Ethical implications for engineering - student module  (Page 2/8)

What you need to know …

Ethical theories and encapsulating tests

Engineering ethics works with different ethical theories. This section will provide a brief outline of three: Deontology, Utilitarianism, and virtue ethics. At the bottom of this page, you will find a media file that presents in tabular form the concepts that underlie these three ethical approaches.

Deontological ethical theories.

• The word "deontology" comes from two Greek words, "deon (duty) and "logos" (account of or study of). Literally, then, deontology is the ethical theory that provides an account of duty. Deontology has different versions based on the different possible foundations for duty, including moral autonomy (Kant), a hypothetical social contract (Hobbes, Locke, Rawls), or natural law.
• Deontology differs from consequentialism. For consequentialism, the moral value of an action lies in its results or consequences. Deontology evaluates actions independently of their consequences; it places the moral value of an action on its formal characteristics. These include universalizability, reversibility, and autonomy.
• Universalizability : Actions that take on the form of duty are universalizable. Because they apply equally to all people at all times, they do not allow individuals to make themselves exceptions to the universal rule. Kant provides different tests to determine if an action exhibits the formal characteristics of duty. If the rule expressed by the action (its 'maxim') can be converted into a universal law without defeating itself, then it is a rule of moral duty. Truth telling expresses a rule that can be universalized. Telling lies does not. (Imagine a possible world in which everybody lied. If telling lies were universalized, then communication would become impossible. When universalized, the rule of telling lies is self-defeating.)
• Reversibility : Moral actions are also reversible. Here, duty functions more or less according to the Golden Rule. You treat others as you would have them treat you. The action, acceptable from the agent's perspective (the perspective of the doer), is also acceptable when viewed from the receiving end (the perspective of those under its impact).
• Respect for Autonomy : Rules of duty recognize and respect autonomy both in those suffering the impact of the action and in the agent. Kant expresses this last point in his formula of the end: Treat humanity (yourself included) always as ends and never merely as means. Treating individuals as ends implies recognizing that they, like you, have the capacity for autonomy, that is, they can formulate life plans and then organize and discipline themselves to carry them out; treating others as ends entails recognizing and respecting this autonomy. Treating someone merely as a means involves actions that circumvent autonomy through force, deception, manipulation, or fraud. Treating someone as a means (distinguished from treating them merely as a means), for example, hiring an individual to work for you as an employee, is morally permissible provided the relation is formed freely and knowingly.