Suchergebnisse

Engineers are trained to think analytically and base their technical decisions on relevant facts and research. Nonetheless, engineers will encounter many situations involving ethical questions during their careers. In order to improve their ability to make ethical decisions engineers require additional tools and training. These include an understanding of the relevant codes of ethics and learning to recognize ethical challenges and solutions through a case study approach. In this tutorial the author discusses the IEEE Code of Ethics that engineers can use as a reference when they confront ethical questions in professional situations. The author also provides a guided review of ethical decision-making using a case study in power engineering. Several suggestions and additional references for improving ethical decision-making are offered

Diane Vaughan's analysis of the causes of the Challenger accident suggests ways to apply science and technology studies to the teaching of engineering ethics. By sensitizing future engineers to the ongoing construction of risk during mundane engineering practice, we can better prepare them to address issues of public health, safety, and welfare before they require heroic intervention. Understanding the importance of precedents, incremental change, and fallible engineering judgment in engineering design may help them anticipate potential threats to public safety arising from routine aspects of workplace culture. We suggest modifications of both detailed case studies on engineering disasters and hypothetical, ethical dilemmas employed in engineering ethics classes. Investigating the sociotechnical aspects of engineering practice can improve the initial recognition of ethical problems in real-world settings and provide an understanding of the role of workplace organization and culture in facilitating or impeding remedial action.

"15 Oct 1982" ; Cover title. ; Bibliography: p. A-1. ; Mode of access: Internet.

AbstractIt is largely assumed that conceptual engineering is essentially about revising, introducing, or eliminating representational devices, in particular the intension and extension of words and concepts. However, tying conceptual engineering too closely to representations is risky. Not everyone endorses the notion of representation as theoretically helpful or even real. Not everyone thinks that concepts or meanings should be understood in terms of the notion of representation. Does this mean that conceptual engineering is not interesting or relevant for these skeptics? In this paper, I motivate and propose a non-representationalist construal of conceptual engineering. I argue that conceptual engineers can be understood as primarily engineering linguistic entitlements and commitments rather than representational devices. Note that this account is non-representationalist, but explicitly not anti-representationalist. Representations may play a significant role when it comes to justifying and completing commitment engineering projects.

AbstractConceptual engineers aim to revise rather than describe our concepts. But what are concepts? And how does one engineer them? Answering these questions is of central importance for implementing and theorizing about conceptual engineering. This paper discusses and criticizes two influential views of this issue: semanticism, according to which conceptual engineers aim to change linguistic meanings, and psychologism, according to which conceptual engineers aim to change psychological structures. I argue that neither of these accounts can give us the full story. Instead, I propose and defend the Dual Content View of Conceptual Engineering. On this view, conceptual engineering targets concepts, where concepts are understood as having two (interrelated) kinds of contents: referential content and cognitive content. I show that this view is independently plausible and that it gives us a comprehensive account of conceptual engineering that helps to make progress on some of the most difficult problems surrounding conceptual engineering.

Title from cover. ; Index to U.S. government periodicals ; Mode of access: Internet.

Chapter 1. Will genetic engineering benefit society? -- Yes : genetic engineering will benefit society. Biotechnology will benefit society / Gregory Stock -- Genetic engineering will improve human health / William Haseltine -- Genetic enhancement can improve humanity / World Transhumanist Association -- No : genetic engineering will not benefit society. Biotechnology has failed to live up to expectations / Stephen Leahy -- Genetic engineering diminishes respect for human life / Erwin W. Lutzer -- Genetic engineering will lead to greater inequality / Maxwell J. Mehlman -- Chapter 2. Will genetic engineering improve food and farming? -- Yes : genetic engineering will improve food and farming. Genetically engineered crops can end world hunger / C.S. Prakash, Gregory Conko -- The risks of genetically modified foods have been exaggerated / Dick Taverne -- Genetically engineered crops protect the environment / Jonathan Rauch -- No : genetic engineering will not improve food and farming. Genetically engineered crops will not end world hunger / Craig Holdrege -- Genetically modified foods are unsafe to eat / Institute for Responsible Technology -- Genetically engineered crops are a danger to the environment / Genetically Engineered Food Alert -- Chapter 3. Is

Social engineering in the 20th century has brought about some large-scale changes in society, often the result of visionary social projects, and plans designed on a grand and ideal scale. Such plans have often extracted terrible human costs. Numerous failures have marked 20th century social engineering

Engineering must respond to innovation and change. The great innovations and technologies are generated in the centers and institutions of higher education, by modifying nature to meet our needs. Technology is a product of science and engineering and is associated with innovation, in which ideas become products or processes at the service of man. Engineering education must adapt to global change if it is to improve productivity and foster local and national economic development. Engineers of the next decade must have a technical or highly technological activity, and play leadership roles in academia, industry, and government. Areas of opportunity are in the generation of new products and processes related to nanotechnology, information technology, robotics and mechatronics, process automation, aerospace, food technology, bioengineering, biotechnology, etc. However, there are others related to transgenic food and nuclear technologies, which generate social controversy.