Engineering Ethics & Moral

Philosophy
Lecture 3
Ethical Theories
• As discussed earlier, Codes of Ethics can be used as
an aid in analyzing ethical issues.

• However, Ethical or Moral theories can also be used

as a means for analyzing ethical cases.

• In ethical problem solving, we will need some

knowledge of ethical theory to provide a framework
for understanding and reaching solutions in ethical
problems.
Ethical Theories
• We must first look at several theories of ethics in order to
have a framework for decision making.
• In most engineering classes, there is generally just one
theory to consider when tackling a problem.
• In studying engineering ethics, there are several theories
that will be considered.
• The relatively large number of theories doesn’t indicate a
weakness in theoretical understanding of ethics or a
“fuzziness” of ethical thinking.
• Rather, it reflects the complexity of ethical problems and
the diversity of approaches to ethical problem solving that
have been developed over the centuries.
Ethical Theories
• Having multiple theories to apply actually enriches the problem-
solving process, allowing problems to be looked at from different
angles, since each theory stresses different aspects of a problem.

• Even though we will use multiple theories to examine ethical

problems, each theory applied to a problem will not necessarily
lead to a different solution. Frequently, different theories yield the
same solution.

• Our basic ethical problem-solving technique will utilize different

theories and approaches to analyze the problem and then try to
determine the best solution.
What is a Moral Theory?
• A moral theory defines terms in uniform ways and links
ideas and problems together in consistent ways.

• There are four ethical theories that will be considered here,

each differing according to what is held to be the most
important moral concept.
- Utilitarianism
- Duty Ethics
- Rights Ethics
- Virtue Ethics
Utilitarianism
• Utilitarianism holds that those actions are good that serve to
maximize human well-being.

• The emphasis in utilitarianism is not on maximizing the well-

being of the individual, but rather on maximizing the well-
being of society as a whole.

• An example of this theory is the building of dams. Dams

often lead to great benefit to society by providing stable
supplies of drinking water, flood control, and recreational
opportunities.
Utilitarianism
• However, these benefits often come at the expense of
people who live in areas that will be flooded by the dam and
are required to find new homes, or lose the use of their land

• Utilitarianism tries to balance the needs of society with the

needs of the individual, with an emphasis on what will
provide the most benefit to the most people.

• However, as good as the utilitarian principle sounds, there

are some problems with it.
Utilitarianism
• First, as seen in the example of the building of a dam,
sometimes what is best for everyone may be bad for a
particular individual or a group of individuals.

• An example of this problem is the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

(WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. WIPP is designed to be a
permanent repository for nuclear waste generated in the
United States. It consists of a system of tunnels bored into
underground salt formations. These salt beds are considered
by geologists to be extremely stable, especially to incursion
of water which could lead to seepage of the nuclear wastes
into groundwater
Utilitarianism
• However, there are many who oppose this facility,
principally on the grounds that transportation of the wastes
across highways has the potential for accidents that might
cause health problems for people living near these routes.

• An analysis of WIPP using utilitarianism might indicate that

the disposal of nuclear wastes is a major problem hindering
the implementation of many useful technologies, including
medicinal uses of radioisotopes and nuclear generation of
electricity. Solution of this waste disposal problem will
benefit society by providing improved health care and more
plentiful electricity.
Utilitarianism
• The slight potential for adverse health effects for individuals
living near the transportation routes is far outweighed by
the overall benefits to society. So, WIPP should be allowed to
open.

• As this example demonstrates, the utilitarian approach can

seem to ignore the needs of individuals, especially if these
needs seem relatively insignificant.

• Another objection to utilitarianism is that its implementation

depends greatly on knowing what will lead to the most
good.
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• Two other ethical theories—duty ethics and rights ethics—are
similar to each other and will be considered together.

• These theories hold that those actions are good that respect the
rights of the individual. Here, good consequences for society as a
whole are not the only moral consideration.

• In duty ethics, ethical actions are those actions that could be

written down on a list of duties: be honest, don’t cause suffering
to other people, be fair to others, etc. These actions are our
duties because they express respect for persons, express an
unqualified regard for autonomous moral agents, and are
universal principles
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• Once one’s duties are recognized, the ethically correct moral
actions are obvious. In this formulation, ethical acts are a result
of proper performance of one’s duties.

• Rights ethics holds that people have fundamental rights that

other people have a duty to respect.

• Duty ethics and rights ethics are really just two different sides of
the same coin.
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• Both of these theories achieve the same end: Individual persons
must be respected, and actions are ethical that maintain this
respect for the individual.

• In duty ethics, people have duties, an important one of which is

to protect the rights of others.

• And in rights ethics, people have fundamental rights that others

have duties to protect.
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• There are problems with the duty and rights ethics theories that
must be considered.

• First the basic rights of one person (or group) may conflict with
the basic rights of another group. How do we decide whose rights
have priority?

• Using our previous example of the building of a dam, people have

the right to use their property. If their land happens to be in the
way of a proposed dam, then rights ethics would hold that this
property right is paramount and is sufficient to stop the dam
project.
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• A single property holder’s objection would require that the project
be terminated

• However, there is a need for others living in nearby communities

to have a reliable water supply and to be safe from continual
flooding.

• Whose rights are paramount here? Rights and duty ethics don’t
resolve this conflict very well; hence, the utilitarian approach of
trying to determine the most good is more useful in this case.
Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• The second problem with duty and rights ethics is that these
theories don’t always account for the overall good of society very
well.

• Since the emphasis is on the individual, the good of a single

individual can be paramount compared to what is good for
society as a whole.

• The WIPP case discussed before illustrates this problem.

Duty Ethics and Rights Ethics
• Certainly, people who live along the route where the radioactive
wastes will be transported have the right to live without fear of
harm due to accidental spills of hazardous waste.

• But the nation as a whole will benefit from the safe disposal of
these wastes

• Rights ethics would come down clearly on the side of the

individuals living along the route despite the overall advantage to
society.
The need of Multiple Theories
• Already it is clear why we will be considering more than one
ethical theory in our discussion of engineering cases

• The theories already presented clearly represent different ways

of looking at ethical problems and can frequently arrive at
different solutions.

• Thus, any complete analysis of an ethical problem must

incorporate multiple theories if valid conclusions are to be drawn.
Virtue Ethics
• Fundamentally, virtue ethics is interested in determining what
kind of people we should be.

• Virtue is often defined as moral distinction and goodness. A

virtuous person exhibits good and beneficial qualities.

• In virtue ethics, actions are considered right if they support good

character traits (virtues) and wrong if they support bad character
traits (vices)
Virtue Ethics
• Virtue ethics focuses on words such as responsibility, honesty,
competence, and loyalty, which are virtues. Other virtues might
include trustworthiness, fairness, caring, citizenship, and respect.

• Vices could include dishonesty, disloyalty, irresponsibility, or

incompetence.

• Virtue ethics is closely tied to personal character.

Virtue Ethics
• We can use virtue ethics in our engineering career by answering
questions such as: Is this action honest? Will this action
demonstrate loyalty to my community and/or my employer?
Have I acted in a responsible fashion? Often, the answer to these
questions makes the proper course of action obvious.

• Problems can arise with words that on the face seem to be

virtues, but can actually lead to vices. For example, the concept
of “honor” has been around for centuries and is often viewed
positively.
Which Theory to Use?
• Now that we have discussed four different ethical theories, the
question arises: How do we decide which theory is applicable to a
given problem?
• The good news is that in solving ethical problems, we don’t have
to choose from among these theories. Rather, we can use all of
them to analyze a problem from different angles and see what
result each of the theories gives us.
• This allows us to examine a problem from different perspectives
to see what conclusion each one reaches.
• Frequently, the result will be the same even though the theories
are very different.
Which Theory to Use?
• Take, for example, a chemical plant near a small city that
discharges a hazardous waste into the groundwater. If the city
takes its water from wells, the water supply for the city will be
compromised and significant health problems for the community
may result.
• Rights ethics indicates that this pollution is unethical, since it
causes harm to many of the residents.
• A utilitarian analysis would probably also come to the same
conclusion, since the economic benefits of the plant would almost
certainly be outweighed by the negative effects of the pollution
and the costs required to ensure a safe municipal water supply.
• Virtue ethics would say that discharging wastes into groundwater
is irresponsible and harmful to individuals and so shouldn’t be
done. In this case, all of the ethical theories lead to the same
Which Theory to Use?
• What happens when the different theories seem to give different
answers? This scenario can be illustrated by the discussion of
WIPP.

• Rights ethics indicated that transporting wastes through

communities is not a good idea,

• Utilitarianism concluded that WIPP would be beneficial to society

as a whole.

• Generally, rights and duty ethics should take precedence over

utilitarian considerations. This is because the rights of individuals
should receive relatively stronger weight than the needs of
Which Theory to Use?
• For example, an action that led to the death of even one person
is generally viewed very negatively, regardless of the overall
benefit to society.

• After thorough analysis using all of the theories, a balanced

judgment can be formed.
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal
Case Study: The Disaster at Bhopal