Engineering Ethics Essay

The need for safety is proportional to the peril of having an accident. Nothing is fool-proof, yet we must try to belittle risks. If the public is willing to run or to take such(prenominal) risks, who be engineers to refuse and to say no? (a) In my opinion, the above is a very straightforward argument. The relationship between measures to ensure safety in engineering operationes or products of such motiones may be linear in the short-term, just at the end, it is effectuate that safety goes down to a participant (or worker) or the user of a product designed and employ by engineers.The theories relating accidents to bad or unethical engineering practices are largely based on mentally ill arguments. Even though it is the ethical and moral responsibility for us engineers to ensure safety during design and expression of projects, in that respect can never be a guarantee no matter how perfect we destiny things to be (Davis, 1998). The society needs innovation, and it is our pr ofessional responsibility as engineers to design innovative products to meet this demand. angiotensin converting enzyme thing is important though.All design procedures are based on both theoretical and empiric methodologies where virtually factors surrender to be held constant (Davis, 1998). In real life, these factors sometimes may not ready constant due to some unforeseen eventualities. This is one cause of accidents, and it is unavoidable. The society, through its demand for engineering innovation, in return chooses to engage these risks. b) By definition, a risk is a source of danger or the possibility of incur a misfortune. Safety, on the other bowl over, safety is a state of having some degree of certainty that danger or misfortune will not occur (Davis, 1998).In the engineering process, risk and safety are inversely proportional. The lesser the risks associated with a process, the more the safety of the process and by extension the product. Engineers have, in the proce ss of delivering their services be it in the design or implementation of technical projects, to make sure that the process or project is characterized by as few risks as can be possible (Davis, 1998). As argued in part (a) above, it is virtually impossible to have zero risk. in that respect therefore has to be some degree of safety compromised no matter how insignificant it may be.(c) technology ethics is a work of applied ethics which is primarily concerned with setting and examining standards that should ideally govern engineers practice, their provinces to the society, their employers and to the profession itself (Davis, 1998). A suitable engineer should practice with application program, professionalism, and morality. When an engineer overlooks any element of this set of standards, the consequences may be minimal or disastrous. If divergence from the engineering code of ethics and professional competency and conduct by an engineer causes an accident, thence the engineer is creditworthy for the accident.Unanticipated mishaps may not be due to lack of diligence on the part of an engineer or engineers in charge of a process or the product of such a process (Davis, 1998). However, where there is sufficient proof that the engineer did not follow standard precautions and the infallible standards of professionalism, the engineer should be held accountable for any accidents or mishaps resulting from such. The engineer may admit to being negligent due to his or her personal moral principles but until there is proof of negligence, he or she should not be held responsible.The standards of due diligence applying here are clearly defined in engineers code of ethics, of which there are several defined for the various engineering disciplines (Davis, 1998). The issue Institute for Engineering Ethics (NIEE), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), the American Society of Mechanical Engineer s (ASME), the Society of self-propelled Engineers (SAE) and a host of other local and international engineering societies each have a strong defined set of ethical standards that each of their members is expected to adhere to.Professional engineers should enforce the standards of due diligence outlined in the applicable code of ethics by first of all liaising with educational institutions that tutor engineers so that the standards can be taught as part of engineering courses. After graduation, young engineers should further be examined on their levels of competence before being admitted to engineering societies. These examinations should be repeated on a perpetual basis to ensure that engineers remain competent.In cases where registered engineers fail to comply with due standards of diligence and standards of ethics, their operational licenses should be suspended for some time depending on the seriousness of their negligence and the gravity of its consequences (Davis, 1998). 2. competency, Personality and Morality (a) Competence in an engineer can be measured by his or her level of knowledge, expertise and cast-of-mind as exhibited in his or her delivery of service (Davis, 1998).A good (or competent) engineer will therefore have the knowledge and expertise required to deliver in his or her engineering discipline as headspring as the right attitude towards the profession. These qualities must go hand in hand skills alone cannot intend an engineer as competent since he or she must have the moral and ethical obligation to take responsibility for all professional activities undertaken. A bad (or incompetent) engineer on the other hand lacks at least one of the above attributes.He or she might have the skills and expertise but lack the moral edge, compromising the safety and satisfaction of clients and employers and therefore bringing the profession into disrepute (Davis, 1998). (b) There is a relation between being a good engineer and being a good person in that the principles upheld in ones personal life are probably to be transferred into professional practice (Davis, 1998). A good person conducts him or herself with honesty and claims responsibility for his or her actions.Engineering ethics are about exhibiting sufficiently high standards of obligation to the public, clients, employers and the profession. A person who cannot be held responsible in the society or in his or her personal life will most likely be irresponsible in professional practice and vice versa so good people are most likely to make good engineers (c) Someones moral competence can be established by recording their approach to situations or by establishing what values are placed on the means and ends of a problem (Davis, 1998).Morally competent people tend to weigh situations carefully so that a balance is created between the values placed on the means and those placed on the end. In the engineering context, a morally competent engineer will seek to practice in a m anner that meets engineering ethics so that his or her practice ensures safety and comfort for others. (d) Moral competence evaluations are difficult because morality itself is a very complex issue. Morality is determined by an soulfulnesss world view, and world views vary from one person to another (Davis, 1998).There cannot be a mechanism to justify some moral values as more righteous than others since everyone is entitled to his or her point of view which has been formed by his or her experiences and environment. However, evaluations of moral competence are still necessary since as engineers, we have to build a consensus on the standards which can be termed as mutually acceptable and recommendable for the practice of engineering. ? References Davis, M. (1998). Thinking like an Engineer Studies in the Ethics of a Profession. Oxford Oxford University Press.