Class Assignments

Philosophy 370 Moral Issues in Engineering (Engineering Ethics)

Midterm Exam Questions

PDF of midterm questions
Try to use examples from cases as often as you can to illustrate your points.

1. a. Explain three key elements of the definition of profession. John Ladd argues that professions are elitist and they tend to favor clients over the public.
b. What are your responses to Ladd’s criticisms? Can you defend professionalism using your definition? Explain

2. How do you answer John Ladd’s challenge that professional codes are not ethical codes because ethics proceeds by questioning, reasoning, and arguments?

3. To be a moral agent is to be self-directed, autonomous, guided by one’s own purposes and reasons.
a. Can an engineer be a moral agent and yet be bound by the code of ethics?
b. Explain.

4. Nobel laureate Herbert Simon argues that employees in business organization should relax and uncritically accept management directives.
a. Explain why he holds this view.
b. How would Kenneth Alpern (DG p.187) respond to this view?
c. With whom do you agree? Explain.

5. Uncritical loyalty requires an engineer/employee to serve the employer’s interest as the employer defines it.
a. What if an engineer receives a directive that leads her to believes that the employer’s (company’s) interest is really different from the manager’s definition?
b. Provide an illustration and suggest what a an engineer who wants to be loyal should do in such a situation.

6. One impediment to responsibility is microscopic vision.
a. Explain what that impediment is and what it has to do with behaving responsibly according to John Ladd’s notion of moral responsibility.
b. Suggest at least two strategies to counter microscopic vision.

7. HPR describe four forms of dishonesty, lying, deliberate deception, withholding information, and failing to seek out the truth. They say that the latter two involve less active distortion of the truth than the first two, but they can have as serious or more serious consequences.
a. Explain this comment using or adapting examples from cases we have studied.
.
8. a. Explain differences between the engineer’s and manager’s perspectives.
b. Explain how engineers can use their understanding of those differences in trying to behave responsibly. For example, how can that understanding help engineers to determine when to hold their ground and when to accept a manager’s decision they don’t agree with.

9. Consider Rodney Rocha’s situation when he represented many engineering colleagues in trying to get additional images to determine the seriousness of the foam shedding from the launch of the Columbia shuttle. We do not know whether additional information could have been used to save the Columbia.
a. Would you recommend whistleblowing?
b. If so, explain why and suggest what he should do.
c. If not, explain why and suggest what he should do.

10. One rationalization for accepting a directive that seems ethically wrong is “If I don’t do it someone else will.”
How would you respond to someone who uses that rationalization?

11. Codes of ethics have several purposes.
a. Explain two purposes you think most important.
b. Can they be achieved even though the engineers’ codes are voluntary?
c. Explain.

Class Assignment Two

Due October 11, 2006

PDF of Assignment 2

This assignment consists of five tasks.

1. The first task is to write a case (about one page) using a case from the course as a model (e.g. a change of materials as in the XYZ Hose case) or a case you know about from elsewhere and have checked out with Prof. Weil.
2. The second task is to make an appointment at a company to interview an engineer on location in the company about how one might handle such a problem in that company.
3. The third task is to write a set of questions to guide your interview. It is a good idea to practice the interview with a classmate.
4. The fourth task is to visit the company and conduct the interview.
5. The fifth task is to write a report of the interview, based on your notes taken at the interview. (You may use a tape recorder if your interviewee agrees.) You may write the report as a dialogue or a narrative that recounts the questions you asked and the answers you received.
6. The sixth task is to provide a concluding analytical paragraph explaining the insights you gained from the interview. (NOT: “I learned how important ethics is in the workplace.” Rather: Explain in detail something you learned about resolving an ethics problem in the workplace.)

You must submit your case for approval no later than September 27. Once it is approved, you must submit your interview questions for approval. You should have your case and questions approved no later than October 4. You can submit the name of the company any time before October 4. After I approve the questions and company, you can proceed with the interview.

Be sure to bring your case to class or send it to me by e-mail no later than September 27. Bring your interview questions to class or submit them by e-mail no later than October 4. Schedule the interview so that you have enough time to write the report with your concluding paragraph by the final due date, October 11.

On the due date, submit the entire package. It should include 1) a full report based on your notes from the interview, including the questions you asked and the interviewee’s responses; 2) the concluding analytical paragraph, 3) the case, and 4) the set of interview questions.

For help in connecting with a company, you may contact Lovetta Houston in the Career Development Center (CDC) at 7-6484, houston@iit.edu. She will give you the name of and contact information for your CDC Advisor.

There will be a Career Fair on campus on September 21 from Noon – 5:00 pm in Hermann Hall. The Fair offers a good opportunity to connect with a company. You will be able to do so through company representatives at the Career Fair, some of whom are IIT alumni.

Class Assignment One

Assigned August 30, 2006, Due September 13, 2006

PDF of "Stan Smith" Case

You are to submit a double-spaced, “typed” approximately 2-3 page essay that includes all 7 items numbered below. The paper should be clear, well organized, grammatically correct, and correctly punctuated. Be sure to proofread before submitting

1. A statement of the ethical issue(s) and the most relevant facts.
2. A description of the situation (Smith’s predicament) that includes the main characters and mentions all the people you think of who will be affected by Smith’s response to his supervisor. You should try to fully imagine the situation, taking into account the perspectives of others as well as Smith.
3. Options for Smith in responding to his supervisor, no less than four!
4. An assessment of the options mentioned – as to their practicality and ethical justification.
5. The option you recommend to Smith and the reasons for your recommendation.
6. The sentences with which he should answer his supervisor.
7. Reference to any of Ladd’s senses of responsibility that seem useful to your analysis -- at least one.

Class Assignment Two: Due October 11

Take Home Assignment: Due November 27, bring two copies to class

Group Projects
October 25: First Progress Report
November 8: Second Progress Report
November 15: Third Progress Report
November 27, 29, December 4, 6: Group Presentations