Parts functionality & availability –Luxury of waiting until all relevant facts are in not available (ability to work with partial knowledge is one talent crucial to an engineer’s success) Outcomes of projects are generally uncertain –Unknown risk may attend even a seemingly benign project Effective engineering depends on knowledge gained both before and after products are released –Monitoring cannot be limited to in-house development

4. Informed Consent Keystone of properly conducted experiments involving human subjects Main elements: –Volunteerism: absence of force, fraud, or deception –Knowledge: all the information needed to make a reasonable decision (not just what they request) –Competence: consenter is competent to process the information and make rational decisions

5. Morally Responsible Engineers as Social Experimenters A primary obligation to protect the safety of human subjects and respect their right of consent A constant awareness of experimental nature of any project, forecasting and monitoring side effects Autonomous, personal involvement in all steps of a project Accepting accountability for the results of a project

6. How this Earmarks a “Style” of Engineering Conscientiousness – people act responsibly to the extent that they conscientiously commit themselves to live according to moral values. –Moral values transcend a consuming preoccupation with narrowly conceived self-interest –A sense of awareness is implied –A role as a social guardian but not to suggest that engineers force, paternalistically, their own views of the social good upon society

7. How this Earmarks a “Style” of Engineering Relevant Information – conscientiousness blind without factual information –Moral concern involves a commitment to obtain and properly assess all available information –Obligation to grasp the context (uses) of one’s work –Since our vision is limited and projects are experimental, ongoing monitoring is crucial

8. How this Earmarks a “Style” of Engineering Moral Autonomy – authenticity in moral conduct and principles –Kant: Moral beliefs and attitudes held on the basis of critical reflection rather than passive adoption –Commitment to action (not abstract or merely verbal) –Professional Societies such as IEEE can be a source of employee moral support

9. How this Earmarks a “Style” of Engineering Accountability – acceptance of moral responsibility for their actions –Willing to submit one’s actions to moral scrutiny –Open and responsive to assessment of others –Willing to present morally cogent reason for one’s conduct –Resistant to a narrowed sense of accountability when working under external authority that may promote fragmentation, diffusion, meeting schedules, and limited roles

10. Commitment to Safety A thing is safe if, were its risks fully known, those risks would be judged acceptable by a reasonable person in light of settled value principles.

11. Effect of Information on Risk Assessment Imagine unusual disease expected to kill 600 Two alternative programs to combat disease proposed –Program A: 200 people will be saved –Program B: 1/3 probability that 600 will be saved, and 2/3 probability that no people will be saved Which program do you favor?

12. Effect of Information on Risk Assessment Imagine unusual disease expected to kill 600 Two alternative programs to combat disease proposed –Program C: 400 people will die –Program D: 1/3 probability that no body will die, and 2/3 probability that 600 will die. Which program do you favor?