Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
84 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Unversalizability |
A moral requirement of professions that states that a professional must provide services to anyone that needs or wants them |
|
|
The "engineers dilemma" Layton, 45 |
The conflict between bureaucratic loyalty and professional autonomy. It is common for engineers to become managers. |
|
|
Necessary Fallibility (martin and schinzinger) |
an idea that is present in the applied sciences, in experiments in nature, and in the principle of informed consent |
|
|
Esoteric Knowledge (layton, 48) |
knowledge understood by only a particular group |
|
|
Moral requirements of professions -Rationalty |
a moral requirement of professions that states that professional must be willling to throw out any theory, no matter how long it has been in place, and replace it with something that is more valid |
|
|
Moral requirements of professions -Functional specificity |
a moral requirement of professions that states that the professional's authority is only a function to those specific spheres where the profession has been educated |
|
|
Moral requirements of professions -Disinterestedness |
a moral requirement of profession that states that you must provide services to the best of your ability without self-interest
|
|
|
Professions (Michael Bayles) Consulting |
A profession in which a client pays the professional for a service |
|
|
Professions (Michael Bayles) The criteria for the consulting professions are.. |
-Individual clients -Provision of a service related to basic values of society -monopoly or near monopoly -self-regualtion |
|
|
Professions (Michael Bayles) Scholarly |
a profession in which the professional receives a salary, do not involve service to individual clients |
|
|
Paternalism |
Limiting a person's freedom for that persons own good -it is prima facie wrong -wrong because utilitariansim will get on with themselves -excercising ones autonomy is always good |
|
|
Technical Paternalism (McFarland, 163) |
The act of deferring to expertise -recognize that a question has expertise then let the expert determine the outcome -this is the laziness of society to defer to experts -this makes it problematic as it is hard to know when people are deferring to an expert |
|
|
Limitations of cost/benefit analysis (McFarland, DeGeorge 164, 182) |
1) Ignores not easily quantifiable considerations 2) Hidden value judgements / not objective or value-free 3) Violates right of self-determination of those who are affected by the use by the use of technology |
|
|
"Strong conception" of engineers' moral responsibilites (Alpern) (188) |
-Where strength of obligation is to be understood in terms of the degree of personal sacrifice that can be demanded. -Engineers have no special source of moral oblicgation, ordinarily moral obligation are sufficient to requrie more, on average, of engineers |
|
|
Rights as valid claims |
1) Virtues - compassion, sympathy, benevolence 2) Duty - weak sense of simply what is required 3) Personal Desert - Fitting behavior (reward, tips, bonuses) 4) Sovereign rights monopoly |
|
|
Rights as prima facie or defeasible |
Rights that can be overruled by something. all rights are prima facie because no right is absolute. the burden of proof lies with those contesting the right. |
|
|
Rights as trumps over collective goods |
The main function of rights is to trump over the collective good because theses rights are based on a strong moral considerations an that the right holder must be individualized. The collective goods could apply the groups of people and not an individual person. There fore a group cannot take something away from any one person. |
|
|
Rights negative and positive |
|
|
|
Rights correlativity with duties |
|
|
|
Rights Infringement vs Violation |
-Infringement - may be justifiable, it weighs the right against other considerations -Violation - always wrong because it ignores the right |
|
|
Duties perfect duties |
no discretion, gotta do what you gotta do when a situation comes up |
|
|
Duties Imperfect duties |
discretion is possible, recognize and acknowledge duty but when and how to do it |
|
|
Duties as "simply what is required" (Feinberg) |
The word duty is ambiguous; in one sense, duties entail rights; but in another sense they do not: 1) your duty always correlates with someone else's right 2) your duty does not always correlate with someone else's right |
|
|
Duties as prima facie |
http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~tlockha/hu329ov8.htm |
|
|
Duties Negative |
Prohibits us from doing something morally bad -may also be called prohibitions -limits are placed on what is permitted to dogma |
|
|
Duties Positive |
require us to do 'good for another' |
|
|
Categorical Imperative (Kant) |
always act in such a way that you could also will the maxim of you action be universal laws |
|
|
Principle of Utility |
That action is right which produces at least as much utility as any other action possible under the circumstances for all those affected -"the greatest good for the greatest number" |
|
|
Negative Responsibility |
-we are responsible for the foreseeable consequences of the choices we make -sometimes we choose to act, and sometimes we choose not to. either way, we are making a choice that has consequences -we are just as responsible for the foreseeable consequences that we fail to prevent as for those that we bring about directly |
|
|
Incommensurability |
Incapable of being measured against a common standard. The presumed incomprehensibility of individual human pleasures is sometimes raised as an objection against hedonistic versions of utilitarianism. |
|
|
Direct intention |
the means to achieve our ends |
|
|
Oblique intention |
intentions are the side-effects of actions that come from direct actions |
|
|
Desire vs reason (Kant) |
http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/kant.html |
|
|
Veil of Ignorance (Rawls) |
The veil of ignorance does not allow those under it to remember any defining characteristics that could cause bias ensuring fair decision. Selfish motives are retained because those under the veil still know they will be impacted by their decisions so they work to minimize any possible bad for themselves. |
|
|
Maximin Principle (Rawls) |
Minimize the bad and/or make the bad the least possible |
|
|
Ethics codes as heteronomous (Ladd, 131) |
Ethics must, be its very nature, be self-directed rather that other-directed. |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Reasons for requiring |
Subjects should be given not only the info they request, but all the info which is needed for making a reasonable decision. Subjects must also enter into the experiment without being subjected to force, fraud, or deception. Respect for the fundamental rights of dissenting minorities and compensation for harmful effects are taken for granted here." |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Conditions 1/2 |
1) The consent was given voluntarily 2) The consent was based on the information that a rational person would want, together with any other information requested, presented to them in understandable form. 3) the consenter was competent to process the info and make rational decisions |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Conditions 2/2 |
4) Info that a rational person would need, stated in understandable form, has been widely disseminated 5) The subject's consent was offered in proxy by a group that collectively represents many subjects of like interests, concerns, and exposure to risk |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Limitations of in engineering |
An engineer can't succeed in providing essential information about a project or product unless there is cooperation by management and receptivity of those who should have the info. Management is often understandably reluctant to provide more info that current laws require, fearing disclosure to potential competitors and exposure to potential lawsuits. |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Proxy consent |
Protects interests |
|
|
Informed consent (Martin and Schinzinger) Surrogate Consent |
Respects autonomy of the unavailable |
|
|
Safety (Martin and Schinzinger) subjective |
-one approach to defining 'safety' would be to render the notion thoroughly subject by defining it in terms of whatever risks a person judges to be acceptable. -a thing is safe if its risks are judged to be acceptable |
|
|
Safety (Martin and Schinzinger) objective |
-a thing is safe if its risks are fully know, those risks would then be judged acceptable -a thing is safe (to a certain degree) with respect to a given person or group at a given time if, were they fully aware of its risks and expression their most settled values, they would judge those risks to be acceptable (to that certain degree) |
|
|
Normal Accidents (Perrow) Tight coupling (3 points) |
1) The sub-components of a tightly coupled system have prompt and major impacts on each other 2) If what happens in one part has little impact on another part, of it everything happens slowly, the system is not described as "tightly coupled" 3) It raises the odds that operator intervention will make things worse, sense the true nature of the problem may well not be understood correctly |
|
|
Normal Accidents (Perrow) Complex Interaction |
A system in which two or more discrete failures can interact in unexpected ways. These interactions can affect supposedly redundant sub-systems. A very complex system can be expected to have many such unanticipated failure mode interactions, making it vulnerable to normal accidents. |
|
|
Normalization of Deviance (Vaughan) |
People within the organization become accustomed to a deviant behavior that they don;t consider it as deviant, despite the fact that they far exceed their own rules for elementary safety. People grow more accustomed to the deviant behavior the more it occurs. |
|
|
Risk vs. Uncertainty (Hansson) http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/risk/ |
Risk=the fact that a decision is made under conditions of KNOWN probabilities. This is opposed to decision under uncertainty. Uncertainty belongs to the subjective realm, while risk has a strong objective component. |
|
|
Statistical Victims |
we don't know exactly who the victim is |
|
|
Psychological obstacles to risk assessment (Martin and Schinzinger) Voluntariness |
Ex: People take voluntary risks when being engaged in dangerous sports such as motorcycles. People do not expect the manufacture to adhere to the same safety standards as car manufactures. |
|
|
Psychological obstacles to risk assessment (Martin and Schinzinger) Job-Relation |
Ex: working in a shipyard and there is a high chance of asbestosis cases. Wife of worker is aware she may come in contact with asbestosis when dealing with the clothes. Doctor says worker is healthy. Worker is taking the risk for his job and is being made aware of the risk. |
|
|
Psychological obstacles to risk assessment (Martin and Schinzinger) Magnitude and Proximity |
Our reaction to risk is affected by the dread of a possible mishap, both in terms of its magnitude and of the personal identification or relationship we may have with the potential victims. |
|
|
Psychological obstacles to risk assessment (Martin and Schinzinger) Framing Effects |
Occurs when transparently and objectively identical situations generate dramatically different decisions depending on whether the situations are presented as either potential losses or gains. |
|
|
Risk aversion and risk seeking (Kahneman and Tversky) |
- we are risk-averse in the domain of gains Ex85% chance to win $1000 or $800 for sure, 0.85*$1000+0.15*0=$850 - risk-seeking in the domain of losses Ex 85% chance to lose $1000 or lose $800 for sure framing effects - violations of invariance |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) Prima facie wrong or right? |
wrong |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) Engineers have what responsiblites to their employers? |
1) do your job 2) be loyal 3) maintain confidentiality |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) What 3 conditions before whistleblowing is satisfied? |
1) Harm to public is serious 2) Make conditions to superiors 3) Go through rest of organization |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) 2 conditions when public is not statisfied |
1) Documentation that you are right and they are wrong 2) Will it help save the public |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) Engineers should not have the last word on the decision. Why? |
1) Determine the degree of risk is an engineering task 2) Feasibility is a managerial task |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) Cost benefit analysis? |
Never decisive because they are base on each change |
|
|
Whistleblowing (DeGeorge) (179-80) How should an engineer respond? |
1) Ask how well the organization can be changed? 2) Irresponsible to ask engineer to risk their job |
|
|
Loyalty (Baron and Duska) What is it? |
It is ordinarily construed as a state of being constant and faithful in a relation implying trust or confidence. It is not founded on just any casual relationship, but on a specific kind of relationship or tie. |
|
|
Loyalty (Baron and Duska) How do businesses come into play? |
Businesses are there to make a profit, people bound together for a mutual fulfillment and support in a business, but it is to divide labor so that business can make a profit. |
|
|
Loyalty (Baron and Duska) Can businesses be loyal? |
You cannot build loyalty with a business, as it will always be looking for profit. |
|
|
Commercialization of work (Duska) (244) |
-The fact that profit determines the quality of work allowed leads to a phenomenon called the commercialization of work. Loyalty to a corporation, the, is not required. But even more it is probably misguided. -To think we owe a company or corporation loyalty requires us to think of that company as a person or as a group with a goal of human enrichment |
|
|
Autonomy Justifications for it: |
1) Personal autonomy 2) Confidentiality 3) Incentives to invest 4) National security 5) Property (conventional right) |
|
|
Autonomy Personal |
1) In order to have gained autonomy, a person has to know how to use reason 2) A person has to be genuinely free, neither coerced nor depended, in forming intentions, making decisions, and acting. |
|
|
Autonomy Professional |
Individual, collective. Characterized as means, not as an end, because it is so diverse. Not necessarily elite, but of high hierarchy. |
|
|
Customary and reflective morality (Dewey) |
Customary - from our upbringing, internalized, and mostly subconscious Reflective - when customary fails, we think to make new habits, get our own standards |
|
|
Broad and Narrow senses of morality (Mackie) |
Broad - a source of motivation Narrow - a test of existing motives (we already have) |
|
|
Trade Secrecy Separability of employee skills and employer property claims (Baram 281-282) |
In trade secrecy the problem is between the employer's proprietary claims to information and an employee's right to market their skills. |
|
|
Trade Secrecy Privacy vs. Secrecy (Bok) |
-Privacy keeps something hidden -Secrecy maintains control |
|
|
Intellectual Property (Hettinger) Intellectual objects as nonexclusive |
1) They don't get used up in their use 2) Lots of people can use at once |
|
|
Intellectual Property (Hettinger) Intellectual products as social products |
"Intellectual products result from the labor of may people besides the latest contributor. In other words, it is not clear that the total value of intellectual product is entirely attributable to the labor of an induvial, since intellectual products are fundamentally social products. It is problematic to maintain that a laborer, but virtue of their labor, has a natural right to the market value of an abstract object, since market value is a sociality created phenomenon. " |
|
|
Conflicts of Interest (Davis) |
you can do them all but should you |
|
|
Conflicts of Interest (Davis) vs. conflicting interests |
you can't do them all |
|
|
Conflicts of interest (Davis) Potential, latent, and actual |
1) Potential - you can do the most about it, lots of options 2) Latent - waiting for it to happen 3) Actual - act in face of conflict, least amount of options |
|
|
Egoism both can't be true |
Psychological - we always are motivated only by self-interest and people do them for the sake of self-satisfaction Ethical - we ought to be motivated only by self-interest |
|
|
Relativism - a response to distance and difference The Argument from Disagreement |
1) We have many unresolved moral disagreements 2) If there were objective moral facts that would settle these disagreements, we would have found them by now. 3) There are no objective moral facts. 4) Moral realism is false and moral relativism is true. |
|
|
Relativism Problem 1 |
No compelling reason is given for treating our moral and non-moral disagreements differently. When we have disagreements over non-moral issues, we generally assume that there is a correct answer (even if we are not sure what that answer is). Why not make the same assumption for moral arguments? |
|
|
Relativism Problem 2 |
Our methods for dealing with our moral disagreements are often unlikely to be productive. Therefore, our failure to arrive at moral agreements may result from our faulty methods, rather than from the absence of objective moral facts. |
|
|
Relativism Factual vs. moral disagreement |
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/ |
|
|
Relativism Resisted by Internalization and Universalization |
Aspects of morality which resist relativism |
|
|
Relativism "vulgar" relativism (Williams) |
Standards of morality are all culturally relative, therefore it is WRONG to pass moral judgement upon the practices of other culture. 1) Right (wrong) means right (wrong) for given society 2) Right (wrong) for given society is to be understood in a functionalist sense 3) It is wrong to criticize, judge, condemn, etc., the actions of another society. |
