Rhetoric, technical writing, and ethics

Many outside science and engineering, especially social scientists and “rhetoricians”, claim that rhetoric, “the art of persuasion”, is an important part of technical communication. This claim is either trivial or false. If “persuasion” simply means “effective communication”, then, of course, rhetoric is an important part of technical communication. But, if “persuasion” has anything like its traditional meaning (a specific art of winning conviction), rhetoric is not an important part of technical communication; indeed, its use in technical communication would be unethical. [By] an advocate is meant one whose business it is to smooth over real difficulties, and to persuade where he cannot convince. —Thomas Henry Huxley, Man’s Place in Nature ^{1 (p. 238)} As a profession, engineers frown on persuasiveness and find it suspect. —Dorothy A. Winsor, Writing Like an Engineer ^{2 (p. 12), A} Michael Davis’s research interests are in the areas of engineering ethics and the social contract. Recent published books include Thinking Like an Engineer, 1998, Oxford, and Ethics and the University, 1999, Routledge.     

Ethical challenges in a technological environment: The perspective of engineers versus managers

In his article ‘Better Communication Between Engineers and Managers: Some Ways to Prevent Many Ethically Hard Choices’¹ Michael Davis analyzes the causes of the disaster in terms of a communications gap between management and engineers. When the communication between (representatives of) both groups breaks down, the organization is in (moral) trouble. Crucial information gets stuck somewhere in the organization prohibiting a careful discussion and weighing of all (moral) arguments. The resulting judgment has therefore little (moral) quality. In this paper I would like to comment on some of Michael Davis’s interesting and thought-provoking insights and ideas. A company which implements Davis’s recommendations at least shows some sensitivity to organizational moral issues. But it might miss the point that moral trouble can also result from a common understanding between managers and engineers. Organizational members sometimes tend to be myopic with regard to safety issues. This paper:

Identifying Differences of Environmental Ethics and Place Attachment Among Visitors and Managers at State Parks

ABSTRACT

Understanding place attachment and environmental ethic variables may improve management of natural areas, including enhanced communication related to management practices, managing various natural resources for specific or designated uses, and mediating significant differences between visitors and managers. Bridging any gaps of knowledge and understanding between visitors and those taking care of these natural places may enhance use and management of those areas into the future. This study elicited place attachment, environmental ethics, and demographic information from visitors to four state parks in Oklahoma. State park managers and state park visitors were found to be significantly different in their levels of place attachment and environmental ethics. Using t tests and discriminant analysis, researchers were able to use proenvironmental ethics and place identity to explain and predict the significant differences between the two groups. Implications for natural resource management include improved resource conservation and sustainability through enhanced education, interpretation efforts, and specific programming to connect people to natural places.     

Responsible engineering: Gilbane Gold revisited

This paper addresses several concerns in teaching engineering ethics. First, there is the problem of finding space within already crowded engineering curricula for meaningful discussions of ethical dimensions in engineering. Some engineering programs may offer entire courses on engineering ethics; however, most do not at present and may not in the foreseeable future. A promising possibility is to weave ethics into already existing courses using case studies, but most current case studies are not well integrated with engineering technical analysis. There is a danger that case studies will be viewed by both instructors and students as departures from “business as usual”—interesting perhaps, but not essentially connected with “real” engineering. We offer a case study, inspired by the National Society of Professional Engineer’s popular video Gilbane Gold, that can be used to make the connection. It requires students to engage in technical analysis, but in a context that makes apparent the ethical responsibility of engineers. Further, the case we present marks a significant departure from more typical cases that primarily focus on wrongdoing and its prevention. We concentrate more positively on what responsible engineering requires. There is a need for more such cases, regardless of whether they are to be used in standard engineering courses or in separate courses in engineering ethics. This article is the product of the NSF/Bovay Endowment “Workshop to Develop Numerical Problems Associated With Ethics Cases for use in Required Undergraduate Engineering Courses” (NSF Grant DUE-9455141) held at Texas A&M University in August 1995. For further information about this project, contact Michael J. Rabins, Director of the Ethics and Professionalism Program in the Look College of Engineering at Texas A&M University. Additional case studies from this workshop are available on the Internet site http://ethics.tamu.edu. The writing of this article was supported in part by “Engineering Ethics: Good Works” (NSF/EVS Grant SBR-930257). Michael Pritchard teaches ethics and is co-author of Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases (1995) with C.E. Harris and Michael Rabins (Wadsworth, Belmont CA). Mark Holtzapple teaches chemical engineering and is author of Foundations of Engineering (McGraw-Hill) which includes an ethics chapter suitable for freshman engineering students.     

From Environmental to Ecological Ethics: Toward a Practical Ethics for Ecologists and Conservationists

Ecological research and conservation practice frequently raise difficult and varied ethical questions for scientific investigators and managers, including duties to public welfare, nonhuman individuals (i.e., animals and plants), populations, and ecosystems. The field of environmental ethics has contributed much to the understanding of general duties and values to nature, but it has not developed the resources to address the diverse and often unique practical concerns of ecological researchers and managers in the field, lab, and conservation facility. The emerging field of “ecological ethics” is a practical or scientific ethics that offers a superior approach to the ethical dilemmas of the ecologist and conservation manager. Even though ecological ethics necessarily draws from the principles and commitments of mainstream environmental ethics, it is normatively pluralistic, including as well the frameworks of animal, research, and professional ethics. It is also methodologically pragmatic, focused on the practical problems of researchers and managers and informed by these problems in turn. The ecological ethics model offers environmental scientists and practitioners a useful analytical tool for identifying, clarifying, and harmonizing values and positions in challenging ecological research and management situations. Just as bioethics provides a critical intellectual and problem-solving service to the biomedical community, ecological ethics can help inform and improve ethical decision making in the ecology and conservation communities.

Educating the Humanitarian Engineer

The creation of new technologies that serve humanity holds the potential to help end global poverty. Unfortunately, relatively little is done in engineering education to support engineers’ humanitarian efforts. Here, various strategies are introduced to augment the teaching of engineering ethics with the goal of encouraging engineers to serve as effective volunteers for community service. First, codes of ethics, moral frameworks, and comparative analysis of professional service standards lay the foundation for expectations for voluntary service in the engineering profession. Second, standard coverage of global issues in engineering ethics educates humanitarian engineers about aspects of the community that influence technical design constraints encountered in practice. Sample assignments on volunteerism are provided, including a prototypical design problem that integrates community constraints into a technical design problem in a novel way. Third, it is shown how extracurricular engineering organizations can provide a theory-practice approach to education in volunteerism. Sample completed projects are described for both undergraduates and graduate students. The student organization approach is contrasted with the service-learning approach. Finally, long-term goals for establishing better infrastructure are identified for educating the humanitarian engineer in the university, and supporting life-long activities of humanitarian engineers.     

Ethics: universal or global? The trends in studies of ethics in the context of globalization

The article discusses how theory and practice in global ethics affect each other. First, the author explores how the study of ethics has changed in the era of globalization and ponders what the role of the field of study of global ethics is in this context. Second, she wants to show how the logical fallacies in widening study field of ethics produce false polarizations between facts and value judgements in social ethics made in various cultural contexts. She further elaborates how these false polarizations prevent constructive cross-cultural and transnational discussions on ethical guidelines and principles that are needed to produce joint action (plans) to deal with serious ethical issues globally and nationally. Finally, the paper argues that in order to find a way to solve our shared complex ethical problems in global context, we need to get back to basics by focusing on the method of ethics, that is, self-critical and logical analysis of sound argumentation and justification of our values and moral principles.     

Professional Ethics of Software Engineers: An Ethical Framework

The purpose of this article is to propose an ethical framework for software engineers that connects software developers’ ethical responsibilities directly to their professional standards. The implementation of such an ethical framework can overcome the traditional dichotomy between professional skills and ethical skills, which plagues the engineering professions, by proposing an approach to the fundamental tasks of the practitioner, i.e., software development, in which the professional standards are intrinsically connected to the ethical responsibilities. In so doing, the ethical framework improves the practitioner’s professionalism and ethics. We call this approach Ethical-Driven Software Development (EDSD), as an approach to software development. EDSD manifests the advantages of an ethical framework as an alternative to the all too familiar approach in professional ethics that advocates “stand-alone codes of ethics”. We believe that one outcome of this synergy between professional and ethical skills is simply better engineers. Moreover, since there are often different software solutions, which the engineer can provide to an issue at stake, the ethical framework provides a guiding principle, within the process of software development, that helps the engineer evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of different software solutions. It does not and cannot affect the end-product in and of-itself. However, it can and should, make the software engineer more conscious and aware of the ethical ramifications of certain engineering decisions within the process.     

Communication for Life in Cyberspace

Cyberspace communication is a key driving force of the neoliberal globalization that has led to worldwide crisis. Despite some positive perspectives, cyberspace communication has played a crucial role in the dominance of global markets by transnational corporations. The ethical foundations of the problematics of cyberspace communication lie in a social Darwinism that leads to ruthless competition based on egoistic morality. This article posits the notion of love as an alternative ethics, drawing on perspectives of Christian love (especially those of US ethicist Paul Ramsey) as unselfish love for others, as well as on East Asian traditions of love (such as Buddhist compassion, Confucian jen, and Korean jung). The article argues that unselfish love offers a perspective to overcome an anthropocentric perspective of communication. In this way, human beings can build a community with all living beings and develop harmonious relationships with them to live together on the earth.     

Changing the Paradigm for Engineering Ethics

Modern philosophy recognizes two major ethical theories: deontology, which encourages adherence to rules and fulfillment of duties or obligations; and consequentialism, which evaluates morally significant actions strictly on the basis of their actual or anticipated outcomes. Both involve the systematic application of universal abstract principles, reflecting the culturally dominant paradigm of technical rationality. Professional societies promulgate codes of ethics with which engineers are expected to comply (deontology), while courts and the public generally assign liability to engineers primarily in accordance with the results of their work, whether intended or unintended (consequentialism). A third option, prominent in ancient philosophy, has reemerged recently: virtue ethics, which recognizes that sensitivity to context and practical judgment are indispensable in particular concrete situations, and therefore rightly focuses on the person who acts, rather than the action itself. Beneficial character traits—i.e., virtues—are identified within a specific social practice in light of the internal goods that are unique to it. This paper proposes a comprehensive framework for implementing virtue ethics within engineering.     

“Ethics wars”: Reflections on the Antagonism between Bioethicists and Social Science Observers of Biomedicine1

Social scientists often lament the fact that philosophically trained ethicists pay limited attention to the insights they generate. This paper presents an overview of tendencies in sociological and anthropological studies of morality, ethics and bioethics, and suggests that a lack in philosophical interest might be related to a tendency among social scientists to employ either a deficit model (social science perspectives accommodate the sense of context that philosophical ethics lacks), a replacement model (social scientists have finally found the “right way” of doing ethics), or a dismissal model (ethics should be abandoned all together as a misconstrued veil of power). Increased awareness of differences in styles of reasoning and objects of research interest might help to overcome the hostility, and an anthropological project is presented as an invitation to a dialogue informed by awareness of such differences.This paper was first presented at the 4S/EASST Conference in Paris, August 25–28,2004 in a panel co-convened with Richard Tutton, who came up with ‘‘Ethics Wars’’ as the appropriate title for the state of affairs we wanted to discuss. Bryn William-Jones contributed to the panel and provided detailed and very useful comments to the paper. The project on which the article reports was financially supported by the Swedish Ethics in Healthcare Programme (Grant 2000/56) and the Danish Social Science Research Council (Grant 24-03-0219).     

Mapping our Progress: Identifying, Categorizing and Comparing Universities’ Ethics Infrastructures

Ethics researchers have scrutinized ethical business problems, which have been demonstrated through the actions of managers at Enron, WorldCom, and Arthur Andersen, among others. In response to these business transgressions, the US government has implemented the Sarbanes–Oxley Act to shore up businesses’ ethics infrastructures. However, universities, too, struggle with ethics problems. These include NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) violations, discrimination issues, sexual harassment, endowment admits, plagiarism, and research funding manipulation. Despite these problems, we have little knowledge regarding universities’ ethics infrastructures and codes of conduct, and insignificant empirical research on academic ethics issues (Kelley & Chang, Journal of Higher Education, under review, 2006; Morgan & Korschgen, College Student Journal, Sept., 2001). This lack of knowledge exists despite the critical role universities play in shaping the moral behavior of future generations (Langlais, The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 13:B11, 2006; Woo, BizEd, May/June:22–27, 2003). In this paper, we conduct exploratory research to identify the elements of universities ethics’ infrastructures. From our research, we develop an understanding of the ethics policies and infrastructure elements in place at a representative group of universities. We compare these infrastructures to those in business as well as across Carnegie Classifications. We then conclude with recommendations for developing university ethics infrastructures and suggestions for future research.     

A CPI comparison of engineers and managers

Seventy-one male employees of three high-technology content product industries in northern Utah were divided into three contrast groups: engineers, engineering-trained managers, and non-engineering-trained managers. The California Psychological Inventory was administered and multivariate analysis of variance performed on seven preselected CPI scales. Results revealed that nonengineering managers scored significantly higher than engineers on scales Dominance, Capacity for Status, Social Presence, and approached significance on Sociability. Engineering-managers also scored significantly higher than engineers on Dominance, and significantly higher than other managers on Psychological Mindedness. A multivariate main-effect significant p < .001 to predict group membership was found. Engineering-managers share with other managers a confident, persuasive, and aggressive self-presentation combined with a preference for leadership roles. Their elevation on Psychological Mindedness, however, suggests a more pragmatic analytical and less intuitive approach to management situations.     

Professionalism,Ethics, and Value‐Based Conflicts in Counseling: An Introduction to the Special Section

This introduction to this special section of the Journal of Counseling & Development explores the importance of a code of ethics to the establishment and maintenance of a profession. Recognizing a code of ethics as a communication of a profession's collective values and expectations, the editors of this special section acknowledge the dilemmas that arise when a counselor's personal values do not align with the profession's collective values. The authors of each article address value‐based conflicts in counseling.     

“Sherry’s Secret”

The case and commentaries below were developed as part of a project, Graduate Research Ethics Education, undertaken by the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics with funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF Grant No. SBR 9421897 and NSF Grant No. 9817880). The project aims at training graduate students in research ethics and building a community of scientists and engineers who are interested in and capable of teaching research ethics. As part of the project, each graduate student participant develops a case for use in teaching and writes a commentary to go with the case, and then a staff member is asked to write additional commentary on the case. The case below was written in the second year of the project and was published in Research Ethics: Cases and Commentaries edited by B. Schrag, Association for Practical and Professional Ethics, Bloomington, Indiana, Vol. II (1998). Publication of these cases and commentaries will be a recurring feature of Science and Engineering Ethics.     

Social Ethics between Universality and Specificity: Outline of a Chalcedonian Social Ethic1

Abstract : In Lutheran ethics the Chalcedonian notion of the communication of properties (communicatio idiomatum) plays an important role in understanding the paradoxical relation between the reality of God and the reality of the world. This motif also plays an important role for Martin Luther and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. In a contemporary context the Chalcedonian understanding substantiates a differentiated unity between universality and specificity with regard to the foundation of a Lutheran social ethic.     

In Defense of Hiya as a Filipino Virtue

The Filipino concept of hiya, often translated as ‘shame’ or ‘embarrassment’, has often received ambivalent or negative interpretations. In this article I make an important distinction between two kinds of hiya: (1) the hiya that is suffered as shame or embarrassment (a passion) and (2) the hiya that is an active and sacrificial self-control of one’s individual wants for the sake of other people (a virtue). I borrow and reappropriate this distinction from Aquinas’ virtue ethics. This distinction not only leads to a more positive appraisal of hiya, it also leads to a new understanding of associated concepts that are often confused with hiya such as amor propio, pakikisama and the infamous ‘crab mentality’. Defending hiya as a virtue is part of an even wider philosophical project, the move from ‘Filipino values’ to a ‘Filipino virtue ethics’, which I already introduced in a previous article in this journal.     

Is it Morally Wrong to Defend Unjust Causes as a Lawyer?

The question I address in this article is whether it is morally wrong for a lawyer to represent a client whose purpose is immoral or unjust. My answer to this question is that it is wrong, prima facie. This conclusion holds, even accepting certain traditional principles of lawyer's professional ethics, such as the right of defence and the so‐called principle of ‘adversarial’ litigation. Both the adversarial system and the right of defence are sufficient to support or justify the right of potential clients (and citizens in general) to defend their interests in the judicial system and to do so with the technical assistance of a lawyer. This right includes a right to pursue unjust or immoral purposes (within the law). However, having a right to do X does not mean that it is morally permissible to do X. We can have a right to do something morally wrong. This being so, the fundamental moral reason for a lawyer not to accept representation for a client with an immoral purpose is that it is, prima facie, morally wrong to help someone do something wrong.