Engineering Responsibility for Hazardous Technologies
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering
Volume 113, Issue 2
Abstract
New philosophical viewpoints emerging from the engineering academic community suggest that engineering is not a science (nor an art) of any kind. The motivation for this paper, then, is concern for whether these new ideas about the nature of engineering serve to differentiate any moral responsibilities of engineers from those of scientists. Questions like “What are the moral responsibilities of engineers?’ from the point of view that engineering is not a science are reexamined. The main argument (or thesis) put forward in this paper is that engineers should inform the public of the limits of scientific knowledge residing in engineering judgments, and the degrees to which nonscientific practices influence these judgments. In order to establish a moral basis for this argument, focus is placed on engineering judgments about the fitness of hazardous technologies for public consent of exposure.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
AAES Model Guide for Professional Conduct. (1984). Amer. Assoc., of Engineering Soc., Washington, D.C.
2.
Broome, T. H. (1984). “Should engineers hold the welfare of the public paramount?” Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Amer. Assn. For the Adv. of Science, AAAS, Washington, D.C., 1–6.
3.
Broome, T. H. (1985). “Engineering the philosophy of science,” Metaphilosophy. Metaphilosophy Foundation, Hyde Park, N.Y., 16(1), 47–57.
4.
Caws, P. (1978). “Praxis and techne,” The History and Philosophy of Technology, G. Bugliarello and B. Donner, Eds., Harper and Row, New York, N.Y., 227–237.
5.
Caws, P. (1982). “Believing in, and believing that,” paper presented at the Annual Philosopher's Day Lee, Howard Univ., Washington, D.C.
6.
Ellul, J. (1967). The technological society. (Transl. by Wilkinson, J.), A. Knopf, New York, N.Y., 7–11.
7.
Koen, B. V. (1984). “Towards a definition of the engineering method,” Engineering Educ.ASEE, Washington, D.C., 75(3), 150–155.
8.
Layton, E. T. (1971). The revolt of the engineers. Case Western Reserve University Press, Cleveland, Ohio, 84–249.
9.
Luegenbiehl, H. (1983). “Codes of ethics and the moral education of engineers,” Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 2(4), 41–61.
10.
Martin, M., and Schinzinger, R. (1983). Ethics in Engineering. McGraw‐Hill, New York, N.Y., 59–61.
11.
Unger, S. (1982). Controlling technology: ethics and the responsible engineer. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, N.Y., 56–91.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering
Volume 113 • Issue 2 • April 1987
Pages: 139 - 149
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 ASCE.
History
Published online: Apr 1, 1987
Published in print: Apr 1987
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.