The Ethics of Engineering

As someone who was once a certified explosives handler, helping to build explosive bomb/artillery fuses and smart exploding proximity artillery shell fuses, air to air missiles and radar controlled ground based anti-personnel radar systems used in Viet Nam I can honestly say I thought a lot about what I was doing. It took some soul searching to justify to myself that what we did was for the ultimate good of the world. Some lower level persons had no idea what they were building.

That was somewhat countered by the fact that I was also involved in fabricating implantable cranial pressure sensors for newborns and tracking collars for Polar Bears and attachable beacons for Sea Otters, building satellites for the NSA[pre-American spy days] and working on the GPS system prior to its deployment.

In the end, it is a personal decision that is very likely much more difficult today.

Also today criminals, hackers and many other nefarious scumbags are using innocently conceived electronics for crime.

Do we blame the gunsmith who builds guns, the distiller who makes whiskey or the cell phone manufacturers who build phones.

Maybe karma will visit some for their actions, maybe not.

"Do we blame the gunsmith who builds guns, the distiller who makes whiskey or the cell phone manufacturers who build phones."

Unfortunately, yes to the first one and the second and third can't be far behind.

"First, we'll kill all the lawyers".

That'll take care of that problem.

Unfortunately, they blame everyone (or society!) but not the real culprits. I cringe when the news reports that terrorists are "radicalized", as if they are some kind of victims themselves.

Yes, the exposure to and adoption of pathological ideas could be considered the contracting of a disease and as such, the person adopting the pathological idea could be considered a victim.

It has no impact, however, with what you do about that person with the contagion. You can cure the person, remedy the person, isolate the person or eliminate the person. Your choice determines the ethical and moral outcome for you.

The individual with the pathological notion will also decide what to do in implementing that idea and his choice will determine HIS ethical and moral outcome.

The two outcomes do not align until you respond.

If the victim is intent on killing others and I decide that killing is a bad thing, then I will most likely exterminate the "victim" for the greater good (read that , kill the guy). Otherwise, I would do something else.

It all depends on where you draw the lines.

"Maybe karma will visit some for their actions, maybe not."

Interesting comment being my Ex always questioned why her life didn't got as she expected.

My logical reasoning for it was she didn't work foe what she wanted but expected others to do it for her thus that's why things always feel short of her expectations given my belief is if I want something I have to take the initiative to get off my lazy butt and actually put forth an effort to get it myself.

But she didn't subscribe to that logical reasoning so it clearly had to be comic karma interference which again I rationalized that to being that one of us did terrible selfish things in a past life and being I am quite content with how my life runs the odds are it wasn't me!

I have noticed that people that work hard have better luck...

. . . funny how that works.

Bah. That purely speculative. Just ask my Ex.

Personally I say hard work has less to do with it as does smart work.

I know a lot of people who have worked themselves to near death that aren't anywhere close to being as well off as most who put just the tiniest bit of planning into getting what they wanted.

Working hard and working smart are both necessary for success - that's what I believe.

You're correct that people can work hard and not receive financial success - though they most likely feel that they've provided a valuable service to society and feel good about their hard work.

People can also work smart and not work hard, but those people usually screw up down the line, because their lack of hard work makes them cut corners and ultimately, they'll cut a corner that shouldn't have been. Then the world falls apart around them.

I think this question of ethical behavior has been asked since the beginning of the first concerted effort of improving quality of life....You can't stop time, and when you try, bad things happen...When you decide to stop moving forward, by default you have delegated control to the least qualified to guide civilization forward...So I say keep going and lead by example while keeping an eye on the bad players....by keeping one step ahead we are able to promote proper perspective and set rules by agreements for information sharing....We have always had to fight the bad players and rule breakers, it's overcoming fear or being overcome by fear....It takes courage and commitment to lead....

"How are today's challenges different than yesterday's?"

The specifics of the situation may be different, but the principles involved are the same.

In a perfect world, society shouldn't dictate how we act ethically. It's something that comes from inside.

Unfortunately, our world is far from perfect. Rules are set up, with consequences for breaking them.

Here's what someone told me years ago. The top workers NEVER need someone to watch over their shoulders, whether it's to make sure they're working or that they're doing their job. If a worker needs less supervision, that means they can be paid more, because the company doesn't need to hire a babysitter. As we move up the scale, managers and corporate people are watched over for different reasons - mostly ethical ones. Do they "doctor" the books, steal funds, give preferential treatment to friends, etc. As one goes higher up the chain, there are less people watching of them to make sure they toe the line ethically. At the top, a CEO is usually a Chairman of the Board, so only an auditor, outside government agency or consumer watchdog group will watch the CEO.

If a person has strong moral and ethical values, then much less resources need to be used to insure they follow the rules and do the right thing. I don't think ethics or moral can be taught. Sure, what someone does in a certain situation can be taught to us as adults, but knowing the difference between right and wrong comes from our upbringing.

Going back to the OP's topic, I believe that the moral pressure society puts on people is much lower now vs in the past. This is the biggest challenge that we face as a society and I feel it's going to get worse before it gets better. Greed is too prevalent in our society. Add to this, we cannot be honest about how we really feel, because we're not being PC? Come one! If it's not done to be mean or degrading to another, then they should be told the truth.

When someone we're suppose to look up to cheats the system, then the morals of our nation are damaged. I keep bringing this up, because I see it as a pivotal point in the decline in the values of our country. It started with "I never smoked marijuana" to "I never had sexual relations with that woman". I believe that's when our citizens started looking up to attorneys and the change went from using the letter of the law over the spirit of the law.

Engineering should NOT be confused with manglement, ie: leading by greed.

In college, my engineering professor posed this question to the class:

"What type of salary would you request to make a switch? It is a simple device, connects a circuit. What would you charge to make something so simple?"

Most of us said salaries around 40-60k, of course college students. He then said:

"What if that switch is for an elevator?"

Nobody changed their answer. Now:

"What if that switch is the switch that triggers the detention of a bomb?"

People started changing their answer. They now ranged from 40-250k. Now:

"What if you knew that switch was going on a bomb that would level an entire city? Men, women, children, everyone gone. What would it take for you to design it?"

Of course people dropped out and the price was super high.

This is a simple question at the time and I thought I understood the full impact of it. However, being out of college now for many years I've come to realize I was so young and naive. Every decision we make as engineers test our morals and ethics in one way or another, whether we realize it or not. Do I design a switch? Who will use it? How about pressure cookers, that is something safe right?

We as engineers also have a responsibility to stand up for what is right. I don't know how many times I've been in positions where a manager at some level has requested something that would compromise safety or privacy, most of the time to save a buck. It is up to us as individuals to recognize when someone is in the wrong and stand up for what we believe is right.

Which I would venture is one of the main reasons why so many of those who worked on the Manhattan Project were given only a small piece of the puzzle and had no idea what they were actually working toward. I know you would say security is a main reason but that is exactly what this question is about. If you knew, would you sabotage the effort? Would you warn the Japanese? Would to try to stir up public outcry? So many ways the knowledge of what was being done could be used to sabotage the project based on "moral" compass logic and rationale. How do we find peace with what we do?

And then there were those who knew what was up and were quite proud of it after the Project was over. I took a course with a Dr. Hammer in college who worked on the Manhattan Project. If you wanted a break from lecturing/note taking all you had to do was find a way to work the Project into a question, and you were free for at least 10 minutes. He ALWAYS ended with "and beyond that is still classified."

I would say why design one at all?

If it's just going to bet blown up in the end design the device to use common mass produced cheapo switch that fits the working condition criteria.

You don't see suicide bombers building their explosive apparatus's with a million dollar switches to get the job done being clearly a thumb tack and a strip of metal on a popsicle stick works just fine in that application.

Personally I was never good at those types of classroom questions. My mind always worked differently than everyone else and thus my logic and reasoning for the actions and costs of designing anything took a far different direction than what the professors were thinking that things would go in.

Still got A+'s for thinking outside the box and using logical problem solving analysis though. Also always came up with workable solutions that were magnitudes of order cheaper to implement too!

I mean if your goal is to blow something up the end result you are after is how big of boom you can make. Not how expensive your bomb was to build so if you're using $250,000 switches to make something go pop that could be done with a $20 - $100 switch that's a load of money that could have went into making way more explosive materials instead.

Asking the, "switch that triggers the detention detonation of a bomb" question to a college student is silly.

It's also a silly question to ask anyone who has never been faced with the prospect that something they helped to create will be used to kill people. (Been there, done that)

Such a decision cannot be reached beforehand, unless you just want to join the Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines to "kill the enemy".

I agree that no one should ever knowingly design or use something that is not safe, unless they understand the reason and consequences.

I don't follow the price value of a component Vs life taken relation.

If you're going to make something that kills someone how does getting paid $250,000 Vs $25 make any difference at all? It's a moral issue that should have zero bearing on price of materials or payment for work done.

Either your morals and ethical standards by default allow you to do it or they don't.

To further complicate things how do you put a financial value on killing anyone for that matter being there are people who would not only kill certain others for very little money but who would actually pay, and likely pay well, to be allowed the chance to to kill that person or specific people.

To me it's like the firing squad dilemma. They have 10 people shooting but one of them has a blank but no one knows who has it so that they have some degree of way to rationalize that they were not the one out of the 10 who fired a fatal shot.

Why bother being if someone is in front of a firing squad they have more than likely done horrible things to the point that there would be many people willing pull the trigger knowing full well their shot will be fatal and would feel morally justified in that action.

We only need to look at what "engineering" or "inventing", which ever you consider it to be, did to Alfred Nobel. Perfect example of the conscience over riding any joy the triumph of his work might have given him.

I applaud this bog and all the comments made. Remaining true to one's self is challenging at times. I been very close to calling the ethical hot line at my company for my belief that a manager and my supervisor were trying to force me to do something that I've felt was unethical. Fortunately, I was able to convince them that doing the right thing was more important than meeting a schedule.

Doing the right thing can be hard but you'll sleep better at night for doing it.

This question is off topic. The reason I am posting this question here is because I don't know how to send a question to a cr4 administrator. cr4 can send me a response to my email account or to my cr4 mail or if they choose, they can reply here.

Here is question: I recently received a query from global 360 (?) Telling me that if I answer a survey about new engineers, that I could be entered into a contest to win a $150.00 Amazon gift card.

So, I decided to take the survey, now I'm not an engineer, but if cr4/global 360 thinks my opinion matters, what the heck, I might as well put my 2 cents in.

So, I started the survey, then I get to a section that says to enter my email, hold on, if global 360 is sending me the survey, don't they already have my email ? We'll ya.

Then I see that the survey is put on by a third party affiliate (?) Didn't auto broker recently post a question on this very subject ?

While i appreciate cr4/global 360 thinking that my experience and opinion matters, I am reluctant to post my email, just so some third party can slam me with unwanted spam.

A $150.00 gift card is not worth the trouble.

Now if global 360 wants my opinion ; directly, then I will be happy to help any way i can.

Tony

Good catch, but if you clicked the link on your email, you may have allowed "them" to download something on your harddrive. Years ago, I was told that I shouldn't click on an email, unless I know the sender and trust them.

About a year ago, I did screw up. Someone sent me something about a problem with one of my accounts. I clicked on it by mistake and when I realized what I had done, I checked the senders email and it was some bogus email. I shut my computer off right away. When I turned it back on, I turned my internet connection off, then ran a virus scan - it grabbed the program! Lucky for me!

Can't we just blame it all on the first neanderthal who tore off a tree branch to defend himself by clubbing an attacking wolf, say?

No, but we could blame that same neanderthal for using that same tree branch to club his neighbors in order to take his neighbors food by force, because that same neanderthal was hungrier than his neighbors...

Ethically speaking, everything else derives from that starving, but necessarily creative, neanderthal's decision to (take), rather than to (trade)...

I like the post .thanks for your sharing.

http://www.jweimolding.com