Engineering Virtue

Engineering ethics has a primary focus on “technical ethics” - - these are the ethical standards closely associated with one’s technical training. It is interesting to note the differences between preventative ethics and virtue ethics. By virtue, I refer to a disposition or character trait that manifests itself in certain types of behavior when the appropriate circumstances arise. For example, a person who has the virtue or character trait of courage acts courageously when the need for courage arises (e.g., the passenger next to the “Underpants Bomber” on Christmas Eve that stopped him from blowing up the airplane). The idea of virtue as it relates to engineering ethical behavior is a little different than what most engineers typically encounter - - the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) has essentially a negative or preventive orientation toward ethical behavior. The ethics code is marked by terms such as “not” or “only” and other policing provisions. The first duty of engineers should be to guard against harming the public or taking unfair advantage of their specialized knowledge and skills to promote their own advantage. Given this preventive-ethics orientation, it is to be expected that engineering ethics has been expressed primarily in rules, and that these rules are primarily negative or prohibitive in character.

Congress is currently examining stiffer regulations and laws for the financial services industry in the wake of our financial tsunami. Like with many federally driven mandates, the goal is to regulate, control, and remove vice from a particular system. Rules marked by “not” or “only” however, cannot adequately account for discretion, judgment, character, and honesty. Exhibiting the virtue of compassion requires an inner attitude of concern for others that cannot be fully expressed in behavior. Having the investment banking community merely obeying a rule cannot fulfill this requirement. With the virtue of gratitude, the inadequacy of a rule such as “Express gratitude to your benefactors” is even more apparent, because gratitude requires a certain motive. Ungrateful people can exhibit “grateful behavior” as well as genuinely grateful people, so the virtue of gratitude is not equivalent to the moral rule requiring gratitude. Many ethical systems and codes are like this - - the primary focus is the prevention of vice without regard or consideration for the promotion of virtue. It is important to remember that in some engineering endeavors, such as sensitivity to risk, governing by rules, certainly not negative rules, cannot adequately define the commitment to the public good. Some of the unique features of virtue ethics in engineering are the greater place it gives for discretion and judgment and also for inner motivation and commitment.

In addition, there are three non-technical virtues or excellences to which the good engineer should aspire to. The first is techno-social sensitivity. This should be a critical awareness of the way technology affects society and the way social forces in turn affect the evolution of technology. E-mail is a great example - - on one hand you have the huge productivity improvements and impacts. While on the other hand you have technology that fragments and impersonalitizes the human experience and thereby limiting or transforming its meaning. The second is respect for nature. Engineers need to fully understand that the virtue of respect for nature cannot be acquired simply by adopting an attitude as an act of will. It includes actions, emotions, perceptions, sensibilities and understandings that are best developed in childhood - - that ultimately grow into an understanding that we share a common bond with all living things. The third is commitment to the public good. The idea that what is needed is “good works” that defines commendable conduct that goes beyond the basic requirements associated with a particular social role, such as a professional engineer.