THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF ENGINEERS TO SOCIETY

The consideration of the social responsibilities of engineers involves the concept of introducing normative values into the generally positivist practice of engineering. The introduction of normative values into the practice of engineering, in turn involves the application of systems of ethics and ethical principles to the process of engineering practice and engineering management (Lynch & Kline, 2000).

The customary practice of engineering involves attention to the balancing of issues such as cost, efficiency, scheduling, best practices, and various types of risk in the design, construction, and completion of a project (Buckam, Ehrenfeld, & Rainwater, 2000). The application of systems of ethics and ethical principles to this process means that the engineer must overlay the customary practice of engineering with the ethical principle of "first, do no harm" (Schiemer, 1998, p. 70).

Ethical principles create a framework that permits the anticipation of conflict in relation to proposed actions or decisions in a variety of situations. Such conflicts may arise through the consideration of a potential action within the context of a single ethical principle, and through the consideration of a potential action within context of the complete ethical principle framework. Individuals typically reach decisions based on ethical principles within the context of an ethical framework. The major systems of ethics prevalent in contemporary h

. . .
ifferentiation between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism, in which types of actions lead to general rules. Under rule utilitarianism, the evaluation of actions occurs within the context of general rules, as opposed to their own specific outcomes. To illustrate the difference between act and rule utilitarianism, consider again the Alaska oil spill of 1989 (referred to above). Within the context of act utilitarianism, evaluation of the actions of those responsible for the oil tanker Valdez would occur within the context of the outcomes of the oil spill in Prince William Sound. Within the context of rule utilitarianism, however, evaluation of the outcomes associated with the event would occur with respect to the general rule that permitted the transport of crude oil through Prince William Sound. In a similar manner, both act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism apply to the development of utilitarian-based law applicable to the protection of the environment (which is the general issue involved in the Alaska oil spill). The decision on the rule that allowed the transport of oil through Prince William Sound relied in part on engineering input to the process, wherein there were engineering evaluations of both probabilit
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Gert Clouser, William Sound, Goldstein Rubin, Thompson Thompson, Jeremy Bentham, Ehrenfeld Rainwater, World War, David Moritz, ENGINEERS SOCIETY, Lynch Kline, rule utilitarianism, practice engineering, utilitarian philosophy, ethical principles, development utilitarian-based law, utilitarian-based law, thompson thompson, thompson 1997, oil spill, development utilitarian-based, goldstein rubin, goldstein rubin 1996, thompson thompson 1997, prince william sound, alaska oil spill,
Approximate Word count = 2364
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)