Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Changing the Paradigm for Engineering Ethics

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modern philosophy recognizes two major ethical theories: deontology, which encourages adherence to rules and fulfillment of duties or obligations; and consequentialism, which evaluates morally significant actions strictly on the basis of their actual or anticipated outcomes. Both involve the systematic application of universal abstract principles, reflecting the culturally dominant paradigm of technical rationality. Professional societies promulgate codes of ethics with which engineers are expected to comply (deontology), while courts and the public generally assign liability to engineers primarily in accordance with the results of their work, whether intended or unintended (consequentialism). A third option, prominent in ancient philosophy, has reemerged recently: virtue ethics, which recognizes that sensitivity to context and practical judgment are indispensable in particular concrete situations, and therefore rightly focuses on the person who acts, rather than the action itself. Beneficial character traits—i.e., virtues—are identified within a specific social practice in light of the internal goods that are unique to it. This paper proposes a comprehensive framework for implementing virtue ethics within engineering.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ACI. (2011). Building code requirements for structural concrete. Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Addis, W. (1990). Structural engineering: The nature of theory and design. New York, NY: Ellis Horwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Addis, W. (1997). Free will and determinism in the conception of structures. Journal of the International Association for Shell and Spatial Structures, 38(2), 83–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • AISC. (2010). Steel construction manual (13th ed.). Chicago, IL: American Institute of Steel Construction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle, & Barnes, J. (1984). The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASCE. (2006). Code of ethics. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.

    Google Scholar 

  • ASCE. (2010). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. Reston, VA: ASCE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Athanassoulis, N. (2005). Morality, moral luck and responsibility. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Athanassoulis, N., & Ross, A. (2010). A virtue ethical account of making decisions about risk. Journal of Risk Research, 13(2), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, R. (2010). Prioritizing people: Outline of an aspirational engineering ethic. In I. van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 135–146). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bulleit, W. (2012). Structural building codes and communication systems. Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 17(4), 147–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, J., & Coeckelburgh, M. (2003). The social ascription of obligations to engineers. Science and Engineering Ethics, 9(3), 363–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coeckelbergh, M. (2006). Regulation or responsibility? Autonomy, moral imagination, and engineering. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31(3), 237–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. (2012). A plea for judgment. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(4), 789–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H., & Dreyfus, S. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, J. (1993). Back to the rough ground: Practical judgment and the lure of technique. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, J. (2005). An intricate fabric: Understanding the rationality of practice. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 13(3), 367–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elms, D. (1999). Achieving structural safety: Theoretical considerations. Structural Safety, 21(4), 311–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, D. (2009). “Is engineering philosophically weak? A linguistic and institutional analysis.” Proc., SPT 2009: Converging Technologies, Changing Societies, 226–227. Twente: University of Twente.

  • Goldman, S. (1991). The social captivity of engineering. In P. Durbin (Ed.), Critical perspectives in nonacademic science and engineering (pp. 125–152). Bethlehem, PA: Lehigh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. (2009). Risk and safety in technology. In A. Meijers (Ed.), Handbook of the philosophy of science: Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences (pp. 1069–1102). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, C. (2008). The good engineer: Giving virtue its due in engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICC. (2012). International building code. Falls Church, VA: International Code Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1993). Grounding for the metaphysics of morals (3rd ed.), translated by James W. Ellington. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.

  • Kardon, J. (1999). “The structural engineer’s standard of care.” Online ethics center for engineering and research, <http://www.onlineethics.org/Topics/ProfPractice/PPCases/standard_of_care.aspx> (August 9, 2013).

  • Koen, B. (2003). Discussion of the method: Conducting the engineer’s approach to problem solving. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (1981). After virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. (1906). Utilitarianism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1984). Virtues and practices. Analyse und Kritik, 6(1), 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitcham, C. (2009). A philosophical inadequacy of engineering. The Monist, 92(3), 339–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Möller, N. (2012). The concepts of risk and safety. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of risk theory (pp. 55–85). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moriarty, G. (2009). The engineering project: Its nature, ethics, and promise. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, E. (2012). A structural engineer’s manifesto for growth—Part 1. Structure, 19(4), 74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petroski, H. (1992). The evolution of useful things. New York, NY: Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Procee, H. (1997). Technology, normativity, and the future: The Aristotelian turn. Techne: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 3(1), 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roeser, S. (2012). Emotional engineers: Toward morally responsible design. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(1), 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, A., & Athanassoulis, N. (2010). The social nature of engineering and its implications for risk-taking. Science and Engineering Ethics, 16(1), 147–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, A., & Athanassoulis, N. (2012). Risk and virtue ethics. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of risk theory (pp. 833–856). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, J. (2013). Engineering as willing. In D. Michelfelder, N. McCarthy, & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: Reflections on practice, principles, and process. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1977). The logic of heuristic decision-making. Models of discovery (pp. 154–178). Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stichter, M. (2007). Ethical expertise: The skill model of virtue. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 10(2), 183–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevelyan, J. (2010). Reconstructing engineering from practice. Engineering Studies, 2(3), 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Poel, I. (2011). The relation between forward-looking and backward-looking responsibility. In I. Vincent, I. van de Poel, & J. van den Hoven (Eds.), Moral responsibility: Beyond free will and determinism (pp. 37–52). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Poel, I., & Nihlén Fahlquist, J. (2012). Risk and responsibility. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, & M. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of risk theory (pp. 877–907). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Much of the content of this paper has been adapted from the author’s bimonthly “InFocus” columns in STRUCTURE magazine, published by the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA), which are available online at www.STRUCTUREmag.org/InFocus.aspx. William M. Bulleit, Steven L. Goldman, Erik A. Nelson, and Ashvin Shah provided valuable feedback on an early draft, and the anonymous reviewers also offered helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aviation and Federal Group, Burns and McDonnell Engineering Company, Inc., P.O. Box 419173, Kansas City, MO, 64141-6173, USA

    Jon Alan Schmidt

Authors
  1. Jon Alan Schmidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon Alan Schmidt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schmidt, J.A. Changing the Paradigm for Engineering Ethics. Sci Eng Ethics 20, 985–1010 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9491-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9491-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation