pe unit wise notes

8/16/2019 Pe Unit Wise Notes

1/82

www.Vidyarthiplus.com

G NIR EE NIG NE NISCIHTELA NOISSEFOR P5706EG

oC buS d /e ema N : EG 5706 - gnir eenignEniscihtElanoissef or P

alC ss : )B/AceS(r etsemeSV

EG 5706 - SCIHTELANOISSEFORP GNIREENIGNENI

INU T I – MUH A VN A SEUL

T eh r otS y of a r aC p ne t r e

n A elderly c r a pen r et was ready to e r tir .e He to d l his emp ol yer-co r t n ac r ot of his pla sn

ot ael ve the house- bu l i ding ub s eni ss and i l ve a m er o leisurely li ef w ht i his w ef ine joy g ni his t x e ended fa y l i m .

He wou d l mi ss his a p c y heck, b t u eh needed to retir . e T eh y could g t e by. Thec t no rac ot r was s r r o y to see his good work r e go and a ek s d f i he cou d l ub l i d just o en

om re house as a p r e sonal af v .r o

hT e carpe t n er sa d i yes, b t u in time t i was ea y s ot see th t a his heart was not n i h siw r o k. He er so t r ed to sho d d y w r o kmansh pi and u es d ni fer oi r materials. t I was na

nu f r o tunate w y a ot e d n his care r e .

W neh the carpe t n er finished his w r o k and t eh bu l i d r e came to n i spect the hous , e t eh

c t no rac r ot hand d e over the house key o t the c r a pe et n r. T “ his is y r uo h uo se,” heas d i , “it is my p r a ting g f i t to you ” .

W t ah a hs o k c ! What a Sham ! e f I only he had nk own he was bu l i ding his own hous , ehe wou d l ah ve done t i a l l os d f i f r e ently. Now he had to i l ve ni the home he bu l i t none

oot l l ew .

(Modif d ei r f om LIV GN I W H T I HONOUR by SH V I KH ) AR E

oD w e f ni d o r u es lv se ni s r al i mi s t i uat snoi sa t eh c r a pen et r?

M vo ing thr uo gh r uo ow rk hours fast pac ,de dri ev n to “g te the job done”, witho tuum ch th uo g th to mor la av lues.

w oH od we rega ni r uo uc of s sa ni dividuals and organi a z t ?snoi

T sih is the hc all ne ge f r o the empl eeyo and the employ r e .

ihtE sc are fundament la standards of c no duct by w ih ch we work as a profe s s ion .la


2/82



AV L SEU

Va ul es are i dn ivi ud la in natur .eVa ul es are com ir p s de of p r e son la c no c tpe s of resp no sibi il t ,y tne itlem tne na drespect .Va ul es are shaped by p r e son la xe peri ne c ,e m ya ch na ge evo r the sp na of a

il f emite dna may be ni f neul c de by l se s sno l r ae ned .Va ul es m ya av ry accordi gn to na indi iv du la ‟s cul ut ral, ethnic and/ r o f ia th-bas de gkcab round .

“Nev r e hc ange yo r u core av lues.”nI s ip te of all the change ar uo nd oy u, dec ide up no wh ta uoy will nev r e hc na g :e oy ur oc re eulav s .

Take y uo r t mi e to dec di e wh ta th ye are but no ce oy u d ,o do n to compr imo se no themr of yna r ae s no .

nI t g e r t i y is one su hc value.

MOR SLA

oM r la s are guidi gn r p i cn iples th ta e ev ry ic tizen hs uo ld h lo d .Mor la s are foundation la c no c tpe s def ined no b to h na individual and societall eve l .

t A the most basic l eve l, mor la s are the knowledge of the i d ffer ne ce betw ee nir g th and wrong.

PERS LANO ET IH CS

iS mply put, all in id iv du la s are mor la ly ua tonom uo s be ni gs w hti the pow r e andir g th to ch oo se th r ie av lues, but ti d eo s n to f lo l wo th ta lla ch io ces na d lla av lue

syst me s have na equ la claim to be ca l l de te hic la . Acti no s and beliefs ni c isno s net t iwth ht e iS x Pill r a s of Charact r e -

ur t stw tr o hine ss , respec , t resp no si ib lit ,y f ia rne ss , caring and citiz ne s ih p - arepmis ly ton et ih c .la

PERS LANO ET IH CS - everyday axe mpl se

• Sof awt re ip racy• Exp ne se ca c uo nt padding• Copying of homew r o k r o tests• nI c emo t exa s• “B r o r ”gniwo n stu na d b stlo , off eci suppli se fr mo pme loyer

• Copying of Vid oe s or DC ‟s• Pl ga i ir a sm• Us gni the copy ma hc ine ta w r o k

R ILE GION DNA ETHICS

• T eh “Gold ne Rul ”e is a basic ten te in almost lla rel gi i no s: C ir h sti ,na Hindu,iweJ s ,h C no f cu ian, Buddhis ,t Muslim.


3/82



• “Do unto to h r e s as y uo would ha ev oth r e s do unto oy u.”• “T taer to h r e s as y uo would like ht me to tr tae y uo ” (Christi na ).• “H tr u n to to h r e s wi ht th ta w ih ch pains uoy ” (Buddhist)• “W tah is hateful to r uoy s le f do n to do to uoy r f le low m ne ”

(Jud ia sm)• “No m na is a true be i l eve r unle ss he desires for his br t o h r e that

w ih ch he desires for h mi s lef” I( sl )ma

M ILARO TY DNA ET SCIH

• C no cerns ht e g oo dne ss of vol nu tary hum na c no duct th ta affects the s le f or to h r e livi gn things

• Morality (Latin m er o s ) u us ally ref r e s to any aspect of human action• ihtE sc (Gr ee k t e hos ) comm no ly ref r e s no ly to profe iss on la beh va ior • ihtE sc c no sist of the applica i t no of fundame tn la moral p nir c pi les a dn re lf ect

r uo d ide c ta ion to f r ia tr ae tm tne of ae ch to h ,r e and of soc iety as a w l oh e .• n A individual‟s nwo av lues c na result ni accept na ce r o rejecti no of society‟s

te hic la standards bec ua se ev ne thou thg fully develop de te hic la rules cannoc f tcil tiw h vidni idual av lu se .

AS CEP TS FO ET SCIH

T eh re are two aspects to t e hi sc :T eh f r i st invol ev s the iba lity to disc nr e r gi th f mor wron ,g g doo from ve il andpr r po iety fr mo impr r po iety .T eh sec no d invol ev s the com im tm ne t to do wh ta is ir ght, g oo d and prop r e .

scihtE ne tai sl tca ion .

n A A RBEGL A c r uo se will t hcae uoy EGL A B AR . A SIH TORY c r uo se liw l t cae h oy u SIH TORY . A MA G AN E NEM T c r uo se wi ll t ae ch oy u r p i icn ples of AM N G A E EM NT.

tuB , W lli na T E HICS c r uo se t ae ch y uo to be E THICAL ?T nih k !


4/82



INU T II - EGNIREENIGNE T SCIH

“Technology can ha ev no leg ti mi acy u ln ess it inf il cts no harm” -Ad .m H.G . Rick evo r,fa ht r e of the US nucl r ae navy.

– W t ah do Ase dm . Ri k c over mean by this? – hS ou d l eng ni e r e s avo d i et hc nology th t a ah s the p t o ential f r o i f n i l cti g n

ah rm on a soc t ei y r o t i s memb r e s?

• nE gin r ee s h eva na et ih c la dna s co i la r se p no is b i il ty to th me selves, th r ie clientsand society.

• Prac it c la ly ( la th uo gh there is much debate about t i h s ,) ne gin ee ring te hics isab uo t bal na cing cos ,t schedul ,e and risk.

NE GIN EE RING ETHICS is:

• the study of mor la issues and decisi no s c no f nor ti gn indi iv du la s andr o ganizati no s in ov l ev id n engin r ee ing na d

• the study of relat de questi no s ab tuo mor la id lae s, charac ter, p lo icies andrel noita s spih of oep p el dna or snoitazinag in ov l dev ni tec onh logic la acti iv ty.

T AR INI GN IN RP EVENT EVI ET IH CS

• tS imulating the om r la imagina it on• Recognizing et ih c la i ss ues• D gnipoleve an ityla c la s ik lls• icilE t gni a s ne se of res ibisnop lity• T elo r ta i gn id s ga r ee m ne t na d ma big iu ty

IMPE ID M NE TS TO RES SNOP I ILIB TY

• S le f-interes .t• F .r ae• S le f-decepti no .• gI nor na ce.• Egoc tne r ci ten cned i .se• iM crosc ipo c iv sion.• Gr nihtpuo k .

SEUQ TI ELBANO ENGI REEN ING PR CA T SECI

• T mir ming – “sm oo thing of i r r ge ular ti ies to make data l oo k xe tremely a cc urateand precise”

• C koo i gn – “retaini gn no ly those res t lu s th ta f ti the th oe ry dna di cs ardingto h r e s”.

• For ig ng – “in ev nting some r o all of the research dat …a ”• Pl ga i ir a sm – im s ppa r po ri gnita ni tel cel ut la property .• C no f il cts of ni terest (such as acc t pe ing gifts.)

– actual – op tential


5/82



– apparentLC E LRA Y WR GNO E GN I EEN RI GN PR CA T CI ES

• L iy gn• D le i eb rate ed c pe it on• W gnidlohhti ni for tam ion

• F gnilia to adeq au t yle pr omo et the d si s ime nati no of infor am it no• Fai ul re to s ee k tuo the truth• R aeve il gn c no fiden lait r o pr eir po tary inf amr o it no• l A lowi gn one‟s judgm ne t to be c r o rupt de .

SE SESN FO EX SERP SI NO OF E GN G . ET IH CS

ihtE cs is na acti iv ty and ar ae of inquir .y tI is the ac it iv ty of understandingmoral av lues, resolving mor la i ss ues and the ar ae of study res lu ting f mor that

ytivitca . W neh we ps e ka of te hic la pro lb me s, i ss ues dna c tno rov r e sies, we m nae to

tsid ing siu h th me fr mo n no mor la probl sme . ihtE cs is us de to ref r e to the particul r a s te of beliefs, ta titudes and h ba its tha t

a p r e s no r o group id s lp ya s c no cerni gn mor ila it es. ihtE cs and ti s gramm ita c la av ri tna s c na be used as synon my s for „mora ll y

r oc r tce ‟.

AV R EI T SEI r o PPA R AO C SEH FO MOR LA ISS SEU

OR C I M -ETH C I S pme hasi ez s typic la ly adyr eve y pro lb me s that can take ons gi nific tna prop tr o i no s in na engin r ee ‟s life r o ne tire engin ee ring o f f ic .e

MA R C O- T E HICS dda resses societ l a pr bo l me s th ta are oft ne shunt de aside na d areon t dda r se s de u litn ht ye un xe p ce t de ly res r u face no a region la r o nation la scale .

M LARO PR ELBO MS IN ENGI REEN I GNMOS( E EXAMP SEL )

1.4 . An inspect r o id sc evo red f ua tl y c no structi no equipm tne and ap lp ied a violationtag, pr eve nting its us .e The us per iv s ,r o a c no s ur t cti no manag r e view de the case as amin r o abrasi no of the safety regul ta i no s and r o der de ht e remov la of the tag to ps ee d

pu the projec .t W neh the ni spect r o bo ject de to t ih s, he was thr ae ten de withanilpicsid ry ac noit .

2.4 . An electric ut li ti y company ap lp ied for a perm t i to operate a nucl r ae pow r e plant.T eh il c ne sing ag ne cy was ni terest de ni knowi gn wh ta emerg ne cy m ae sures hadb nee est ba li hs de for hum na s safety in case of r ae ctor m la uf nctio in ng. The ut li ityengin r ee s descr bi de the alarm syst me and r a rangements w hti loc la hos ip t la s fortr nemtae t . They did not emphasize th t a this m ae sures pa pli de to pl na t p r e s no nel

no ly and th ta th ye had no pl na s f r o the su r r uo nding popul ta ion. W eh n enquir de aboutth r ie omi ss i ,no th ye said it was n to th r ie resp no sibility.

3.4 . A chemic la lp tna dump de saw t se in a l dna if ll . Hazard uo s s bu stances f uo nd th ie rw ya into the und r e gr uo nd wat r e t ba l .e The plant‟s en ig ne r e s were aware of thes ti u ta i no b tu d di n to hc ange ht e meth do of id spos la bec ua se th r ie co pm ite t r o s did it


6/82



the s ema c paeh wa ,y and no l wa cilpxe itly f r o bad e th pe r itca ce .

4.4 . Electroni sc C mo pany B A C g ae r de up f r o pr udo c it no of ti s own r ev sion of ap po lu r a n we ti e .m The product was n t o tey r ae dy f r o sal ,e tub ev ne s ,o ip ctures na dimpre ss i ev specificati no s pa p ae red in ad ev r it sem tne s. Prospecti ev cus ot m r e s wereled to b le ieve th ta it was a av li ba le o f f ht e sh le f na d were drawn away f o r m c mo p te ing

il nes.

TY SEP OF INQUIR SEI

1 . RON MAT EVI I YRIUQN

T eh se are about „wh ta ought to be‟ and „wh ta is g oo d .‟ These questi no s iden it fy andlaso u j stify the morally desira lb e norms r o stand dr a s.

S emo of eht seuq ti sno are: A. H wo f r a ne gin r ee s are bo ligat de to protect p bu lic safety in givens ti u ta i no s?B. W neh sh uo ld ne gin r ee s st tr a w ih stle blow ni g no danger uo s practices ofth r ie emplo r ey s?

C. W oh se lav ues are primary n i taking a mor la decisi ,no me pl yo e ,e pub il cr o go tv ?

D. W yh are eng ni r ee s bo ligated to protect pub i l c safety?E. W eh n is og tv u j s it if de in int r e fering no such issues na d why?

2 . C CNO EPT AU L I RIUQN Y:

T eh se questi no s sh uo ld l dae to cl ir a fic ta i no s on c no cepts, r p inciples and i ss ues nite hics . E max ples are:

A) W itah s S„ A EF TY‟ and how is i t relat de t o „ R SI K‟B) P„ rotect the safet ,y h ae lth dna w le fare of public‟-W tah d eo s t ih ss at tem ne t m ae n?C) W tah is a r b bi e?D) W itah s a p„ rofession‟ and who ar e „profe ss ion la s‟?

3. CAF T AU L ( ED S RC IPT EVI ) I RIUQN I SE

T eh se are inq iu ries us de to nu cov r e ni form ta ion using cs i itne fic tec nh iques. Theseni quiries get to ni for am t oi n ab uo t ub siness r ae l ti ies, history of igne n ee ringprof ,noisse proc ude r se us de ni sa s se s tnem of r sksi and ne gin sr ee psyc oh l ygo .

hW y st du y E G N I R E E N ING I H T E CS

ENGIN EE RING ETHICS is a m nae s to incr ae se the ba i il t y of c no cern de ne gin r ee s,manag r e s, c ti zi ne s dna to h r e s to resp no si lb y c no fr tno mor la i ss ues r ia s de byte hc nologic la acti tiv ies.

MOR LA D ELI MMMA


7/82



T eh re are thr ee typ se o f c mo p eitixel s.

AV GUEN SE S: T ih s c mo lp ixe ty arises due to the fact th t a ti is not c r ael toni di iv du la s as to w ih ch mor la c no siderati no s r o r p inci lp es pa ply to th ie r

noitautis .

CON ILF CTING R S AE ON :S E nev wh ne it is p r e fectly cl r ae as to which moralr p inci lp e is ap lp ica lb e to one‟s s t i u ta ion, there cou dl d eve lop a situ ta i no whereni t ow r o om re lc e r a ly ap ilp ca lb e om r la p nir cipl se c emo into c no fl tci .

D ASI G ER E EM NT: Indi iv du la s and gr puo s m ya dis ga ree how to ni t pr e ret,apply and b nala ce om r la r ae s sno ni p citr a ul r a situati no s .

St pe s in c no fr no ting AROM L ID LEMMAS:i) Id ne tify t eh rel ave nt om ra l f ca t sr o and r ae s sno .ii ) G ta h r e all ava il ba le facts th ta are p tr e ni tne to the mor la f act r o s

in ov lved.

iii ) Rank ht e moral c no sider ta i no s ni the r o d r e of their import na ce as theyapply to ht e s ti uati no .iv) C no sid r e la t r e n a it ev c r uo se of action, traci gn the full implicati no s of

,hcae sa syaw of solvi gn d li amme .v) Talk wi ht c lo l ae gues, s kee i gn the su gg esti no s and p r e ps ecti ev s of the

ammelid .iv ) r r A i ev ta a caref lu ly r ae son de jud mg tne by we gi ih ng all the relev na t

moral fact r o s na d r ae s no s in lig th of facts .ll A the above st pe s are distinc , t eve n though th ye are inter-

relat de and c na oft ne be taken j io ntly

M LARO UA T ONO MY

• T ih s is viewed as ht e ski ll and hab ti of thinking r ta ion la l y ab uo t te hicalis us es no the basis of mor la c no c nr e s independ tne ly or by s le f -determ ni ati no .

• u A tonom uo s individu la s thi kn f r o th me sel ev s and do n to a muss e thatsuc t smo are al syaw right .

• T yeh s ee k to r ae s no and li ev by gener la r p inciples.• T r ieh m to i av ti no is to do wh ta is morally r ae son ba le f r o ti s nwo sake,

m nia taining int r ge it ,y s le f-respect, na d respect f r o o ht r e s.

“One who br kae s na unjust l wa must do so openl , y l vo ingl ,y and iw ht a wil il n ng e ss toca c tpe the penalty . I sub tim th ta na individual who bre ka s a law th ta c no cs i ne ce tells

him is unjust na d wi ll ingly acc tpe s the penalt …y is in r ae lity xe press ni g the highestrespect f r o the law ”. Rev. Mart ni uL th r e Kin ,g Jr. in Le tt er f or m a r iB mi gn h ma J lia ,19 36 .

A p r e son becomes mora l l y ua tonom uo s by impr vo ing r av i uo s prac it cal ski ll s listedeb l wo :

i) Profici ne cy is rec go ni iz n g mor la pr bo l me s and i ss ues in engin r ee i gn .ii ) Sk li l in c mo preh ne din ,g cl ir a f iy ng and c ir tically asse ss i gn arg mu tne s


8/82



no opposing sides of moral i s s ues.iii ) T eh ba i il ty to form c no sist ne t na d c pmo reh ne si ev viewpoi tn s based

up no c no is derati no of relevant facts.iv) aw A reness of la t r e nate resp no ses to is us es dna cr tae i ev s ulo ti no s for

prac it c la id f f ic tlu ies.v) S ne siti iv ty to g ne uine id ffic tlu ies na d subtl te ies

iv ) nI cr ae s de precisi no ni the use of a co mm no et ih c la langu ga enecessary to xe pre ss and la s o def ne d one‟s vi we s adequately .iv i) pp A r ce i ta ion of pos is b li ities of isu ng r ta ional dial go ue i n resolvin omg ral

c no f il cts and the n dee f r o toler na ce of id ffer ne ces in p r e spectiveamong or la ly r ae son ba le p oe lp e.

iv ii) A s ne se of imp r o t na ce of int ge r ta ing one‟s profession la il fe andp r e son la con iv cti no s i. .e m nia taining one‟s mor la ni teg ir ty.

HOK L S’GREB THE YRO

ST SEG A OF MORAL ED V LE OP NEM T

• er P -convent oi nal eL vel W ah tev r e benef ti s ones le f r o a ov ids pu in shment . T ih s is the le ev l of d eve lopment of la l oy nu g chi dl ren. -A ov id pu in s mh ne t & G ia n R awe rd

• C no ev ntional Level Unc itir c la acc pe t na ce of one‟s f ma il ,y group r o society are acc pe t de as f ni la

adnats rd of om rality . Most da u tl s do n to mature be oy nd this stage. -1.Gainpp A ro av l & A ov id Disappr avo l & 2. Duty & Guilt

• oP st-co ev n t n ional eL ev l M to i av ti no to do wh ta is mor la ly r ae sona lb e for ti s own sak ,e ra ht er th nasolely fr mo u tl erior m to ives, wi ht la so a desire to maintain th r ie moral ni t ge rit ,ys le f-respect dna the respect of o h t r e ua tonom uo s indiv di u la s. Th ye are„Mor la ly ua tonomous‟ p oe pl .e -1. Agr ee d up no rig th s & .2 P r e son la mor la

s at ndards

ILLIG G NA ’S THE YRO

• er P -convent oi nal eL vel T ih s is eht same as K ho bl erg‟s f r i st l leve in th ta the p r e s no is pr oe ucc piedwith s le f centered r ae soning, c r a ing fo r the n dee s and desires of s l e f.

• noC ev ntional Here the thinki gn is po posite in th ,ta one is pr oe ccupi de wi ht n to r uh ting

to h r e s na d a willingne ss to sac ir fice one‟s own interests in r o d r e to help or r un ture to h sr e (or ret nia frien hsd i )p .

• oP st-convent i no al eL ev l deveihc A thr hguo c no t xe t-ori ne t de r ae s no i ,gn ra ht r e th na by applying tsba ract

ur les r na ked in a hier r a chy of imp r o t na c .e Here the in id iv du la becomes ba le tos ir t ke a r ae son de bal na ce betw ee n caring ab tuo oth r e p oe lp e and r up suingone‟s ow n s le f - ni terest while exercisi gn one‟s rig th s .


9/82



iD f ef r ne ces betwe n e th e T OW THEOR SEI

KO REBLH G LIG L N AGII. t E hi sc f o ru el s a d n rig st h t E hi sc f o care

II. Stud ei s bas d e no we l l e ud c t a e ,d t S u d ei s ni cluded fema sel and colored white male‟s only, tending ma e l b ai s. peop el sIII . App i l c t a ion of ba stract ru el s rank d e c i l p p A t a noi f o c no t t x e -oriented rea os nin .g ni the order of im o p rtanceI .V Stud ei s w er e hypothesi ez d r of bo ht t S udy was con ud ct d e no bo ht gend sr e

eht gend r e s ev ne though the study w s a and t i was found, men based the r inoc d t c u ed som tly on ma sel aer son g ni no „ u j stice‟ and women ba e s d

ht e sr i o „n c r a e ‟

HEINZ S’ ID L ME MA

T eh fam uo s axe mple us de by Kohlberg was c la l de “Heinz‟s d li e mm a”. A womanli iv ng in uE rope w uo ld die of c na c r e unless she was gi e v n na xe pensi ev drug. Heruh bs an ,d Hein ,z c uo ld n to afford i .t B tu the local pharmacis , t who h da in ev nted t ehr d ug ta o ln y one t ne th of ht e sale ir p ce refus de to sell it to Heinz who c uo ld no ly r ia se

lah f the requir de om n ye fr mo b r o r wo i sgn . Desperati no r d ives H ie nz to br kae ni to theph amr a cy dna st ae tl eh dr gu to s eva ih s iw fe .

W neh resp no dents were a ks de wh te h r e and why H ie nz hs uo ld r o sh uo ld n to st ae l ar d ug to save his wife fr mo a il f e-thr ae tening illne ss . hT e re ps no ses of eht individu la s

were compar de w hti a protot ipy c la resp no se of individu la s ta part icul r a stages ofmor la r ae sonin .g Kohlberg not de ht ta r i respecti ev of the lev le of the individu la theresp no se cou dl be same, b tu the r ae s no i gn cou dl be di f f ere tn .

F r o exampl ,e if a chi dl r ae s no ing ta a p„ recon ev ntion la ‟ l eve l mig th s ya th ta ti is notir g th to st ae l bec ua se it is against law and som o e ne mig th s ee y uo .

t A a „con ev itn on la ‟ le ev l, na in id iv ud la mig th r a ug e th ta it is n to right to st lae bec ua seti si agai tsn wal dna l swa are en c se sary f r o s co iet y to f nu ction .

t A a „postcon ev ntion la ‟ lev ,le one m ya r a gue th ta st ae ling is wrong bec ua se isagainst law and it is i mm or la .

NOC ES NS SU DNA C NO T OR V YSRE

CONTRO EV RSY :• ll A individu la s wi ll n to r r a i ev ta same ver id ct d r u i gn th r ie ex r e ci is ng th r ie moral

ua tonomy.• Aristotle not de long ago that morality is n t o as precise and cl ae r-c tu as

ir a thmetic.• mi A of t ae chi gn ne gg et ih c s is n to to g te un na im uo s c no for im ty of tuo l koo by

ni doc r t ni ta ion, ua thorit r a ian and dogm i ta c t ae ching, h py notism or any othertech in que but to improve promoti no of toler na ce in the ex r e cise of moral

.ymonotua


10/82



CON ES NS SU :T eh con ud ct r o of a music r o chestra has ua th ir o ty r evo the musici na s dna ih s

ua th ir o ty is respect de by th me by c no sensus as to her iw se the m su ic p r e form na cewill su f f .r e H ne ce ht e tua hority na d ua tonomy are c mo p ta ible.

On the other han ,d t ne si no ir a ses betw nee the n dee s f r o autonomy and the n ee d forc no cerns ab tuo ua thorit .y The differ ne ce betw ee n the t ow hs ould be discussedope ln y to resol ev the i ss ue to ht e co mm on g oo d .

PR SEFO S SNOI DNA PR FO E SS IO AN L MSI

nE gin r ee s norm la ly imagine th ta th ye are ser av nts to r o ganizations ar th r e th na acilbup guar naid . R se p no s libi ity to eht cilbup si se s tne i la fo r a prof sse ion la .

W oh is a prof e ss ion ?la• Obvi uo sly a member of a profe ss ion.

W tah is a profession?„JOB‟ r o „O CC U AP TION‟ th ta m tee s the f lo lowi gn criteria f r mo ihw ch a p r e s no ear snsi h i l v g ni .

• Knowl de ge – E r ex cise of s ik lls, knowle gd ,e judgment dna id cs r te ion req iu ringxe t ne si ev form la c ir t r e ia.

• Org na izati no - speci la b do ies by memb r e s of the profession to set stand r a dcodes of et ih cs,

• uP b il c g doo -The occup ta ion ser ev s some imp r o tant public g oo d indicat de bya code of et ih sc .

W oh is a profession la ne gin ee r?

• Has a bachelor‟ s d ge r ee in ne gin ee ring fr mo na a cc redit csde h loo• P r e forms gne ni ee ring w r o k• Is a register de and il c ne s de Profe ss ional Engin ee r • Acts ni a morally resp no sible way w ih le practicing engin r ee ing

iD f f r e i gn sweiv no Prof sse ion la s

ylnO“ c no s lu t gni ne gin sr ee who are bas ica l l y independ tne and have f eer dom fromc r eo ic no c na be call de as profe ss ion la s ”. -Rob r e t .L W ih telaw

P“ rofe ss ion la s have to m ee t the xe pect ta i no s of c il tne s dna e lpm yo ers. Prof oisse nalrestr tnia s are to be impos de by no ly laws dna gov r e nm tne r ge lu ati no s dna n to by

r ep s lano c neicsno c ”.e -Samu le Florman

nE“ gin r ee s are profe ss ion la s wh ne th ye )1 ta tain sta dn ards of achievement ineduc ta ion, j bo p r e f r o m na ce r o cr tae ivity in eng ni r ee i gn and )2 accept the most basicmoral resp no sibil ti ies to the pu ilb c as ew ll as employ r e s, c il tne s, c lo l ae gues na d

bus or id nat .se ” -Mike M r a tin & Roland Schinzinger


11/82


12/82



RIV T EU ET IH CS

• T “ he u en ma x ined i l fe is not wo t r h i l v .g ni ” (S co rat ,se 470-39 9 .B C.)

• T “ he ha p p y i l fe is thought to be v r i tuous; on w a v t r i u uo s ef i l requ r i es ex r e t ionand d seo not oc nsist ni am su em ne .t ” A( ristotl ,e 384- 23 2 .B C.)

T eh F r uo Main V r i tues

• ur P d ne ce (mi dn ): to think ab tuo a moral probl me cl ae rly na d c mo pletely• T epme r na ce ( ome ti :)sno c tno r lo attr ca ti no to p iso ti ev ome it no s• F r o t ti u ed ( )snoitome : contr lo sr eva i no f r o en g ta i ev em to i no s• itsuJ ce ( lliw ): ch oo se ca cordi gn to r t u ht dna f ssenr ia .

r iV tue tE h ci s• Focuses on the type of p r e son we sh uo ld s r t ive to be• Acti no s which reflect d oog c ah r et c a r tr tia s ( iv rtues) are inherently r g i ht • Acti no s which reflect bad ch ar a ct r e traits ( iv ces) are i hn erently wrong • r iV tue et ih cs are it de more to in id iv du la beh va ior th na to th ta of an

r o ganizati no ( .e g . b isu ness, go ev r mn )tne

AR OT SI TLE s ya s ht ta mor la vi tr ues are tend ne cies, a qc iu red ht r uo gh h ba itformati ,no to r ae ch a prop r e bal na ce betw nee xe tremes in conduc , t em to ion, desireand ta t ti du e i.e. r iv ut es are tend ne cies to find the Gold ne Mean betw ee n the

xe tremes of t oo um hc na d t oo il ttl .e

Some of the r iv tues are defin de usi gn e ax lpm es her :e

r iV ut e T oo much T oo less(G lo d ne naem bet eew n xe tr eme s)

uoC ra eg l ooF hardin se s Cowardice

ur T th uf senl s Revea i l ng a l l ni vio al tion f o Be ni g sec er t ive orat ct and conf d i entia t i l y al ck ing ni candor

or eneG s t i y Was ni t g one‟s er so r u ces Be ni g miserlyFriend seni l s ni eB g onna ying y l f e fusive Sul y k or surly

PR SEFO S LANOI RES SNOP I ILIB TY

• Being mor la ly resp no sible as a profe ss ion la .• tsoM ab s ci dna c pmo reh evisne prof sse ional r iv t .eu

• Cr ae it no of usef lu and safe technol i go c la products while resp ce gnit theua ton ymo of stneilc dna pu ,cilb esp ce ia ll y in tam t sr e of risk t ka i gn .

T ih s ne compasses a wide r av iety of the more ps ec if ic vi tr ues grouped as fo l l wo s:

1. LES F DIRECTION VIRTU :SEuF dn ament la vi tr ues ni ex r e cisi gn r uo mor la ua tonomy and res op nsib li it .y e.g.

s le f nu d r e standi ,gn humilit ,y g oo d mor la ju gd m ,tne c uo rag ,e s le f id cs pi line,p r e sever na c ,e co mm itments, s le f-respect na d d gi in ty


13/82



2. PU ILB C IPS RITED IV RTU SE :Focusi gn no the g oo d of the cli tne s dna public a f f ect de by ht e eng ni r ee s‟ work by. n to id rectly and int ne it on la ly harming to h r e s i.e. elamnon„ fic ne ce .‟B ine fic ne c ,e s ne se of commu in ty, generosity are t o h r e iv rtues f la ling in t ih s

category .3. T M AE WORK IV RTU :SE

En ba les prof e ss ion la s to wo kr cus c sse f lu ly iwth to h r e s. E.g. c lo l ge iality,c oo per ta i ev ne ss , the ability to co mm unicat ,e respect f r o tua h r o ti ,y loy la ty toempl r eyo s and l ae d r e ship uq la ities .

4. PRO IF C EI NCY IV RTU SE :etsaM ry of one‟s craft ht ta charact r e i ez g oo d engin r ee i gn prac it ce e.g.epmoc t ne c ,e negilid c ,e cr ae ti iv t ,y s le f-r awene l throu hg c no tinu suo educ ta ion .

M LARO INT IRGE TY

Moral int r ge ity is the u in ty of character no the basis of mor la c no cern, dna especi la lyno the basis of honest . y The u in t y is c no sist ne cy among r uo itta tudes, em to i no s and

c no duct in rel ta ion to jus it fi de moral av lues.

FLES -RES TCEP

• Valui gn ones le f ni mor la ly appr r po iate w ya s.• nI t ge r la to if nding m ae ning in one‟s il fe and w r o k• A pre-r qe u isi te f r o r up s iu ng ot r eh om r la id slae and iv rtues.• S le f-respect is a mor la c no cept of properly av ul ing ones le f tub s le f -es et me isa psyc igoloh c la c no c tpe of p tiso i ev ta tit edu t awo r sd ones le f .

S le f-r tcepse t seka t ow forms .

.1 Recognit oi n self- er spect is properly av luing ones le f bec ua se of no e‟s inher ne tmoral wor ht , the same w tr o h that eve ry other human being has.

.2 Ap r p aisal self- er spect is properly av luing r uo selves according to how w l le wem tee mor la st na dards na d our p r e son la id lae s.

AV RI SUO SE ESN S FO RESPO SN I ILIB TY

Resp no sibility a cs rib de by )i r iv tu ,e i )i lbo ig ta i no s, i )ii gener la mor la capa ic ties ofp oe lp ,e i )v il iba lities and acc nuo tability f r o acti no s and )v blamew tr o hine ss or

pr ia s owe r iht n se s .

1. By r iv tu :e A p r e s no is s dia to be a resp no si lb e p r e s no wh ne ew ascr bi e amor la r iv tue to the p r e son. We xe pect th ta the p r e s no is r uge l r a ly c no cern de todo the ir g th ht ni ,g is c no scienti uo s dna dil gi tne in m ee ting lbo igati no s. nI t ih ss ne s ,e profe ss ion la resp no sibi il ty is the c tne ral r iv tue of eng ni r ee s.

2. By bo lig ta ion: Mor la re ps no sibi il t ies c na be th uo g th of as lbo ig ta i no s r o ud tiesto p r e form morally right acts.


14/82



3. By gener la mor la capacit :y W neh we view a p r e s no as a whole rath r e thanone iw th respect to a ps ecific ar ,ae we are actu la ly thinking abo tu the activecapacity of the p r e s no f r o kn iwo ng h wo to act ni mora ll y ppa ropriate ways g.e .the capacity of hc ildr ne grow as th ye m ta ure and l r ae n.

4. By acc nuo tabilit :y Resp no is b i il ty la so em na s b ie ng ac oc nu tabl ,e answera elbr o lia lb e to m tee p itr a cul r a oblig ta i no s. The r iv tue of profession la resp no sibilityimp il es a wi ll ingne ss to be acc nuo ta lb e for one‟s con ud ct.

5. By bei gn blameworth :y W neh acc nuo tability f r o a wr no dg io ng is ta i ss ue,re ps no sible becomes a synon my f r o blamew r o ht .y W neh ri thg c no duct is the

,eussi the c no t xe t si pr ia s owe rthin sse .

UAC S LA DNA EL G LA ER SPO SN IBI IL T SEI

suaC al R pse onsibil t i y : c no sists simply in b ie ng a c ua se of some eve . tn E g. . lig th ningsa ieb ng r se p bisno le f r o a uoh se c ta chi gn fire .

Legal Re ps no sib t i l i y : c no sists s mi ply in bei gn a c ua se f r o harm that was so u l n ikelydna la so nu forese bae le t ah nt o om ra l r nopse s ilibi ty si in ov l dev .

ILITU T RA I NA I MS

• T tah w ih ch pr udo ces the am ximum benef ti f r o the gr ae test numb r e of p oe elp( .e g . D come racy)• T eir s to achie ev a bal na ce betw nee the g doo and b da c no sequences of anaction• T eir s to m xa imize the w le l-bei gn of society and e pm hasizes wh ta wi ll pr vo i edthe most benef t i s to the l r a gest gr puo of p oe lp e• T ih s m te h do is f nu dame tn la to many types of eng n i ee ring analysis, ni cl du ni g

ksir - eneb f ti anal sisy and c so t-benef ti analysis

Dr wa backs:

• Sometimes what is best f r o the c mo um in ty as a whole is bad f r o c r e t ia nni di iv du la s in the c mo munity

• tI is o tf ne mi possible to know ni adv na ce w ih ch decisi no w lli l dae to themost g doo

g r O na iz g ni Pr ni cip sel to R se olv g ni Ethi ac l ssI u se

• U it litari na thinki gn

– a st na d dr a th ta promotes those indi i v du la acti no s r o rules ht ta pr udo ce thegr setae t latot tnuoma of ut ili ty to those aff ce t de .


15/82



– A code th ta ne joins engin r ee s to promote the safet , y h ae lth, and w le fare of the pub il c.

– W tah is ut li it ,y th uo gh? H pa piness?

• Prefer ne ce atilitu r msinai

– promote those con i d it no s th ta a ll wo ae ch in id iv du la to p r u sue happine ss as her o she c no cei ev s ti .

– Two c no di it no s necessary f r o t ih s: fr ee dom na d w le l-b ie ng. – Pr itca c ,ylla for ,sr eenigne siht ovda cates c tso / eneb f ti an yla s .se

Probl me s with Uti il t r a ianism

• Diffic tlu to qu itna fy benefits for ALL those affect de .• “Gr ae test g doo ” di f f ic tlu to pa lp y to na la l- cni l su i ev popul ta ion .• Som oe ne g te s “ hs aft ”de – appr ao ch jus it fies p r e p te r ta i gn inj su it ce on

dni i iv d ,slau i. ,.e s oemo ne g ste left out .

• Thr ee appr ao che :s

1. C eneb/tso f ti – qu itna if ba le appr ao hc . M xa imize posi it ev util ti ies (benef ti s)tsniaga nega it ev tu i il it se (c )stso .

2. Act ut ilitari na – “W lli the c r uo se of acti no pr udo ce more g oo d th na anyla t r e n a it ev c r uo se of action th ta I c uo ld take”?

3. Rule utilit r a i na – “W luo d utility be m xa imiz de if eve r oy ne did the sameht i gn in t eh s ema smucr ic t na c se ”? Ad po it no o f c nommo ly ca c pe te d rules .

1 . C SO T-BENE IF T NA LA Y SIS :• A ss sse the ava li ba le po ti no s• A ss e ss the costs and benef t i s of ae hc tpo ion f r o ht e itne re audi ne ce affect de• Make the decisi no ht at is likely to resu t l ni the gr ae test bene i f t rel ta ive to cos .t

2 . CA T-UT ILI TARI SINA M:p( rofessed by J ho n Stuart iM lls)

• F uco s se o n indiv di u la ca ti ,sno r ta h r e th na gener r la ul .se• n A act is ir g th if ti is il kely to pr udo ce the most g doo f r o the most p poe lein ov l dev in t eh par cit lu ar is tua it no .• Rules may be brok ne whenev r e d io ng so wi ll produce the most g doo ni aspecific s ti u ta ion.• Happine ss is the no ly i„ n r t insic‟ g oo d dna all to h r e s are „ins r t um ne t la ‟ g doo sth ta ser ev as the m ae ns of h pa piness.

3 . RU EL -UT ILI TARI NA ISM:p( rofessed by Richard Br dna t)

• T ih s regards mor la av lues as r p imar .y• We s uoh ld foll wo the r lu es dna ova id bribes, neve wh ne those acts od noth eva ht e best c no se uq ne ces ni a par it c lu r a situ ta i ,no bec ua se the general


16/82



prac it ce of following rules and n to b ir bing pr udo ce the most over l la g oo d• Rules sh uo ld be c no sidered in s te s call de „moral codes .‟ A mor la code isu j s it fi de wh ne fo ll owed, w uo ld m xa imize the pu i lb c g oo d more than alternativeoc des ow uld.

DU YT ET IH CS (Imman eu l Ka tn ’s vie )w

C no tends th ta certain acts ( r o duties) hs ou dl be p r e form de bec ua se th ye areni her ne lt y te hic la such as:

• be honest,• k ee p promises,• do n to inf il ct sufferings no o ht r e p oe pl ,e• be f ,r ia• make reparati no wh ne oy u h eva b ee n unf ia r,• woh gr ita tu ed for ik ndness ext ne ded by to h r e s• s ee k to impr evo own int le lig ne ce and charact , r e• d eve lop one‟s tal tne s,•

d no ‟t comm ti us icide.• D tu ies, r ta h r e th na g oo d c no sequ ne ces, is f nu dament .la• nI di iv du la s who recognize th r ie te hical d tu ies will ch oo se et ih c la ly c r o rectmoral acti sno

T eh se duties should m ee t K na t‟s 3 conditi no s i. .e

1. tI hs uo ld express re ps ect f r o p r e s no s,• P poe le deser ev respec t bec ua se th ye ha ev capacity to be autono om suand f r o ex r e cis g ni goodw l i l .• G oo dwill is ht e oc nscient uoi s and honest e o f f rt to do wh ta is ri hg taccording to uni r ev s la r p inciples of d tu ies .• Mor la m to ives and intenti no s lp ya a prominent role in duty et i h sc rather th na tu i il t r a iani ms .

.2 It is na uni r ev s la r p inci lp e• D tu ies are bindi gn no us no ly if th ye are pa p il c ba le to e ev r oy ne. T eh y

tsum be r evinu s ila sable .I.3 t pxe resses comm dna for ua tonom uo s mor la ag tne s. Duties presc i r be c r e tain

ca ti no s categorically, uohtiw t qu ila ficati no s or c no d ti i no s ta ta hc ed. V la dir p inci lp es of d tu ies are Cate og rical Impe ar tives . hT ye c tno rast iw th non-moraloc m dnam s c la le d py H o eht tic l a e pmI ratives which are condition la .

ehT evoba ▬► „R EPSE CT f r o PERSONS‟

D ar wba k c f o K na t‟s duty ethi :sc tI has f ia l de to be s ne s ti ive to h wo p nir ciples of dutyc na noc f i l ct with ae ch to h r e thereby cr tae ing oM r la id l me m sa .

Ra lw s eD ve ol pme tn on K tna ’s tuD y htE ci s

R lwa s argues th ta lla ration la p oe ple w uo ld ga r ee to abide by two basic mor l ar p i :selpicn


17/82



1. Each p r e son is ne t ti led to the most xe t ne sive amou tn of lib r e ty c mo p ta ible with anequ la amou tn f r o o ht r e s and2. Di f f er ne ces in soci la pow r e and economic benef t i s are jus it fied no ly wh ne ht ye are

ylekil to benefit eve r ,enoy cni luding mem b sr e of om st disad av ntag de gr spuo .

RIGHTS ET IH CS (JO NH LO KC E – 1632-170 ) 4

• E ev r oy ne sah in eh r ne t mor la rig th s• E ev r oy ne has rig th s that arise fr mo EX SI TING (i. .e rig th to iL f ,e m xa imumni di iv ud la L bi ert ,y and human Dignity are Fundament l a Rig th s).• ehtO r sthgir ir a se sa a C no seq neu ce .• eituD s arise eb c ua se elpoep evah r ,sthgi n to iv ce r ev sa .• Any act th ta violates na in id iv du la ‟s moral rights is te hically unaccept ba le.• iR g sth scihte aw s highly individu ila stic .• Rig th s are r p im ir a ly tne itlements th ta prevent to h r e p oe ple fr mo med ld ing ni

eno s‟ il f .e These are refe r r de to as Lib r e ty Rig th s r o Neg ta i ev Rights th ta lp ac eud ties on other p oe ple not to int r e fere with one‟s life.

.e g. Indi iv ud la s do not have rig th s to il f e bec ua se to h r e s ha ev d tu ies n to to ki llthem. nI st ae d, possessing the ri hg t to il fe is the r ae s no why oth r e s ou hg t n to toik ll th me .

D ar wba k c s

• H wo do we r p i ir o t zi e the rights of di f f er tne individu la s?

• Rig th s te hi sc o tf ne promote the rig th s of dni ividu la s ta the xe p ne se of largegr puo s/so ic ety

I. A .M le den‟s r ev si no of Rig th s Ethics

• Human rights are i tn mi ately relat de to communities of p oe ple.• T ih s r ev si no is known as POSIT EVI W AFLE RE RIGHTS and is defin de asir g sth to c inummo ty benef sti f r o li niv g a m ni i am lly decent hu nam lif .e

EVAL AU IT NO FO ET IH C LA THE SEIRO

We are basica l l y n to interest de in which of the te hic la ht r oe ies si the best. tI isbe il ev de ht ta there are ar ae s ni w ih ch ae ch th oe ry complements oth r e s by h wo they

f f id er .

Proc ude re f r o G ene r la E lav uat :noi

.1 The th oe ry um st be lc ae r and formulat de with c no cepts that are coher t ne andilppa c lba e .

.2 It um st be intern la ly c no sist ne t in that none of t i s ten te s contr ida cts any oth r e .

.3 N ie t eh r eht oeht ry on r sti ed f ne se c na rely up no f la se ni for tam i no .

.4 It sum t be us f f ci iently compreh ne is ev to provide guid na ce in ps ecific s ti uati no sof interest to us.

.5 tI must be co pm ta ible w ti h r uo most carefully c no sider de moral con iv cti no s


18/82


19/82



long-term interest of s le f. H ne ce taking bribe is n to accept ba le s ni ce ti w uo ld notdo any g oo d no a l no g-term. T ih s was profess de by Thomas Hobbes (1588-16 97 ) dna A ny Rand (19 50 -1982) .

Ayn R na d – with no ly one il fe to li ev , the individu la is of utmost import na ce tI is ni one‟s s le f-interest to ad tpo the Mor la Po tni of View (Hobbes‟ Social

C tno ract)

SUC TOMS dna ET IH C LA RELAT MSIVI

Rel ta i iv sm:

• Dis nit cti no betw nee “mor la s” t“( r ae tm tne of to h r e s )” and “mores” (“harmle sssuc t ”smo )

utluC r la ( eD s r c i itp v )e Rel ita vis :m

• Factu la Claims: “x is c no sider de rig th ni society y ta time t” dna i“ s c no sider de

wrong in society z ta t mi e t”• ipmE ir c la C no c noisul : oM r eitila s are rel ta ive• T ih s is ie th r e true r o f la se ( na thropology –a study of manki dn , ti s cust mo s,be il efs, te c.can f ugi re ti uo t)

oN rm ita ve ( htE ica )l R ale tivis :m

• N r o mati ev Clai :m “W tah is c no is der de rig th in society x ta t mi e t is g i r ht r of ht at soc t ei y ”

• A p itr a cul r a cul ut re c na n to be judg de fr mo tuo s di e of that cul ut r .e• tE„ hic la Rel ta i iv sm‟ s ya s th ta acti no s are morally right wh ne they are appr evo dby law na d cust mo .• T yeh are wrong when th ye violate l wa s dna cust mo .• ihtE c la egoism r t ies to reduce mor la r ae s no s to m ta t r e s of s le f ni teres ,t

ihte„ c la re al tiv ism‟ ta tem tp s to r ude ce mor la lav ues to l wa s, con nev ti no s andsmotsuc of alucitr ap r s co i eite s .

noC seq eu cn se f o oN rm ita ve Rel i ta vism

• We cannot s ya oth r e “mor la s” are inf r e i r o to r uo ow n society s‟• We ed cide ht e av lue of r uo acti no s bas de no ly no wh ta r uo p itr a cul r a society

kniht s•

We s uoh ld sh wo a l to of ot ler na ce f r o di f f er tne cust mo s and outl koo s in asociety ni w ih ch we il ev i .n tI m nae s ht ta cust mo s c na have mor la si ing fic na ce indecidi gn how we sh uo ld ac .t T ih s view is ca ll de „et ih c la plurali ms ‟.

eR a os ns f r o Acc pe t na ce Of htE ic la R le a it vism

T eh r ae s no s prof ess de f r o acc pe t na ce of te hical rel ta i iv sm is thr ee fold.

.1 L wa s s ee m so tang bi le and cl ae r-cut. Th ye pro iv de a pub il c w ya ending


20/82



s ee mingly endless id sputes ab tuo rig th s and wr gno s. But many times, moralr ae s no s s ee m to be ta av ri na ce with l wa s g.e . apartheid l wa s.

.2 oM r la adnats r sd av ry dr ama tical yl fr mo eno luc ture to r ehtona . hT e no ly kind of bo jectivity po ss ible is limit de to a ig nev s te of l wa s in a gi ev n society.

Acknowledging this rel ta i v ti y of morality ne c uo rages the vi tr ue of toler na ce of

ef f id r ne c se gnoma soci seite .


21/82



.3 Mor la judgm tne s hs ou dl be made in rel ta i no to fact r o s th ta fr mo case to cas ,eusu la ly making ti i pm o iss ble to form lu ate rules which are si pm l .e Cust mo s a dn

swal are su u la ly mor la ly rel ave nt f ca t r o s ht ta shou dl be t eka in nto acc uo nt .

GILER I NO dna ID VI EN CO MM DNA ET SCIH

ihtE cs and Re i l g :noi

oM r la ssi u se and r gile i suo eileb f are r ale t de in s eve r la p iso it ev ways.

• r iF s ,t th ye are shap de ov r e time from the c ne tral moral av lues of maj r o w r o ldr le igi no s.• Sec ,dno reli ig uo s vi we s oft ne supp tr o mor la r esp no sib li ity by pr vo idingad id tion la m to i av ti no f r o b ie ng moral.• T ,dr ih s emo t semi r le igi no s s te a hi hg er om r la standard th na si conve tn ion .la• So ic te ies o tf ne benef it f or m a r av iety of reli ig no s that make pr mo in ne tp r a ticul r a iv rtues, inspi ir ng ht r ie memb r e s to r up sue them beyond wh t a is

ir anidr o ly s nee sa om r la ly obligatory .

iD vine Comm dna htE i :c

• T ih s s ya s ht ta an act w ih ch is rig th is co mm na ded by g do and the one w ih chis wrong is f r o bidd ne by God .• T eh di f f ic lu ty in t ih s is to know precisely what G d o ‟s comm dna s are and inkn wo ing wh te h r e God ixe sts .

We c na view th ta mor la r ae s no s are not reducible to r le igi uo s m ta t r e s, la th uo gh

r le i suoig b eile f yam pr vo di e na add d e ni s i p rat oi n for resp no ding t o ht em .

sU es f O E ht i ac l T oeh ries

1. ihtE c la th oe ries aid in id itne f iy ng the moral c no sider ta i no s r o re sa no s thatitsnoc tute a dil me ma .

2. T yeh pr vo ide a precise s ne se of wh ta kinds of ni f r o mati no are rel ave nt toos l iv ng om ral d eve lop nem t .

3. T yeh some it mes, o f f r e w ya s to rank the relevant mor l a c no sider ta ions ni order of i opm rt na ce dna pr ivo de a r hguo ug i nad ce in solving om r la pr bo lems .

4. T eh th r oe ies help us id ne tify the f lu l mor la ramificati no s of la t r e nati ev c r uo sesof action, urgi gn a wide p r e spec it ev no the mor la im ilp c ta i no s of the opti no sa dn pr vo i gnid a s sy t ame t ci fr ema w kr o of c mo p r a ing la tern ta i ev s .

5. T eh th oe ries ua gm tne ht e precisi no with ihw ch we use mor la terms and theypr vo ide frame works f r o mor la r ae soning wh ne id cs u ss ing mor la i ss ues with

eugaelloc s .6. By pr vo iding frame works f r o developm ne t of moral argum tne s, the th oe ries

stren tg hen r uo ab li ity to r ae ch bal na c de na d insig th ful j du gments .


22/82



INU T I II - E GN I EEN RI GN AS S CO IA L EX IREP M NE TA IT NO

To r ednu take a gr t ae kr ow a dn se pe ic a ll y a kr ow of on v le type mean , s c r r a y gnituo na ex ep rim tne . tI means t ka i gn pu a ts ruggle t iw h the forces of na u t re

iw t uoh t the as us rance of emer i g ng sa a iv otc r f a ter the i f r ts tta a kc .

L iuo s Marie H ir ne N va i r e (17 58 - 183 )6 - Found r e f o t S ruc ut ral Analys si

GNIREENIGNE A TNEMIREPXES AT NOI

• Exp r e imenta it no P( r le iminary tests r o Simulat i no s) pl ya s a v ti la r lo e in thedesi ng of a product or proce ss .

• nI la l stages of con r ev ting a n we engin ee ring c no cept into a design like, f r i st rou hg c tu design, usage of id f f erent types of mat r e i la s and processes, detail de desi ng , f tr u her stages of w r o k design and the f ini shed produc , t

Exp r e iments and tests are con u d ct de to e av ul ate the pr udo ct. M ido fic ta i no s aremade based no the tuo come of these xe p r e im tne s .

• T eh n r o m la design proce ss is t uh s iter ta i ev (modific ta i no s b ie ng made no thebasis of f ee dba kc inform ta ion ac uq ir de fr mo the tests).

E nev though av ri uo s tests na d xe p r e mi tne s are c no duct de at r av i uo s stages, theen ig n r ee i gn proj ce t sa a whole in sti tota t i l y can be viewed as an ex e p r mi ent .

LIMIS A IR T SEI T DNATSO A NEMIREPXEDR TS1. Any projec t is c r r a i de out in parti la ignor na ce due to

• T eh nu c r e tai tn i se in the tsba r ca t om del us de f r o ht e d se i ng c la uc lati sno ,• T eh nu c r e tai tn i se ni t eh pr ice se character scitsi of t eh am teri la ps cr u hased,• T eh nu c r e t ia nties c ua s de by av ri ta i no s in processi gn and f ir ba cati no of

materi la s na d• T eh unc r e tai tn ies ab uo t the n uta re of stresses the finish d e pr do cu t w lli

etnuocne r .

nI d ee d, Engin ee r‟s succe ss lies in the ab t i l i y to a c c omp i l sh at sks wi ht no ly a a p rt ialonk w el dge of scien it fic l wa s ab tuo n uta re and so ic ety.

2. T eh fin la outcome of ne gin ee ri gn projects, like ht ose of xe periments, is gener l a lynu cert nia . Very oft ,ne possible tuo comes are n to even known na d gr ae t ir sks may

be pres ne ted which c uo ld n eve r be thou hg t of.


23/82



3. Effecti ev Engin r ee i gn relies up no knowledge g ia n de about pr udo cts both beforeand af t r e th ye lea ev the factory- knowl de ge n ee ded f r o improving c r u r ne tpr udo cts and cr tae i gn b te t r e ones. Th ta is, ongoing succe ss in ne gin ee ringdep dne s upon gai in ng new knowl de ge.

EL A MORFGNINR T PEH A TS

nE gin r ee s hs uo ld l nr ae n to no ly f mor th r ie nwo r ae li r e design dna oper ta i gn res tlu s,ub t la so fr mo to h r e engin r ee s.

r eenignE s r taepe the past im st eka s of to h sr e due to the foll iwo ng rea .snos

• L kca of se t silba hed hc na n sle of com um nic ta ion .• iM ps lac de r p di e in n to a ks ing f r o ni form ta ion• r abmE r sa s tnem at f ia lure r o f r ae of il tig ta ion (lega l probl .)sme• N negilge ce .

x E ampl se :

1. T eh T t i anic lack de suffi ic ent numb r e of il fe b tao s re us tl ing in the d ae th of 1522tuo of 2227 il( fe bo ta capacity a av ila lb e was no ly 8 52 ), a f we decades lat r e r A ctic

perish de due to the same problem.

2. nI June 196 ,6 a s ecti no of the M li f dr o Hav ne r B idge ni Wales co ll pa s de d r u ni gc no s ur t c it .no A bridge of sim li r a design, erect de by the same br d i ge- ub ild r e niM le b uo rn ,e Austr la i ,a la so parti la ly c lo l pa s de in the mon ht of Octob r e , same ye r a .D r u i gn this incid ne t 33 p oe lp e were ik ll de and many were in u j red.

3. M la f nu cti no s o cc r u red at nucl ae r r ae ct r o s at r av i uo s loc ta i no s dna theni for am t noi r str ope ew re iw th B ba cock dna W ,xocli the r ae ct r o am nuf ca tur r e . In s ipteof thes ,e no att tne ion was p ia d l ae di gn to a pre ss ure relief av lve ig ving ir se to theThr ee Mile sI land n cu l r ae a cc ident no M r a ch 82 , 1979 .

STSARTNOC W TSHTI A DN A STNEMIREPXEDR

1 . EX EP RIM NE T LA C NO T LOR : nI st na d dr a xe perim tne s, memb r e s are in twoid f f er tne gr puo s. Memb r e s of eno group er ceive special xe p r e mi ne at l tr tae men .t Theto h r e gr puo memb r e s, ca ll de „co t n rol r g oup‟ do t on er ceive speci la tr ae tm ne t, th uo gh

th ye are fr mo the s ema en iv ron nem t in lla other re ps stce .

uB t this is n to true in ne gin ee rin ,g s ni ce most of the xe p r e im tne s are not conductedni laboratories. hT e us bjects of xe periments are hum na b ie ngs who are outside thexe perim ne t r e ‟s c tno r lo .

T uh s ti is n to po ss i lb e to study the effects of hc na ges in r av iable no id ffer ne t groups.H ne ce no ly ih st ir o c la and r te rospect i ev data ava ila lb e ab tuo v r a io su t r a get groups


24/82



has to be us de f r o eva ul ati .no H ne ce engin r ee i gn as a soci la xe p r e im ne t ta i no s mee sto be an xe tend de usage of the c no cept of xe periment ta i no .

2 . INFORM DE CONSENT : has two elements, k on wledge and vo nul tar seni s . Thes bu jects h( um na b ie ngs) sh dluo be ig nev lla the inf r o m ta i no need de to make ar ae s elbano iced s noi . Ne ,tx th ye must g te ni to the xe per mi tne with tuo be ni g us bjectedto f r o c ,e r f a d u r o ed ception . Supplyi gn complete inform ta i no is n ie ther necessary norni tsom cas se p sso ible . B tu a l l el er v t na ni for am tion n ee ded f r o maki gn a r ae sona lb edecisi no no whe ht r e to p r a ticipate sh uo ld be conve ey d. Gener la l ,y we all pref r e to bethe su jb ect of r uo own exp r e im tne s rath r e than those of somebody else.

Con id ti no s defining of nI rmed r o Va i l d Consent

a. T eh c no s ne t is gi ev n ov lunt ir a lyb. T eh c no s tne is bas de no ni form ta i no a r ta ion la p r e s no w uo ld ,tnaw

togeth r e htiw any oth r e ni form ta i no request de and present de to ht me insr ednu t na d ba le form .

c. T eh c no se tn er was competent to proce s s the ni form ta i no and ma ekr ta ional dec .snoisi

d. nI f amr o it no h sa b nee iw d yle sid s me inat de .e. T eh subject‟s c no s tne is offer de by pro yx by a group th ta collecti ev ly

r pe resents many su j b ects like ni terests, c no c nr e s and xe posure to irsk.

E„ ng ni r ee ing xe p r e mi tne s are n to con ud ct de to g ia n new kn wo ledge unlike cs ien it ficxe perim tne s .‟ sI siht tsid i tcn i no nec se sary?

T ih s id stincti no is n to iv t la bec ua se we are c no c r e n de abo t u t eh man en r ni w ih ch t ehxe perim tne is con ud cted, such as av i l d oc nsent of hum na subjects being s uo g th ,

s t ef a y meas er u s tak ne and m ae ns ixe st f r o et r ani m t ni g the xe perim tne at any time and pr vo idi gn all p r a ticipants a s f a e exit .

eF a r ut es f o r om a ll y re ps ons bi le ne g ni e r e s in s co i la ex ep rim ne ta noit

snoC cientio ensu ss : A r p imary ob il gati no to protect the safety of hum n a subjects na dr pse ce t ieht r hgir t of c no sent .Re el vant in of rmat oi n: A c no st tna awarene ss of the xe p r e imental nature of a ynprojec ,t mi agin ta i ev forecas ti gn of ti s po ss ible side effects dna a reason ba le eff tr o t om ino t r o them.M r o al a t u on mo y : A tu on ,suomo p r e son la in ov l ev em nt in all st spe of the projec .t

nuoc c A tabil t i y : Acc tpe ing acc uo nt iba lity f r o the res tlu s of the project.

SNOC CIENT UOI S EN S :S

C no sci ne ti uo s mor la commitment m ae ns s ne siti iv ty to the fu ll range of relevant mor la va ul es.S ne siti iv ty to resp no sibi il ties th ta is rele av n .t


25/82



W nilli gne ss to de ev lop the ski ll and xe pe dn the eff tr o n ee ded to r ae ch t ehb tse ab l na ce p sso ible oma ng t eh se c no sider snoita .C no sci ne ti uo sne ss m ae ns c ensuoicsno ss bec ua se mere intent is notsuffic ei nt.

C no c gnivie gne i een ri gn sa cos i la xe per nemi t ta i no r se tor se the iv sion of en sr eenig asgu r a di na s of the pub i l c interest ni th ta ht ye are duty b uo nd to gu dr a the w le fare a dnas fety o tf oh se f a f ce t de by en gg pr stce jo .

ELER V NA T I ROFN MAT :NOI

C no cs i ne it uo ns e ss is lb ni d w ti hout re el av nt factu la ni form ta ion. Mor la c no c r e nin ov vl es a commitment to bo tain and asse ss lla avail ba le p tr e in tne informati no .

An to h r e dim ne si no to factu la inf r o mati no is the c no s qe u ne ces of wh ta one d eo s.W elih reg r a ding ne gg as soci la xe p r e im ne t ta i no p tnio s tuo the pmi ort na ce of cont txe ,ti la so r u ges the engin r ee to view his r o h r e specializ de acti iv it es in a project as p r a tof a larg r e whole h va ing a soci la impact th ta m ya i vn ol ev a av r iety of unint ne ded

f e f tce s . It m ya be b te ter to prac it ce „defen is ev engg‟ (Chauncy Star ) r or „prev ne tiveengg‟ (R tu h D iva s).

M LARO UA T ONO MY

P poe le are mor la ly ua tonom uo s when th ie r mor la con ud ct and r p inciples of acti no are th ie r own.Mor la b le iefs and at it tudes must be a c i r tic la ref lecti no and n to a pa iss vead po ti no of the p r a ticul r a con ev nti no s of one‟s societ ,y r ile gi no r o professi no .Moral be il efs and ta t ti udes cann to be ga re de to formally and adhered tomerely ev rb la ly.T yeh um st be int ge rat de into the core of one‟s p r e son ila ty and hs uo ld l ae d ot

immoc tt de ca t noi .tI is wrong to think th ta as na em lp yo ee wh ne one p r e forms „ a st c ‟ ser iv ng

c mo pany‟s interests, one is no l n o g r e mor la ly and p r e son la ly id ne tifi de withone‟s acti no s.Viewing engg as a soci l a xe p r e im ne t ta ion helps to o r ev come this f al wedth uo g th and restores a s ne se of ua tonom uo s p r a ticip ta ion in one‟s w r o k.

As na xe perim ne t ,r e na en ig ne r e is r exe cising the speci la iz de tr ia ningth ta forms the core of one‟s id ne tity as a profe ss ion la .

A soci la xe p r e iment th ta c na re us tl in unknown c no se uq ne ces sh luo dhelp ni spire a cr iti c la and questi no ing at it tude about the adequacy ofr uc r tne econ cimo dna safety st adna r sd .

nI t r u n, t ih s l dae s to better p r e sonal in ov l ev m ent wi ht work .


26/82



CA C NUO T IBA LITY:

Resp no sible p oe ple accept mor la resp no si ib lity f r o th r ie acti no s. A cc nuo tability is the wi ll ingness to us b im t one‟s ac it no s to mor la cs r tu iny na dbe open na d resp no si ev to the asse ss m ne t of to h r e s.tI hs uo ld be und r e st oo d as b ie ng cu pl ba le and blamew t r o hy f r o misd dee s.

uS b sim sio n to an me lp oy r e ‟s auth ir o ty cr ae tes in many p oe ple a n r a row s ne se ofca c ytilibatnuo f r o eht c no s neuqe c se o tf r ieh ac noit . T ih s is bec ua se of

i) Only a sm lla c r tno ibuti no is made by one in id iv du ,la wh ne large sca elengin r ee i gn ow rk si f ar g nem t .de The final product which is f r a away fr mo one‟s

aidemmi te ow r alpk c ,e d seo ton evig a prop r e und sr e t idna ng of the c no s qe u ne cesof one‟s ac it no .ii ) Due to the fr ga ment ta i no of w r o k, a av st id f f usi no of acc nuo tability takesplac .e The ar ae of p r e son la acc nuo tability is delimit de to the porti no of w r o kbeing c r a ri de uo t by one.iii ) T eh pressure to move on to another new project does not allow one to

c mo lp ete the bo ser av it no s l gno enough. T ih s makes p oe lp e account ba le no ly form tee ing cs h de ules and not f r o the c no s qe u ne ces of action.iv) To a ov id g tte ing into leg la i uss es, engin r ee s tend to c no c ne trate more onleg la il ba i il ties th na the c no tainment of the potenti la ir sks in ov l ev d in th r ie ar ae ofw r o k.

Viewing ne gin ee ring as a soci la xe periment ta i no makes one o r ev come theseid f f tluci ies dna s ee the pr melbo ni elohw rather than sa part .

GNE I REEN ING C SEDO FO ET SCIH

nE gin ee ring Codes of Et ih sc ha ev e ov lv de o ev r time

AE RLY CO SED

•Codes of p r e sonal be ah vior •Code s for honesty in busine ss d ae il gn s and f ia r busine ss practic se•Empl eeyo / me pl eyo r r el ta i no s

NE REW C SEDO

• ahpmE s ezi c emtimmo n st to safet ,y cilbup h ae l ht and envir no ment la protecti no• Expr sse the r ,sthgi duti se and oblig ta i sno of mem b sr e of the Prof sse i no• Do n to xe pre ss new et ih c la p r ni ciples, b tu coherently restate i xe sti gn sta dn ar ds

of resp elbisno ne gin ee ring practice• Cr ae te na ivne ron tnem iw t ih n t eh Profe ss i no where te hical be ah vi r o is th e n mr o• N to leg la ly ib nding; na engin r ee cannot be r a rested f r o viol ta ing na te hical code

ub( t am y be xe p le led from r o c ne sured by the ne gin ee ring society)


27/82



er A En i g n ee r ni g oC ed s Needed ? NO:

– nE gin r ee s are capable of fendi g n for th me sel sev – Comm no law is avail ba le to defend ni et ih c la disputes – f O f dedne cilbup ca n s kee redr sse thr uo gh c tr uo s

er A En i g n ee r ni g oC ed s Needed ? Y :SE

– nE gin r ee s have f we r o no res r uo ces to defend th me sel ev s in na et ih c la id spute – Comm no law is avail ba le in r ae lity o ln y iw th gr tae id f f ic lu ty – Con r ev sel ,y the pub il c has similar probl me s in s ee ki gn redress ht rough legalchann le s

j bO e i t c ons ot Exi its ng E gn ine ir e ng Codes of t E hic :s

– Rel ylevita f we ne gin sr ee are sr ebmem of engin r ee ing s co i te ies. – N no -memb r e s d no ‟t necessarily f lo low the te hical codes. – Many ne gin r ee s eith r e d no ‟t nk ow th ta the codes xe is ,t r o h eva n to re da them.

W ih ch te hic la codes pa lp y?

– Dependi gn up no y r uo id cs ipline and r o ganiz ta ion la aff i il ta i no s, oy u m ya be b uo ndby one, two or eve n more et ih c la codes:• iD cs pi line relat de (ASM ,E I EEE , CS A E, IIE te c.)•N ta ional So ic ety of Profession la Engin r ee s (N EPS )• eeyolpmE c edo s (corpor ta ion, nu i r ev sit ,y .cte )•Uni no Codes

gnE ine ir e ng Et ih cs

O r u ne gin ee ring et ih sc codes are deri ev d from a Western cul u t ral tr ida ti no – cn A i tne Gre ske – uJ d oe -C tsir h ian r le igi sno – ihP los po h sr e and thi r ekn s ( g.e . Lock ,e Kan ,t Mi ll s)

T eh Hamm r u a ib C edo

If a bu li d r e has bui tl a h uo se f r o a m na dna has not made his work s u o n ,d and theh uo se he has bu t li has f la l ne down dna so c ua s de the d ae th of the h uo seh lo d ,r e that

ub ild r e sh lla be put to d ae t .h I f ti c ua ses the d htae of the h uo seh lo d r e ‟s s ,no theyhs all tup the build r e ‟s s no to d tae h….

(H umma r ba i, King of Babylon, 1758 B .C. )


28/82



doC e f o htE ics r of E gn ine sr e A cc ider tati no B ao rd f r o Eng ni r ee i gn and Technology

EB A( T)T eh Fundam ne t la r P i icn ples

nE gin r ee s sha l l upho d l a d n d a av nce t eh ni t g e r t i y, hon ,r o a d n dign y t i of the

en ni g eer g ni pr sef o s noi y b :• us ing t eh r i knowledge and k s l l i of r t eh enhancement of the hum n a rac ;e• being ho en st and mi p r a tial and s r e ving w t i h f d i e t i l y the p bu i l c , the r i emp ol y r e s, and c i l e t n s;• striving to ni crease the oc mpet ne ce and prest e g i of the eng ni eer ni g or p fess io .n• r o p pus t g ni t eh prof noi sse al na d et c i nh c l a soc ei t ei s f o the r i d si cip i l ne .

T eh Fu dn am ne t la C na nons

nE gin sr ee shall• ho d l a p ramo t nu the saf t e y, hea t l h, a d n welfare f o t eh pub i l c ni t eh r e p formance f o

r i eht r p o sef sional ud t sei ;• e p r of rm s r e vice only ni ar ae s f o t eh ir comp t e ence;• i ss eu pub i l c s at teme t n s only in an objective and r t u ht ful mann r e ;• act ni p or fess ional m t a t r e s r of each emp ol y r e r o c i l e t n as fait f h ul age t n s r o ur t st ee s,and sha l l a ov id conf i l cts f o in et rest;

• bu d l i t eh r i r p o ef ssional repu a t t ions no the mer t i s of the r i s r e vices d na hs a l l n t oc mo pete nu af irly w ht i ot r eh s

• act ni such mann r e as ot upho d l a d n enhance the hon , r o ni t g e r t i y and d g i n t i y f o theor p f se s noi ;

• c no tin eu t eh r i or p f se sional d v e e ol p em nt ht rougho t u the r i c r a e r e s, na d sha l l or p v ed i op o p rtunit ei s f r o the r p o ef ssi no al ed ve ol pment of tho es engine r e s und r e the r i

s r e pu vision. CODES FO ET IH CS - ROLES OR FUNCTIONS

1. nI s ar ip t oi n a dn Guid na ce:Codes pr vo ide positi ev stimu ul s f r o te hic la c no duct dna helpf lu guid na ce byusing p iso ti ev l na ug age .Codes shou dl be brief to be effective and h n e ce such codes o f f r e no ly general

ug id na ce .uS pplementary statements r o guidelines to gi ev specific directi no s are added

by a number of soci te ies r o profe iss on la b do ies.

2. S pu port:Codes gi ev positi ev pus p r o t to those s kee ing to act et ih c la ly.n A ne gin r ee u dn r e pressure to act un t e hically c na use one of the publicly

pr co lai dem cod se to g te supp r o t for hsi st dna o n sp ice f ci om ral issues .Codes la so ser ev as leg la supp tr o f r o eng ni r ee s.


29/82



3 . r eteD ren ec and dis i c p il n :eCodes can be us de as a basis f r o con ud cting in ev stig ta i no s no un te hic la

noc d .tcuT yeh la so provide a det r e rent f r o en ig ne r e s to act immor la ly .

nE gin r ee s who are pu in sh de by profession la socie it es f r o pr nevo un te hicalbeh va i uo r by re ov king the ir g th s to prac it ce as engin r ee s are la so subjected topu ilb c ridicule and lo ss of respect f r mo c lo l ae gues na d loc la commu in ty .T ih s h ple s to pr udo ce te hic la conduct neve ht uo gh iht s c na be view de as anegati ev way of moti av ti no .

4 . Edu tac i no and tum u la nu der ts a dn ing :T eh codes c na be us de f r o id scussi no dna reflecti no no mor la i ss ues and there ybimprove the u dn r e standi gn of mor la re ps no sibi il ties among lla en ig ne r e s, cli tne s,pu cilb and g oo d org na iz ta i sno .

5 . Co tn ri tub i gn to the profes i s o ’n s pu lb ic ima eg :Codes pres tne the engin ee ring professi no as na et ih c la ly committ de society ni t eh

eye s of the publ ci th su enh icna ng th r ie i am ge .

6 . Pr to e itc ng ats tus quo:Codes estab i l sh et ih c la con ev nti no s, which c na h le p promote an ga r ee d upon

nim imum level of et ih c la c no d tcu .

7 . Prom ito ng b su iness n i terests:C edo s c na lp ace un r aw r na t de restr stnia of c r emmo ce o n isub n sse d ae lings.

aleR tive imp t r o ance of the v r a ious fu tcn ions of c do es f o hte ics

T eh p r e specti ev of engg as social xe p r e im ne tati no cl ae rly em hp asizes ther p imary role „s pu p r o ti ev f nu cti no ‟ of the codes of et ih sc . T ih s is so bec ua se,

no ly this supp tr o enables ne gin r ee s, ps ae k uo t cl r ae ly and ope ln y th r ie views,to t oh se aff ce t de by en gg pr e jo c st .T ,eh „in ps irati no dna guid na ce‟ dna „ ude c ta i ev ‟ f nu cti no s are la so pmi r o tant inprom to ing mutu la und r e standi gn and in moti av ting en ig ne r e s to act w ti h

ih gh r e moral stand dr a s .T eh „di cs pi linary‟ f nu cti no ni en gg codes is of sec no dary imp r o t na c .e Thosewi ht un te hic la c no duct wh ne xe pos de are subject to l .wa Developi gnelaborate paraleg l a procedures w t i hin profe ss ion la societies dup i l cates af nu cti no which c na be done b te t r e by leg la system. t A bes ,t codes sh uo ld tryto id scipline engin r ee s in ar ae s which are n to cover de by law .T eh w r o st uba se of codes has b e e n to restrict honest mor l a effort ni the na emof p„ reservi gn profe ss i no ‟s pub il c mage‟ dna „protecting status quo . ‟ T eh best

w ya to incr ae se trust is by ne c uo raging dna aidi gn engin r ee s to sp ae k fr ee lydna res ylbisnop tuoba bup l ci safety .


30/82



at i mi L t oi sn of Codes of t E hics

1. Codes are res i r t ct de to general na d av gue wording. Th ye c na n to be straightawayap lp ied to la l si ut ta i no s. tI is impo ss i lb e to fores ee the full ra gn e of moral pro lb me s

taht c na arise ni a c xelpmo prof oisse ln eki en gg .

2. tI is ae sy f r o di f f er tne cl ua ses of codes to come into c n o f il ct wi ht ae ch oth r e .Usually codes pr vo ide no guid na ce as to w ih ch cl ua se shou dl h eva r p i ir o ty in thosecases, cr tae i gn mor la id le mm as.

3. Th ye c na n to ser ev as the fin la mor la tua h r o ity f r o profe ss ion la con ud c .t If the codeof a profe ss ional society is tak ne as the last wor ,d ti m nae s th ta we are g te ting into a

r ap t uci l r a s te o f con snoitnev i.e . ihte c la c nevno t ilanoi sm .

4 . And er w Olden uq ist and Edw r a d S ol wt r e po ni ted out how the exist n e ce of es a p ratec ed o s f r o d ef f i re t n or p fess ional soc e i t ei s can give me bm r e s the fee i l ng that t e hicalc no duct is mo er re al tive than t i is and t ah t t i c na c no vey to the pub i l c the v ei w thatnone is r „ ea l l y r g i ht‟. The c r r u ent codes r a e by no me na s p ef r e ct b t u r a e defin t i ely

s pet s ni the r g i ht d c er i tion .

T eh pro lb me s f o law ni en ig n ee r gni

1. The gr ae test pr bo lem of law ni engg is of „minim la comp il na ce‟. En ig en r e s na demploy r e s c na s r ae ch for l oo p holes ni the law to barely k ee p to ti s l te ter whileviol ta ing ti s s ip r ti . Engin r ee s w li l tend to ref r e to sta dn r a d r ae dymade ps ecific ta i no sr ta h r e th na come up wi ht inn avo it ev id ae s. M ni im la compli na ce l de to the tragedy ofht e T„ ita in c‟.

2. C no tinu la ly upd ta ni g l wa s and regul ta i no s m ya be c nuo ter-pr udo ctive dna w li lmake law alw ya s lag behind technolog . y This la so ov r e b r u d ne s the r lu es andreg alu t r o s .

3. Many l wa s are „non-l wa s‟ i. .e l wa s iw th uo t ne f r o c bae le s na ctions. These merelyser ev as window dressin ,g fr qe u ne tly ig ev s a f la se s ne se of sec r u ity to the public.

4. The oppon tne s of the l wa m ya burd ne ti int tne iona ll y wi ht many nu r ae sona lb epr ivo si no s th ta a rep ae l wi ll n to be f r a o f f .

5. Highly pow r e ful org na iz ta i no s, like the g evo rnm tne c na violate the l wa s wh ne theyht i kn th ye c na g te aw ya wi ht ti by in tiv i gn w uo ld be cha ll ne g r e s, to face th me in

lengthy na d costly c tr uo proc ee di gn s . hT is la so cr ae te s f ur strati no with the law.

eloR f o law in ne g ni e r e i gn

tI is wrong to write o f f ur le-maki gn and rule following as futil .e G oo d laws,f e f ylevitce ne f r o c de , ylr aelc pr udo ce eneb f sti .

R ae son ba le minimum st na d dr a s are ensur de of profe ss ion la con ud ct .tI la so pr vo ides a s le f-interest de m to i ev f r o most p oe ple na d c r o por ta i no s to

c mo ply.


31/82


32/82



We buy an ill-design de Ir no b xo ni a sale-> Underestimating riskWe du j ge flu r o ide in water can k l i l l to s of p oe ple -> O ev rest mi ta i gn ir skWe ih re a t xa i, with tuo thin ik ng about its safety -> Not estim t a ing ir skH wo does a judge pa s s a judgem tne on safety in these 3 cases?

….So, ht is ed finit oi n won't do ni real i l fe.

T neh , wh ta is acc pe t ba le la so depends upon the individual or group‟s a v l euu j gd m tne . H ne ce a be tt er, r ow king definit oi n of c no c pe t of saf t e y c uo ld be,

A“ ht i gn is safe (to a c r e tain d ge r )ee wi ht re ps ect to a gi nev p r e s no r o group ta agi nev time if, were th ye f lu ly aware of ti s ir sks and pxe ressing th r ie most s te tledav ul es, th ye wou dl judge those risks to be acc p e table (to that c r e t ia n d ge re ”.)e -

Mike M r a t ni and Roland Schinzi gn e r

A thing is NOT SA EF if ti xe poses us to unacc p e table danger r o hazard

R KSI is the potenti la th ta som te hing unwa tn de and harmf lu m ya o cc ur.a. We at ke a ir sk wh ne we und r e take somethi gn r o use a product that is

not safe.Risk in tec nh ology could incl du e dang r e s of

b. bodily har ,mc. econ imo c lo ss , r od. ivne ron nem t la ged rad ta i no .

Some m ya assume th ta “saf et ”y is a c no crete c no c pe t, while ir “ s ”k is a av gue,hyp to h ite c la c no c tpenI fac ,t ti s the other w ya ar uo nd

Risks always e ix st. tuB r t ue saf ety ne r ev e ix sts, xe c tpe in hypoth ite cals ti u ta i no sS ,o risk i s rea t i l y , safety is f na tasy

W tah d ge r ee of risk is acce tp ba l ?e

Safety is a ma t t er of how p oe ple would f ni d ir sks accept ba le r o unacc pe table, ifth ye kn we the risks, dna are basing th r ie jud mg tne s no th r ie om st s t e tled va eul

vitcepsr ep e .S ,o to this xe t ne t, it is bo ject ive .

P epsr e c sevit id f f r e .To t ih s xe tent, it is subj c e tive .

S ,o Safety is a' ec c t p ab el ri k s ' .

cA c pe t ba le Ri ks

A„ ir sk is accept ba le wh ne those affect de are generally no ol n r eg ( r o no )tap r p ehensive abou t i .t ‟


33/82



pp A r nehe s noi i( .e . anxiety) depends l r a gely on fact r o s such aswheth r e the ir ks is a ss um de v lo unt r a ily.h wo the prob ba i il ties of harm ( r o benefit) is p r e cei ev d.

job-related r o other pressures th t a c ua ses p oe lp e to be aware of r o toov r e l oo k risks.

wheth r e the defects of a ri ks y activity r o s ti u a it no are imm de iately n ito c ae bler o close ta h dna .

wheth r e the pot tne ial iv ctims are id ne tifi ba le beforeh na d.

loV u atn ry risk and Co t n rol

A p r e son is s dia to take V „ OL N U TARY R SI K‟ -wh ne he is subjected to i r sk by ie th r e his nwo acti no s r o acti no taken by to h r e s dna-volunt r ee s to take th ta risk wi ht tuo any appreh ne si no .

-F r o exampl ,e J nho and Ann Smith enj yo ridi gn mot r o cycles r evo rou hg gr uo nd foruma s neme t . Th ye take vol nu tary ris ,k p tr a of b ie ng ne gag de in such a potenti la ly

d na ger uo s ps tr o .

Connect de to iht s n to i no of ov lu tn arism is the m ta t r e of C t no rol . nI the example cit de ,the Smiths are aware of the high probability of a c c ident figures in such a spor , t bu tth ye displ ya characteris i t c la ly nu rea i l stic oc nfid ne ce of most pe po le wh ne theybe il eve the da gn r e s to be under the r i co r t n ol. nI terms of ne gin ee ring as social

xe peri nem t ta i no , p oe lp e are more w l i ling to eb the subjects of the r i o nw ex e p rime t n s th na of som oe ne le se‟s (wheth r e soci la exp r e im ne t r o n )to .

Ch nua c ye St r r a ni forms us th ta individu la s are more r ae dy to a uss me ov l nu tary ir sksth na ni ov luntary ir sks, eve n wh ne ov ul ntary risks are 1000 times more likely topr udo ce a fat ila ty th na ht e i nulovn tary ones .

A D SI ASTER = A s r e i uo sly id sr pu ti ev event + A state of unprepared ne s s ..e g ,. Titanic col il si no with na iceber ,g at nig :th Emerg ne cy

Few r e lifeb tao s, inadequate traini gn and w r a nings of icebergsu hn ee ded -> Disast r e .

ef f E ct of ni form ta i no on risk assess n em ts

T eh m na n r e in w ih ch informati no necessary f r o decisi no making is pres ne t de cangr yltae ni flu ne ce woh r sksi are p r e cei dev . C isno d r e t ih s e ax lpm e:

nI a p r a ticul r a case of id sast r e managem ne t , the no ly opti no s ava li able are pr vo di edni 2 id fferent w ya s to ht e public f r o one to be chos ne (where il ev s of 006 peo lp e areta stak )e .


34/82



lA tern ta e 1If pr go ram A is followed, 2 00 p oe ple will be s eva d. If Pr go ram B is fo ll owed, 1/3prob ba i il ty is 6 00 p oe ple wi ll be s eva d na d 2/3 prob ba i il ty th ta nobody wi ll be s eva d.

seR ponse

72% of the t r a g te gr uo p chose po ti no A and 28% opti no B

lA tern ta e 2If pr go r ma A is f lo lowed, 400 p oe lp e iw ll di .e If Pr go r ma B is f lo lowe ,d /1 3 probabilitysi th ta nobody wi ll die and 2/ 3 probability that 6 00 p oe lp e wi ll die .

seR ponseT ih s t mi e only 22% of the targ te gr puo chose tpo ion A and 78% po ti no B

noC c u l s oi n:1. T eh po ti no p r e cei dev as yieldi gn f mr i gain w lli tend to be pref r e r de o r ev thosef mor hcihw g snia are r ep c evie d sa ir sky o r no ly prob ba le .2. O tp ion emphasizing firm losses will tend to be avoid d e in f ova ur of ht osewhose hc na ces of success are p r e cei ev d as probable.

eS c no d r a y Co ts s f o Prod cu ts

Cost of products is Hig ,h if designed unsafelyR ute rns and W r a r na ty Exp ne sesLo ss of Custom r e G oo dwillCost o f l ti ig ta ionLo ss of Custom r e s due to inj r u ies in using itCost of rewor ,k lost time in ta tendi gn to design probl sme

M una f acturer‟s und r e st na ding of the ir sk in a pr udo ct is necessary:To h ple r ude ce sec no dary costsTo know ht e po ss ible risk f r o up rposes of ir p cing, id cs laim r e s, leg la t mr e s andc no d ti i no s, te c.To know ht e cost of reduci gn the ir sksTo take a decision before fin l a izi gn the design.

Bu r ey ‟s und r e st na ding of ht e ir ks in a product is necessary:To judge whether h /e hs e wants to take h t e risksTo judge wheth r e ht e ir „ sk vs. costs‟ u j s it f ies t ka ing the ris .k

‘J BO RELAT DE SIR K ’S

Many work r e s er a at k g ni ri sk s ni the r i j bo s in th r ie s r t ide like b ie ng exposed toasbestos.

Ex o p sure ot ri k s s no a j bo is ni one s ne se of ov ul n r at y nat r u e since one canalw ya s refuse to us bm ti to the w kr o r o m ya have c tno r lo ov r e how the j bo isdone.


35/82



tuB gener la ly w r o k r e s have on choice oth r e th na wh ta th ye are t dlo to ods ni ce th ye want to sti k c to the only job ava li able to them .

tuB they are on t generally ni f r o med ab tuo ht e xe posure to ot ix c s bu st na cesand o ht r e d na g r e s ihw ch are n t o read l i y s ,nee smel ,t h ae rd r o to her iw ses ne sed .

O cc upa it on la he la th and safety r ge lu ati no s and nu i no s can have a better sayni c r o recting these situ ta i no s ub t s it ll thi gn s are f r a below xe pect de safetys at ndards .

nE gin r ee s while des gi in ng work stati no s must take ni to ca cou tn ht e casualedutitta f o ow r sr ek no safet y (esp . wh ne th ye are p dia on ip ece rat )e .

Pr bo lems fac de by e ign ne sr e ab tuo u p b i l c c no c pe t f o s ef a ty

T eh tpo i im stic at it tude th ta things th ta are fam li i ,r a th ta h eva n to caus de harm beforeand ov r e w ih ch we have some contr l o p er es t n no ri k s s .

T eh s r e i uo s sho kc p oe ple f lee when na accid tne ki ll s r o m mia s p oe ple ni al rgenumb r e s r o h mr a s t oh se we k on w , eve n th uo gh st itsita c la ly sp ae king such a cc idents

hgim t ucco r ni fr qe uently .

aS‘ f te y ni a comm t ido y comes iw th r pa ice’ – E px l ia n.

b A os ul te saf t e y is nev r e o p ssible to attain and safety can be i pm ro ev d in anengin r ee i gn pr tcudo no ly iw th na cni r ae se in c tso .

On the to h r e h ,dna unsafe products ni c r u second r a y costs to the produc r e b oye ndthe r p mi ary (pr udo ct ion) costs, like w r a r na ty costs lo ss of oog dwil ,l loss ofc su tom ,sr e il tig ta ion costs, d tnwo i em c stso in manuf ca t r u ing, te c .

iF gure in id cates th ta P- Prim r a y costs er a high for a highly s f a e (l wo ris )k pr udo ctand S- c eS ond r a c y osts r a e high f r o a highly ris y k (low safe) product.

If we draw a cur ev T=P S+ as show ,n there is a po t ni t a which costs e r a minimum below w ih ch the cost c na n to be r ude c de .

If eht ri k s ta Minim mu Tot la Cost Poi tn is n t o a c c e t p ab el , th ne the pr udo c r e has tochoo es a r ew ol pec c a tab el r si k av ul e ni w ih ch case the total cost iw ll be h g i her thanM and the prod tcu d se ign de acc r o dingly.

tI sh uo ld now be cl r ae th ta „saf t e y oc em s with a price‟ no yl


36/82



.Knowl de ge of risk for b t e ter saf te y

Rob tr e St pe h ne s no writes th ta lla the a cc di tne s, the harms c ua s de dna them nae s us de to rep r ia the damage shou d l be er corded f r o the benef t i of the

uoy n eg r meM b sr e of Prof sse ion . A f htia ful acc uo nt of those a cc id tne s na d the damage c no t ia nm ne t was r lae ly

om re valuable than the de cs ri tp ion of succe ss f lu work.H ne ce ti is imper ta i ev th ta knowl de ge of ir sks iw ll de if in tely help to ta t a ni

r etteb saf yte .tuB ti hs ould be borne in min ,d th ta st li l g pa s remain, bec ua se

)i there are some in ud stries where ni formati no is n t o freel sy h r a ed and)ii there are al yaw s new app i l cations of old et ch on g ol y ht ta rend r e the

ava li ba le inf r o ma it no el ss useful.

Un ec r at i tn i se enco nu t er e d i n desi ng or p ce ss

A decisi no no m xa imising profit or maxi im si gn the r te u nr on in ev stm tne .Unc r e tai tn ies ab uo t pa p il c ta i no s l ki e dynamic lo da ing inst ae d of staticl dao ing, vibr ta i no s, wind sp dee s.

nU c r e tai tn i se reg r a ding am t r e i la s and iks l sl r qe uir de ni the m una factu ir ng .Ch na ging economic r ae l ti ies.Unfam li i r a envir no ment la c no d ti i no s like very low temperature.T eh avail ba le st na d dr a data no it me s like st ,lee resist r o s, in us lat r o s,

po tical gla

pe unit wise notes

Documents