Download Full Version ebookmass - Visit ebookmass.

com

ISE Ethics in Engineering 5th Edition Mike Martin

Prof.

https://ebookmass.com/product/ise-ethics-in-engineering-5th-
edition-mike-martin-prof/

OR CLICK HERE

DOWLOAD NOW

Discover More Ebook - Explore Now at ebookmass.com

 Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...

ISE Principles of Statistics for Engineers and Scientists

(ISE HED IRWIN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING) 2nd Edition William
Navidi Prof.
https://ebookmass.com/product/ise-principles-of-statistics-for-
engineers-and-scientists-ise-hed-irwin-industrial-engineering-2nd-
edition-william-navidi-prof/
ebookmass.com

ISE MATLAB for Engineering Applications 5th Edition

William Palm

https://ebookmass.com/product/ise-matlab-for-engineering-
applications-5th-edition-william-palm/

ebookmass.com

MATLAB for Engineering Applications, 5e ISE 5th/ISE

Edition William J. Palm Iii

https://ebookmass.com/product/matlab-for-engineering-
applications-5e-ise-5th-ise-edition-william-j-palm-iii/

ebookmass.com

012 - Dein Tod geschehe Roxann Hill

https://ebookmass.com/product/012-dein-tod-geschehe-roxann-hill/

ebookmass.com
Contabilidad Financiera 7th Edition Gerardo Guajardo Cantú

https://ebookmass.com/product/contabilidad-financiera-7th-edition-
gerardo-guajardo-cantu/

ebookmass.com

Gravitational Waves, Volume 2: Astrophysics and Cosmology

Maggiore

https://ebookmass.com/product/gravitational-waves-
volume-2-astrophysics-and-cosmology-maggiore/

ebookmass.com

Al-R■z■ Peter Adamson

https://ebookmass.com/product/al-razi-peter-adamson/

ebookmass.com

Communism and Culture: An Introduction Radu Stern

https://ebookmass.com/product/communism-and-culture-an-introduction-
radu-stern/

ebookmass.com

GaN transistors for efficient power conversion Third

Edition De Rooij

https://ebookmass.com/product/gan-transistors-for-efficient-power-
conversion-third-edition-de-rooij/

ebookmass.com
Nursing Calculations 9th. Edition Gatford

https://ebookmass.com/product/nursing-calculations-9th-edition-
gatford/

ebookmass.com
 Page i

ETHICS IN ENGINEERING
FIFTH EDITION

Qin Zhu
Assistant Professor of Humanities, Arts & Social Sciences

Colorado School of Mines

Mike W. Martin
Professor of Philosophy

Chapman University

Roland Schinzinger
Professor Emeritus of Electrical Engineering

University of California, Irvine

 Page ii

ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

Published by McGraw Hill LLC, 1325 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10121.
Copyright © 2022 by McGraw Hill LLC. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of
America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any
means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written consent of
McGraw Hill LLC, including, but not limited to, in any network or other electronic storage
or transmission, or broadcast for distance learning.

Some ancillaries, including electronic and print components, may not be available to
customers outside the United States.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LCR 24 23 22 21

ISBN 978-1-265-25490-2
MHID 1-265-25490-7

Cover Image: The Art Institute of Chicago, Mr. and Mrs. Martin A. Ryerson Collection

All credits appearing on page or at the end of the book are considered to be an extension of
the copyright page.

The Internet addresses listed in the text were accurate at the time of publication. The
inclusion of a website does not indicate an endorsement by the authors or McGraw Hill
LLC, and McGraw Hill LLC does not guarantee the accuracy of the information presented
at these sites.

mheducation.com/highered
 Page iii

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Qin Zhu is Assistant Professor of Ethics and Engineering Education in the Department of
Humanities, Arts & Social Sciences and an affiliate faculty member in the Department of
Engineering, Design & Society and the Robotics Graduate Program at the Colorado School
of Mines. Dr. Zhu is Editor for International Perspectives at the Online Ethics Center for
Engineering and Science, Associate Editor for Engineering Studies, Program Chair of
American Society for Engineering Education’s Division of Engineering Ethics (2020–2021),
Executive Committee Member of the Society for Ethics Across the Curriculum, and
Treasurer of the Society for Philosophy and Technology. Dr. Zhu’s research interests include
the cultural foundations of engineering ethics, global engineering education, and ethics and
policy of computing technologies and robotics.

Mike W. Martin and Roland Schinzinger participated as a philosopher-engineer team in the

National Project on Philosophy and Engineering Ethics, 1978–1980. Since then they have
coauthored articles, team-taught courses, and given presentations to audiences of engineers
and philosophers. In 1992 they received the Award for Distinguished Literary Contributions
Furthering Engineering Professionalism from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, United States Activities Board.

Mike W. Martin received his B.S. (Phi Beta Kappa, Phi Kappa Phi) and M.A. from the
University of Utah, and his Ph.D. from the University of California, Irvine, and he is
currently professor of philosophy at Chapman University. In addition to publishing many
articles, he is author, coauthor, or editor of eight books, including Meaningful Work:
Rethinking Professional Ethics (2000) and Everyday Morality (3rd ed., 2001). He received the
Arnold L. and Lois S. Graves Award for Teachers in the Humanities and two fellowships
from the National Endowment for the Humanities.

Roland Schinzinger received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Page iv
the University of California at Berkeley. Born and raised in Japan where he had industrial
experience with Bosch-Japan, Tsurumi Shipyard of Nippon Steel Tube Co., and Far Eastern
Equipment Co., he worked in the United States as design/development engineer at
Westinghouse Electric Corp. and taught at the University of Pittsburgh and at Robert
College/Bosporus University (in Istanbul). He was a founding faculty member to the
University of California at Irvine, from which he retired as Professor Emeritus of Electrical
Engineering in 1993. He authored or co-authored Conformal Mapping: Methods and
Applications (1991, 2003), Emergencies in Water Delivery (1979), and Experiments in
Electricity and Magnetism (1961, accompanying a kit he designed for use in Turkey). His
honors include the IEEE Centennial and Third Millennium medals, Fellow of IEEE, and
Fellow of AAAS. He is a registered professional engineer.
 FOR ELLY B. ZHU, FOR LILI GUAN Page v

QIN ZHU

FOR SONIA AND NICOLE MARTIN, FOR

SHANNON SNOW MARTIN, AND IN
MEMORY OF THEODORE R. MARTIN
AND RUTH L. MARTIN.

MIKE W. MARTIN

FOR STEFAN, ANNELISE, AND BARBARA

SCHINZINGER, FOR SHIRLEY BARROWS
PRICE, AND IN MEMORY OF MARY JANE
HARRIS SCHINZINGER

ROLAND SCHINZINGER
 Page ix

BRIEF CONTENTS
Preface xv
Chapter 1 Ethics and Professionalism 1
Chapter 2 Moral Reasoning and Codes of Ethics 34
Chapter 3 Moral Frameworks: A Global Survey 55
Chapter 4 Engineering as Social Experimentation 92
Chapter 5 Safety, Risk, and Design 121
Chapter 6 Workplace Cultures, Responsibilities and Rights 151
Chapter 7 Honesty 196
Chapter 8 Engineering and Environmental Ethics in the Anthropocene 227
Chapter 9 Engineering Ethics in the Global Context 252
Chapter 10 Technology and Engineering Leadership in Future Societies 269
Appendix 292
Index 298

DIGITAL EDITION
 Page vi

CONTENTS

Preface xi

Chapter 1 Ethics and Professionalism 1

1.1 Scope of Engineering Ethics 2
1.1.1 Overview of Themes / 1.1.2 What Is Engineering Ethics? / 1.1.3 Why Study
Engineering Ethics? / Discussion Questions
1.2 Accepting and Sharing Responsibility 12
1.2.1 Saving Citicorp Tower / 1.2.2 Meanings of “Responsibility” / 1.2.3 Dimensions of
Engineering / Discussion Questions
1.3 Responsible Professionals and Ethical Corporations 21
1.3.1 What Are Professions? / 1.3.2 Morally Committed Corporations / 1.3.3 Social
Responsibility Movement / 1.3.4 Senses of Corporate Responsibility / Discussion
Questions
Key Concepts 29
References 30
Page vii

Chapter 2 Moral Reasoning and Codes of Ethics 34

2.1 Resolving Ethical Dilemmas 34
2.1.1 Steps in Resolving Ethical Dilemmas / 2.1.2 Right-Wrong or Better-Worse? /
Discussion Questions
2.2 Making Moral Choices 41
2.2.1 Designing Aluminum Cans / 2.2.2 Design Analogy: Whitbeck / Discussion
Questions
2.3 Codes of Ethics 46
2.3.1 Importance of Codes / 2.3.2 Abuse of Codes / 2.3.3 Limitation of Codes / 2.3.4
Ethical Relativism and Justification of Codes / Discussion Questions
 Key Concepts 53
References 53

Chapter 3 Moral Frameworks: A Global Survey 55

3.1 Utilitarianism 56
3.1.1 Utilitarianism versus Cost-Benefit Analysis / 3.1.2 Act-Utilitarianism versus Rule-
Utilitarianism / 3.1.3 Theories of Good / Discussion Questions
3.2 Rights Ethics and Duty Ethics 61
3.2.1 Human Rights / 3.2.2 Varieties of Rights Ethics / 3.2.3 Duty Ethics / 3.2.4 Prima
Facie Duties / Discussion Questions
3.3 Virtue Ethics 68
3.3.1 Virtues in Engineering / 3.3.2 Florman: Competence and Conscientiousness /
3.3.3 Aristotle: Community and the Golden Mean / 3.3.4 Confucian Role Ethics /
Discussion Questions
3.4 Self-Realization and Self-Interest 76
3.4.1 Ethical Egoism / 3.4.2 Motives of Engineers / 3.4.3 Self-Realization, Personal
Commitments, and Communities / 3.4.4 Religious Commitments / 3.4.5 Which Ethical
Theory Is Best? / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 87
References 88

Chapter 4 Engineering as Social Experimentation

92
4.1 Engineering as Experimentation 93
4.1.1 Similarities to Standard Experiments / 4.1.2 Learning from the Past / 4.1.3
Contrasts with Standard Experiments / Discussion Questions
4.2 Engineers as Responsible Experimenters 99
4.2.1 Conscientiousness / 4.2.2 Comprehensive Perspective / 4.2.3 Moral Autonomy /
4.2.4 Accountability / 4.2.5 A Balanced Outlook on Law / 4.2.6 Industrial Standards /
Discussion Questions
Page viii
4.3 Challenger 110
4.3.1 Safety Issues / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 119
References 119

Chapter 5 Safety, Risk, and Design 121

5.1 Safety and Risk 122
5.1.1 The Concept of Safety / 5.1.2 Risks / 5.1.3 Acceptability of Risk / Discussion
Questions
5.2 Assessing and Reducing Risk 129
5.2.1 Uncertainties in Design / 5.2.2 Risk-Benefit Analyses / 5.2.3 Personal Risk / 5.2.4
Public Risk and Public Acceptance / 5.2.5 Examples of Improved Safety / Discussion
Questions
5.3 Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Safe Exits 139
5.3.1 Three Mile Island / 5.3.2 Chernobyl / 5.3.3 Safe Exits / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 148
References 148

Chapter 6 Workplace Cultures, Responsibilities and

Rights 151
6.1 Teamwork 152
6.1.1 An Ethical Corporate Climate / 6.1.2 Loyalty and Collegiality / 6.1.3 Managers and
Engineers / 6.1.4 Managing Conflict / Discussion Questions
6.2 Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest 160
6.2.1 Confidentiality: Definition / 6.2.2 Confidentiality and Changing Jobs / 6.2.3
Confidentiality and Management Policies / 6.2.4 Confidentiality: Justification /
6.2.5 Conflicts of Interest: Definition and Examples / 6.2.6 Moral Status of Conflicts of
Interest / Discussion Questions
6.3 Rights of Engineers 169
6.3.1 Professional Rights / 6.3.2 Employee Rights / Discussion Questions
6.4 Whistleblowing 178
 6.4.1 Whistleblowing: Definition / 6.4.2 Two Cases / 6.4.3 Moral Guidelines / 6.4.4
Protecting Whistleblowers / 6.4.5 Commonsense Procedures / 6.4.6 Beyond
Whistleblowing / Discussion Questions
Page ix

6.5 The BART Case 186

6.5.1 Background / 6.5.2 Responsibility and Experimentation / 6.5.3 Controversy / 6.5.4
Aftermath / 6.5.5 Comments / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 191
References 192

Chapter 7 Honesty 196

7.1 Truthfulness and Trustworthiness 197
7.1.1 Truthfulness / 7.1.2 Trustworthiness / 7.1.3 Academic Integrity / Discussion
Questions
7.2 Research Integrity 202
7.2.1 Excellence versus Misconduct / 7.2.2 Bias and Self-Deception / 7.2.3 Protecting
Research Subjects / 7.2.4 Giving and Claiming Credit / 7.2.5 Reporting Misconduct /
Discussion Questions
7.3 Consulting Engineers 211
7.3.1 Advertising / 7.3.2 Competitive Bidding / 7.3.3 Contingency Fees / 7.3.4 Safety and
Client Needs / Discussion Questions
7.4 Expert Witnesses and Advisers 216
7.4.1 Expert Witnesses in the Courts / 7.4.2 Abuses / 7.4.3 Advisers in Planning and
Policy-Making / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 223
References 224

Chapter 8 Engineering and Environmental Ethics in the

Anthropocene 227
8.1 Engineering, Ecology, and Economics 228
8.1.1 The Invisible Hand and the Commons / 8.1.2 Engineers: From Sustainable
Development to Geoengineering / 8.1.3 Corporations: Environmental Leadership /
 8.1.4 Government: Technology Assessment / 8.1.5 Communities: Preventing Natural
Disasters / 8.1.6 Market Mechanisms: Internalizing Costs / 8.1.7 Social Activists /
Discussion Questions
8.2 Ethical Frameworks 241
8.2.1 Human-Centered Ethics / 8.2.2 Sentient-Centered Ethics / 8.2.3 Biocentric Ethics /
8.2.4 Ecocentric Ethics / 8.2.5 Religious Perspectives / 8.2.6 Environmental Ethics and
the Anthropocene / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 249
References 249
Page x

Chapter 9 Engineering Ethics in the Global Context

252
9.1 Global Ethical Codes 254
9.2 Functionalist Theory 256
9.3 Cultural Studies 258
9.4 Global Ethics and Justice 261
9.5 Cultivating Globally Competent Engineers 262
Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 266
References 267

Chapter 10 Technology and Engineering Leadership in

Future Societies 269
10.1 Cautious Optimism 270
10.1.1 Optimism, Pessimism, Realism / 10.1.2 Technology: Value-Neutral or Value-Laden?
/ 10.1.3 The Co-shaping of Technology and Society / 10.1.4 Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and
Social Experimentation / Discussion Questions
10.2 Moral Leadership 281
10.2.1 Morally Creative Leaders / 10.2.2 Participation in Professional Societies / 10.2.3
Leadership in Communities / 10.2.4 Ideals of Voluntary Service / Discussion Questions
Key Concepts 289
References 289
Appendix

A General Resources on Engineering Ethics 292

B Sample Codes of Ethics and Guidelines 297

Index 298
 Page xi

PREFACE

Technology has a pervasive and profound effect on the contemporary world, and engineers
play a central role in all aspects of technological development. In order to hold paramount
the safety, health, and welfare of the public, engineers must be morally committed and
equipped to grapple with ethical dilemmas they confront.

Ethics in Engineering provides an introduction to the issues in engineering ethics. It places

those issues within a philosophical framework, and it seeks to exhibit their social
importance and intellectual challenge. The goal is to stimulate reasoning and to provide the
conceptual tools necessary for responsible decision making.

In large measure we proceed by clarifying key concepts, sketching alternative views, and
providing relevant case study material. Yet in places we argue for particular positions that in
a subject like ethics can only be controversial. We do so because it better serves our goal of
encouraging responsible reasoning than would a mere digest of others’ views. We are
confident that such reasoning is possible in ethics, and that, through engaged and tolerant
dialogue, progress can be made in dealing with what at first seem irresolvable difficulties.

Sufficient material is provided for courses devoted to engineering ethics. Chapters of the
book can also be used in modules within courses on engineering design, engineering law,
engineering and society, safety, technology assessment, professional ethics, business
management, and values and technology.

FIFTH EDITION
All chapters and appendixes in this edition have been updated with the most recent data,
research findings, and teaching resources. Chapters 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 10 are either new or
extensively reorganized and developed. This edition has extensively expanded the
discussions on corporate social responsibility, research ethics in less traditional contexts
(e.g., children, animals, cross-cultural, and online), environmental ethics in the
Anthropocene, duty ethics, design ethics, life-cycle assessment, and the philosophy of
technology. Particularly, one major strength added to this edition is the global and
international dimension. Chapter 3 added one section on Confucian role ethics, which has
not been well discussed in any other engineering ethics textbooks. Chapter 9 is completely
new and it has incorporated a comprehensive review of four existing approaches to
engineering ethics in the global context. Most recent studies in artificial intelligence and
robotics have been added to Chapter 10. The pedagogical resources in Appendix A have
been fully updated to 2021. Qin Zhu worked on revising this edition, with general approval
from Mike W. Martin.
 Page xii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Since the first edition of Ethics in Engineering appeared in 1983, many students, professors,
and reviewers have provided helpful feedback or in other ways influenced our thinking. We
wish to thank especially Robert J. Baum, Michael Davis, Dave Dorchester, Walter Elden,
Charles B. Fleddermann, Albert Flores, Alastair S. Gunn, Charles E. (Ed) Harris, Joseph R.
Herkert, Deborah G. Johnson, Ron Kline, Edwin T. Layton, Jerome Lederer, Heinz C.
Luegenbiehl, Mark Maier, Nicole Marie Martin, Sonia Renée Martin, Carl Mitcham, Steve
Nichols, Michael J. Rabins, Jimmy Smith, Michael S. Pritchard, Harold Sjursen, Carl M.
Skooglund, John Stupar, Stephen H. Unger, Pennington Vann, P. Aarne Vesilind, Vivien
Weil, Caroline Whitbeck, and Joseph Wujek.

And we thank the many authors and publishers who granted us permission to use
copyrighted material as acknowledged in the notes, and also the professional societies who
allowed us to print their codes of ethics in Appendix B.

Mike and Roland’s deepest gratitude is to Shannon Snow Martin and to Shirley Barrows
Price, whose love and insights have so deeply enriched our work and our lives. Qin’s greatest
gratitude is to Elly and Lili who have been unconditionally supportive while Qin was
working on revising this edition. Qin also appreciates the longtime mentorship and
encouragement from Carl Mitcham.

Qin Zhu
Mike W. Martin
Roland Schinzinger
 Page 1
CHAPTER 1
ETHICS AND PROFESSIONALISM
Engineers create products and processes to improve food production, shelter, energy,
communication, transportation, health, and protection against natural calamities—and to
enhance the convenience and beauty of our everyday lives. They make possible spectacular
human triumphs once only dreamed of in myth and science fiction. Almost a century and a
half ago in From the Earth to the Moon, Jules Verne imagined American space travelers being
launched from Florida, circling the moon, and returning to splash down in the Pacific
Ocean. In December 1968, three astronauts aboard an Apollo spacecraft did exactly that.
Seven months later, on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong took the first human steps on the
moon. This extraordinary event was shared with millions of earthbound people watching the
live broadcast on television. Engineering had transformed our sense of connection with the
cosmos and even fostered dreams of routine space travel for ordinary citizens.

Most technology, however, has double implications: As it creates benefits it raises new moral
challenges. Just as exploration of the moon and planets stand as engineering triumphs, so
the crashes of two new Boeing 737 Max series aircrafts (Lion Air Flight 610 in 2018 and
Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in 2019) were tragedies that could have been prevented, had
urgent warnings voiced by experienced engineers been heeded. We will examine these and
other cases of human error, for in considering ethics and engineering alike we can learn from
seeing how things go wrong. Technological risks, however, should not overshadow
technological benefits, and ethics involves appreciating the many positive dimensions of
engineering that so deeply enrich our lives.

This chapter introduces central themes, defines engineering ethics, and states the Page 2

goals in studying it. Next, the importance of accepting and sharing moral responsibility is
underscored. Finally, we attend to the corporate setting in which today most engineering
takes place and the communal setting in which an increasing number of engineers are
working, emphasizing the need for reflecting on the broader social and ethical implications
of engineering work.
1.1 SCOPE OF ENGINEERING ETHICS
1.1.1 Overview of Themes
In this book we explore a wide variety of topics and issues, but seven themes recur. Taken
together, the themes constitute a normative (value) perspective on engineering and on
engineering ethics.
1. Engineering projects are social experiments that generate both new possibilities and
risks, and engineers share responsibility for creating benefits, preventing harm, and
pointing out dangers.
2. Moral values permeate all aspects of technological development, and hence ethics and
excellence in engineering go together.
3. Personal meaning and commitments matter in engineering ethics, along with principles
of responsibility that are stated in codes of ethics and are incumbent on all engineers.
4. Promoting responsible conduct and advocating good works is even more important than
punishing wrongdoing.
5. Ethical dilemmas arise in engineering, as elsewhere, because moral values are myriad and
can conflict.
6. Engineering ethics should explore both micro and macro issues, which are often
connected and more ethical issues are arising from the global context of engineering.
7. Technological development especially in the age of artificial intelligence warrants
cautious optimism—optimism, with caution.

Let us briefly introduce and illustrate each of these themes.

(1) ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL

EXPERIMENTATION
When the space shuttle Columbia exploded on February 1, 2003, killing the seven astronauts
on board, some people feared the cause was a terrorist attack, given the post–September 11
concerns about terrorism. The working hypothesis quickly emerged, however, that the cause
was a piece of insulating foam from the external fuel tank that struck the left wing 82
seconds after launch. The panels on the leading edge of the wing were composed of
reinforced carbon carbon, a remarkable material that protected it from 3000-degree
temperatures caused by air friction upon reentry from space into the earth’s atmosphere.
Even a small gap allowed superheated gases to enter the wing, melt the wiring, and spray
molten metal throughout the wing structure.

Investigators stated they were interested in far more than pinpointing the immediate Page 3
cause of the disaster.1 Several previous incidents involved insulating material breaking off
from the fuel tank. Why were these occurrences not scrutinized more carefully? And why
were so many additional hazards emerging, such as faulty “bolt catchers,” which were
chambers designed to capture bolts attaching the solid rocket boosters to the external fuel
tank after their detonated-release? Had the safety culture at NASA eroded, contrary to
assumptions that it had improved since the 1986 Challenger disaster, such that the
independent judgment of engineers was not being heeded? Even during Columbia’s last trip,
when crumbling shielding hit fragile tiles covering the craft’s wings, some knowledgeable
engineers were rebuffed when they requested that the impacts be simulated and observed
without delay. Had the necessary time, money, personnel, and procedures for ensuring safety
been shortchanged?

Very often technological development is double-edged, Janus-faced, morally ambiguous: As

engineering projects create new possibilities they also generate new dangers. To emphasize
the benefit-risk aspects in engineering, in chapter 4 we introduce a model of engineering
as social experiments—experiments on a societal scale. This model underscores the need for
engineers to accept and share responsibility for their work, exercise due care, imaginatively
foresee hazards, conscientiously monitor their projects when possible, and alert others of
dangers to permit them to give informed consent to risks. In highlighting risk, the model
also accents the good made possible through engineering discoveries and achievements.
And it underscores the need for preventive ethics: ethical reflection and action aimed at
preventing moral harm and avoidable ethical dilemmas.

(2) ETHICS AND EXCELLENCE: MORAL VALUES

ARE EMBEDDED IN ENGINEERING
Moral values are embedded in even the simplest engineering projects, not “tacked on” as
external burdens. Consider the following assignment given to students in a freshman course
at Harvey Mudd College:
 Design a chicken coop that would increase egg and chicken production, using materials that
were readily available and maintainable by local workers [at a Mayan cooperative in
Guatemala]. The end users were to be the women of a weaving cooperative who wanted to
increase the protein in their children’s diet in ways that are consistent with their traditional diet,
while not appreciably distracting from their weaving.2

The task proved more complex than it at first appeared. The students had to identify Page 4
plausible building materials, decide between cages or one open area, and design structures
for strength and endurance. They had to create safe access for the villagers, including ample
head and shoulder room at entrances and a safe floor for bare feet. They had to ensure
humane conditions for the chickens, including adequate space and ventilation, comfort
during climate changes, convenient delivery of food and water, and protection from local
predators that could dig under fences. They also had to improve cleaning procedures to
minimize damage to the environment while recycling chicken droppings as fertilizers. The
primary goal, however, was to double current chicken and egg production. A number of
design concepts were explored before a variation of a fenced-in concept proved preferable to
a set of cages. In 1997 four students and their advisor, supported by a humanitarian aid
group named Xela-Aid, traveled to San Martin Chiquito, Guatemala, and worked with
villagers in building the chicken coop and additional structures such as a weaving building.

Moral values are embedded at several junctures in engineering projects, including: the basic
standards of safety and efficiency, the social, cultural, and environmental contexts of the
community, the character of engineers who spearhead technological progress, and the very
idea of engineering as a profession that combines advanced skill with commitment to the
public good. In engineering, as in other professions, excellence and ethics go together—for
the most part and in the long run. In general, ethics involves much more than problems and
punishment, duties and dilemmas.3 Ethics involves the full range of moral values to which
we aspire in guiding our endeavors and in structuring our relationships and communities.
This emphasis on moral aspiration was identified by the ancient Greeks, whose word arete
translates into English as either “excellence” or as “virtue.”

(3) PERSONAL COMMITMENT AND MEANING

A team of engineers are redesigning an artificial lung marketed by their company. They are
working in a highly competitive market, with long hours and high stress. The engineers have
little or no contact with the firm’s customers, and they are focused on technical problems,
not people. It occurs to the project engineer to invite recipients of artificial lungs and their
families to the plant to talk about how their lives were affected by the artificial lung. The
change is immediate and striking: “When families began to bring in their children who for
the first time could breathe freely, relax, learn, and enjoy life because of the firm’s product, it
came as a revelation. The workers were energized by concrete evidence that their efforts
really did improve people’s lives, and the morale of the workplace was given a great lift.”4

Engineers’ motives and commitments are as many and varied as those of all human Page 5
beings. The desire for meaningful work, concern to make a living, care for other human
beings, and the need to maintain self-respect all combine to motivate excellence in
engineering. For the most part, they are mutually reinforcing in advancing a sense of
personal responsibility for one’s work. As we emphasize repeatedly, engineering is about
people as well as products, and the people include engineers who stand in moral (as well as
monetary) relationships with customers, colleagues, employers, and the general public.

All engineers are required to meet the responsibilities stated in their code of ethics. These
requirements set a minimum, albeit a high standard of excellence. The personal
commitments of individual engineers need to be aimed at and integrated with these shared
responsibilities. Yet some responsibilities and sources of meaning are highly personal, and
cannot be incumbent on every engineer. They include commitments concerning religion, the
environment, military work, family, and personal ambitions. When we speak of “personal
commitments” we have in mind both commitments to shared responsibilities and to these
more individual commitments as they affect professional endeavors.

Engineers’ motives and commitments are critical for them to actually devote themselves to
ethical actions. Based on the findings in moral psychology, it is very likely that an engineer
knows what the right action is but feels hesitant to do it as the engineer lacks motivation.5
Engineering ethics education programs in the United States tend to teach students to
separate their personal commitments and meaning from professional ideals. Arguably, the
traditional approach to engineering ethics education often assumes that engineers are
isolated, rational, and autonomous human beings and engineering as a profession needs to
be depersonalized.6 Therefore, personal traits such as emotion, virtues, and commitments
are sometimes invisible in engineering education or are considered irrelevant.7 Philosopher
Michael Davis argues that emotion is quite normal and sometimes can be justified and
necessary in the everyday practice of engineers. For instance, an engineer can feel angry
when their company generates chemical pollutants to the community and the company
leadership has kept overlooking this engineer’s remonstration. The emotional state of this
engineer in fact well demonstrates their commitment to the safety, health, and welfare of the
public.
(4) PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT,
PREVENTING WRONGDOING, AND
ADVOCATING GOOD WORKS
Beginning in 2001, a wave of corporate scandals shook Americans’ confidence in
corporations.* In that year, Enron became the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, erasing
about $60 billion in shareholder value.8 The following year the scandal-ridden WorldCom
bankruptcy set another new record. Arthur Andersen, a large and respected accounting firm
charged with checking the books of Enron and other corporations, was charged with
complicity and was forced to dissolve. We return to these events later in this chapter.

Compliance issues are about making sure that individuals comply to professional standards
and avoid wrongdoing. Procedures are needed in all corporations to deter fraud, theft,
bribery, incompetence, and a host of other forms of outright immorality. Equally essential
are reasonable laws and government regulation, including penalties for reckless and
negligent conduct. We should examine the pressures that sometimes lead engineers to
cooperate in wrongdoing, rather than reporting wrongdoing to proper authorities.9

Having said this, an important part of engineering ethics is preventing wrongdoing in Page 6
the first place. There is a need for what we have referred to as “preventive ethics”: ethical
reflection and action aimed at preventing moral harm and unnecessary ethical problems.
The main emphasis in ethics should be supporting responsible conduct. In fact, the vast
majority of engineers are morally committed. So too are most corporations. Reinforcing the
connection between ethics and excellence, individuals and corporations should primarily be
“value-driven,” rather than simply preoccupied with “compliance-based” procedures, to
invoke terms used in management theory. More recently, Charles Harris and his colleagues
have suggested that engineering ethics education needs to pay closer attention to the more
positive aspects or the “aspirational ethics” of engineering.10 Most articles in engineering
codes of ethics often focus on preventative ethics and they do not provide much clear
guidance on how engineering work can promote human well-being. Practicing aspirational
ethics often requires engineers to go beyond what is obligatory for them. Nevertheless, we
argue that advocating aspirational ethics is beneficial for building positive public images of
engineering, cultivating ethical culture of the engineering profession, enhancing the mutual
trust between engineers and the public, and generating positive impacts of technological
change.
(5) MYRIAD MORAL REASONS GENERATE
ETHICAL DILEMMAS
A chemical engineer working in the environmental division of a computer manufacturing
firm learns that their company might be discharging unlawful amounts of lead and arsenic
into the city sewer.11 The city processes the sludge into a fertilizer used by local farmers. To
ensure safety, it imposes restrictive laws on the discharge of lead and arsenic. Preliminary
investigations convince the engineer that the company should implement stronger pollution
controls, but their manager insists the cost of doing so is prohibitive and that technically the
company is in compliance with the law. The engineer is responsible for doing what promotes
the success of their company, but they also have responsibilities to the local community that
might be harmed by the effluent. In addition, they have responsibilities to their family, and
rights to pursue their career. What should they do?

Ethical dilemmas, or moral dilemmas, are situations in which moral reasons come into
conflict, or in which the applications of moral values are problematic, and it is not
immediately obvious what should be done. The moral reasons might be obligations, rights,
goods, ideals, or other moral considerations. In engineering as elsewhere, moral values are
myriad and they can come into conflict, requiring good judgment about how to reconcile
and integrate them. Beginning in chapter 2 we discuss resources for understanding and
resolving ethical dilemmas, including codes of ethics and ethical theories. We emphasize
that ethical dilemmas need not be a sign that something has gone wrong; instead, they
indicate the presence of moral complexity. That complexity would exist even if we could
eliminate all preventable problems, such as the corporate scandals.

(6) MICRO AND MACRO ISSUES

Micro issues consider individuals and internal relations of the engineering profession. Macro
issues concern much broader issues, such as the directions in technological development,
the laws that should or should not be passed, and the collective responsibilities of groups
such as engineering professional societies and consumer groups.12 Both micro and macro
issues are important in engineering ethics, and often they are interwoven.13

As an illustration, consider debates about sport utility vehicles (SUVs). Micro issues Page 7
arose, for example, concerning the Ford Explorer and also Bridgestone/Firestone, who
provided tires for the Explorer. During the late 1990s, reports began to multiply about the
tread on Explorer tires separating from the rest of the tire, leading to blowouts and rollovers.
By 2002, estimates were that 300 people had died and another thousand were injured and
more recent estimates place the numbers much higher since then.14 Ford and
Bridgestone/Firestone blamed each other for the problem, leading to the breakup of a
century-old business partnership. As it turned out, the hazard had multiple sources.
Bridgestone/Firestone used a flawed tire design and poor quality control at a major
manufacturing facility. Ford chose tires with a poor safety margin, relied on drivers to
maintain proper inflation within a very narrow range, and then dragged its feet in admitting
the problem and recalling dangerous tires.

In contrast, macro issues center on charges that SUVs are among the most harmful vehicles
on the road, even the most harmful, given their numbers. The problems are many: instability
because of their height that leads to rollovers, far greater “kill rate” of other drivers during
accidents, reducing the vision of drivers in shorter cars behind them on freeways, blinding
other drivers’ vision because of high-set lights, gas-guzzling, and excessively polluting. Keith
Bradsher estimates that SUVs are causing about 3,000 deaths in excess of what cars would
have caused: “Roughly 1,000 extra deaths occur each year in SUVs that roll over, compared
to the expected rollover death rate if these motorists had been driving cars. About 1,000
more people die each year in cars hit by SUVs than would occur if the cars had been hit by
other cars. And up to 1,000 additional people succumb each year to respiratory problems
because of the extra smog caused by SUVs.”15 Bradsher believes these numbers will
continue to increase as more SUVs are added to the road each year and as older vehicles are
resold to younger and more dangerous drivers.

Should “the SUV issue” be examined within engineering as a whole, or at least by

representative professional and technical societies? If so, what should be done? Or, in a
democratic and capitalistic society, should engineers play a role only as individuals, but not
as organized groups? Should engineers remain uninvolved, leaving the issue entirely to
consumer groups and lawmakers? Even larger macro issues surround public transportation
issues, in relation to all automobiles and SUVs, as we look to the future with a dramatically
increasing population and a shrinking of our traditional resources.

(7) CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM ABOUT TECHNOLOGY

The most general macro issues pertain to technology in its entirety, including its Page 8

overall promise and perils, an issue taken up in chapter 10. Pessimists view advanced
technology as ominous and often out of our control. They point to pollution, depletion of
natural resources, fears of biological and chemical weapons, and the lingering threat of
robotics taking human jobs. Optimists highlight how technology profoundly improves all our
lives. Each of us benefits in some ways from the top 20 engineering achievements of the
twentieth century, as identified by the National Academy of Engineering: electrification,
automobiles, airplanes, water supply and distribution, electronics, radio and television,
agricultural mechanization, computers, telephones, air-conditioning and refrigeration,
highways, spacecrafts, Internet, imaging technologies in medicine and elsewhere, household
appliances, health technologies, petrochemical technologies, laser and fiber optics, nuclear
technologies, and high-performance materials.16

As authors, we are cautiously optimistic about technology. Nothing is more central to

human progress than sound technology, and no aspect of creative human achievement is less
appreciated by the public than engineers’ ingenuity. At the same time, consistent with the
social experimentation model, the exuberant confidence and hope—so essential to
technological progress—needs to be accompanied by sober realism about dangers.

Such a cautiously optimistic attitude is even more critical in the age of AI. Given the huge
potential of AI-enabled technologies in improving human well-being and production
efficiency, it is unlikely that humans will completely terminate or abandon the development
of these technologies. As philosopher Peter-Paul Verbeek has suggested, we as humans need
to learn how to morally accompany technology. We are required to thoroughly engage with
designers and engineers and “look for points of application for moral reflection and
anticipate the social impact of technology-in-design.”17

1.1.2 What Is Engineering Ethics?

With this overview of themes and sampling of issues in mind, we can now define
engineering ethics. The word ethics has several meanings. In the sense used in the title of
this book, ethics is synonymous with morality. It refers to moral values that are sound,
actions that are morally required (right) or morally permissible (all right), policies and laws
that are desirable. Accordingly, engineering ethics consists of the responsibilities and rights that
ought to be endorsed by those engaged in engineering, and also of desirable ideals and personal
commitments in engineering.

In a second sense, ethics is the study of morality; it is an inquiry into ethics in the first
sense. It studies which actions, goals, principles, policies, and laws are morally justified.
Using this meaning, which also names the field of study of this book, engineering ethics is the
study of the decisions, policies, and values that are morally desirable in engineering practice and
research.

These two senses are normative: They refer to justified values and choices, to things that are
desirable (not merely desired). Normative senses differ from descriptive senses of ethics. In
one descriptive sense, we speak of Henry Ford’s ethics or the ethics of American engineers,
referring thereby to what specific individuals or groups believe and how they act, without
implying that their beliefs and actions are justified. In another descriptive sense, social
scientists study ethics when they describe and explain what people believe and how they act;
they conduct opinion polls, observe behavior, examine documents written by professional
societies, and uncover the social forces shaping engineering ethics.

As it turns out, morality is not easy to define. Of course, we can all give examples of Page 9
moral values, but the moment we try to provide a comprehensive definition of morality we
are drawn into at least rudimentary ethical theory—a normative theory about morality. For
example, if we say that morality consists in promoting the most good, we are invoking an
ethical theory called utilitarianism. If we say that morality is about human rights, we invoke
rights ethics. And if we say that morality is essentially about good character, we might be
invoking virtue ethics.

These and other ethical theories are discussed in chapter 3. For now, let us simply say
that morality concerns respect for persons, both others and ourselves. It involves being fair
and just, meeting obligations and respecting rights, and not causing unnecessary harm by
dishonesty and cruelty or by hubris. In addition, it involves ideals of character, such as
integrity, gratitude, and willingness to help people in severe distress.18 And it implies
minimizing suffering to animals and damage to the environment.

1.1.3 Why Study Engineering Ethics?

Engineering ethics should be studied because it is important, both in contributing to safe and
useful technological products and in giving meaning to engineers’ endeavors. It is also
complex, in ways that call for serious reflection throughout a career, beginning with earning a
degree. But beyond these general observations, what specific aims should guide the study of
engineering ethics?

In our view, the direct aim is to increase one’s ability to deal effectively with moral
complexity in engineering. Accordingly, the study of engineering ethics strengthens one’s
ability to reason clearly and carefully about moral questions. To invoke a term widely used in
ethics, the unifying goal is to increase moral autonomy.

Autonomy means “self-determining” or “independent.” But not just any kind of independent
reflection about ethics amounts to moral autonomy. Moral autonomy can be viewed as the
skill and habit of thinking rationally about ethical issues on the basis of moral concern. This
foundation of moral concern, or general responsiveness to moral values, derives primarily
from the training we receive as children in being sensitive to the needs and rights of others,
as well as of ourselves. When such training is absent, as it often is with seriously abused
children, the tragic result can be an adult sociopath who lacks any sense of moral right and
wrong.19 Sociopaths (or psychopaths) are not morally autonomous, regardless of how
“independent” their intellectual reasoning about ethics might be.

Improving the ability to reflect carefully on moral issues can be accomplished by Page 10

improving various practical skills that will help produce autonomous thought about moral
issues. As related to engineering ethics, these skills include the following:
1. Moral awareness: Proficiency in recognizing moral problems and issues in engineering.
2. Cogent moral reasoning: Comprehending, clarifying, and assessing arguments on
opposing sides of moral issues.
3. Moral coherence: Forming consistent and comprehensive viewpoints based upon a
consideration of relevant facts.
4. Moral imagination: Discerning alternative responses to moral issues and receptivity to
creative solutions for practical difficulties.
5. Moral communication: Precision in the use of a common ethical language, a skill needed
to express and support one’s moral views adequately to others.

These are the direct goals in college courses. They center on cognitive skills—skills of the
intellect in thinking clearly and cogently. But it is possible to have these skills and yet not act
in morally responsible ways. Should we therefore add to our list of goals the following goals
that specify aspects of moral commitment and responsible conduct?
6. Moral reasonableness: The willingness and ability to be morally reasonable.
7. Respect for persons: Genuine concern for the well-being of others as well as oneself.
8. Tolerance of diversity: Within a broad range, respect for ethnic and religious differences,
and acceptance of reasonable differences in moral perspectives.
 9. Moral hope: Enriched appreciation of the possibilities of using rational dialogue in
resolving moral conflicts.
10. Integrity: Maintaining moral integrity, and integrating one’s professional life and
personal convictions.
11. Moral emotions: Social emotions (feelings or intuitions) that “are linked to the interests
or welfare either of society as a whole or at least of persons other than the judge or
agent.”20

In our view we should add these goals to the study of engineering ethics, for there would be
little moral point to studying ethics without the expectation that doing so contributes to the
goals. At the same time, these goals are often best pursued implicitly and indirectly, more in
how material is studied and taught than in preaching and testing. A foundation of moral
concern must be presupposed, as well as evoked and expanded, in studying ethics at the
college level.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. Identify the moral values, issues, and dilemmas, if any, involved in the following cases,
and explain why you consider them moral values and dilemmas. Page 11
a. An engineer notified his firm that for a relatively minor cost, a flashlight
could be made to last several years longer by using a more reliable bulb. The firm
decides that it would be in its interests not to use the new bulb, both to keep costs
lower and to have the added advantage of “built-in obsolescence” so that consumers
would need to purchase new flashlights more often.
b. A linear electron accelerator for therapeutic use was built as a dual-mode system that
could either produce X-rays or electron beams. It had been in successful use for some
time, but every now and then some patients received high overdoses, resulting in
painful aftereffects and several deaths. One patient on a repeat visit experienced great
pain, but the remotely located operator was unaware of any problem because of lack
of communication between them: the intercom was broken and the video monitor had
been unplugged. There also was no way for the patient to exit the examination
chamber without help from the outside, and hence the hospital was partly at fault.
Upon cursory examination of the machine, the manufacturer insisted that the
computerized and automatic control system could not possibly have malfunctioned
and that no one should spread unproven and potentially libelous information about
 the design. It was the painstaking, day-and-night effort of the hospital’s physicist that
finally traced the problem to a software error introduced by the manufacturer’s efforts
to make the machine more user-friendly.21
2. Regarding the artificial lung example, comment on why you think simple human contact
made such a large difference. What does it say about what motivated the engineers, both
before and after the encounter? Is the case too unique to permit generalizations to other
engineering products?
3. Should SUV problems at the macro level be of concern to engineers as a group and their
professional societies? And should individual automotive engineers, in their daily work,
be concerned about the general social and environmental impacts of SUVs?
4. It is not easy to define morality in a simple way, but it does not follow that morality is
a hopelessly vague notion. For a long time, philosophers thought that an adequate
definition of any idea would specify a set of logically necessary and sufficient conditions
for applying the idea. For example, each of the following features is logically necessary
for a triangle, and together they are sufficient: a plane figure, having three straight lines,
closed to form three angles. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951),
however, argued that most ordinary (nontechnical) ideas cannot be neatly defined in this
way. Instead, there are often only “family resemblances” among the things to which
words are applied, analogous to the partly overlapping similarities among members of a
family—similar eye color, shape of nose, body build, temperament, and so forth.22 Thus,
a book might be hardback, paperback, or electronic; printed or handwritten; in English
or German; etc. Can you specify necessary and sufficient conditions for the following
ideas: chairs, buildings, energy, safety, morality?
5. Unfortunately, the mention of ethics sometimes evokes groans, rather than engagement,
because it brings to mind onerous constraints and unpleasant disagreements. Worse, it
evokes images of self-righteousness, hypocrisy, and excessively punitive attitudes of blame
and punishment—attitudes that are themselves subject to moral critique. Think of a
recent event that led to a public outcry. With regard to the event, discuss the difference
between being morally reasonable and being “moralistic” in a pejorative sense. In doing
so, consider such things as breadth of vision, tolerance, sensitivity to context, and
commitment.
 Page 12

1.2 ACCEPTING AND SHARING

RESPONSIBILITY
Before he became president of the United States, Herbert Hoover was a mining engineer. In
his memoirs he reflects on engineering in general:
It is a great profession. There is the fascination of watching a figment of the imagination emerge
through the aid of science to a plan on paper. Then it moves to realization in stone or metal or
energy. Then it brings jobs and homes to men. Then it elevates the standards of living and adds
to the comforts of life. That is the engineer’s high privilege.
The great liability of the engineer compared to men of other professions is that his works are out
in the open where all can see them. His acts, step by step, are in hard substance. He cannot bury
his mistakes in the grave like the doctors. He cannot argue them into thin air or blame the judge
like the lawyers. He cannot, like the architects, cover his failures with trees and vines. He cannot,
like the politicians, screen his shortcomings by blaming his opponents and hope that the people
will forget. The engineer simply cannot deny that he did it. If his works do not work, he is
damned.23

Hoover is reflecting on an era when engineering was dominated, at least in outlook, by the
independent consultant, rather than by the corporate engineer. In his day, it was easier for
individual engineers to work with a sense of personal responsibility for an entire project.
When a bridge fell or a ship sank, the engineers responsible could be more easily identified.
This made it easier to endorse Hoover’s vision of individualism in regard both to creativity
and personal accountability within engineering.

Today, the products of engineering are “out in the open” as much as they were in Hoover’s
time. In fact, mass communication ensures that major mistakes receive even closer public
scrutiny. And there are more engineers than ever. Yet despite their greater numbers,
engineers of today are less visible to the public than were those of Hoover’s era.
Technological progress is taken for granted as being the norm, and technological failure is
blamed on corporations, if not government. And in the public’s eye, the representative of
any corporation is its top manager, who is often far removed from the daily creative
endeavors of the company’s engineers. This “invisibility” can make it difficult for engineers
to retain a sense of mutual understanding with and accountability to the public.
Nevertheless, individuals who accept responsibility for their work can make an enormous
difference, as the following case illustrates.

1.2.1 Saving Citicorp Tower

Structural engineer Bill LeMessurier (pronounced “LeMeasure”) and architect Hugh
Stubbins faced a challenge when they worked on the plans for New York’s fifth highest
skyscraper. St. Peter’s Lutheran Church owned and occupied a corner of the lot designated
in its entirety as the site for the new structure. An agreement was reached: The bank tower
would rise from nine-story-high stilts positioned at the center of each side of the tower, and
the church would be offered a brand new St. Peter’s standing freely underneath one of the
cantilevered corners. Completed in 1977, the Citicorp Center appears as shown in
figure 1-1. The new church building is seen below the lower left corner of the raised
tower.

FIGURE 1-1
Axonometric view of Citicorp tower
with the church in the lower left-
hand corner. Wind loads: F, frontal
and Q, Quartering. (Adaptation of
an axonometric drawing by Henry
Dong, Anspach Grossman Portugal,
Inc., in Buildings Type Study 492,
Architectural Record, Mid-August
Special Issue, 1976, p. 66.)

Page 13
LeMessurier’s structure departed from the usual in that the massive stilts are not situated at
the corners of the building, and half of its gravity load as well all of its wind load is brought
down an imaginatively designed trussed frame, which incorporates wind braces, on the
outside of the tower.24 In addition, LeMessurier installed a tuned mass damper, the first of
its kind in a tall building, to keep the building from swaying in the wind.

Questions asked by an engineering student a year after the tower’s completion prompted
LeMessurier to review certain structural aspects of the tower and pose some questions of his
own.25 For instance, could the structure withstand certain loads due to strong quartering
winds? In such cases, two sides of the building receive the oblique force of the wind, and the
resultant force is 40 percent larger than when the wind hits only one face of the structure
straight on. The only requirement stated in the building code specified adequacy to
withstand certain perpendicular wind loads, and that was the basis for the design of the
wind braces. But there was no need to worry since the braces as designed could handle such
an excess load without difficulty, provided the welds were of the expected high quality.

Nevertheless, the student’s questions prompted LeMessurier to place a call from his Page 14
Cambridge, Massachusetts, office to his New York office, to ask Stanley Goldstein, his
engineer in charge of the tower erection, how the welded joints of the bracing structure had
worked out. How difficult was the job? How good was the workmanship? To his dismay,
Goldstein answered, “Oh, didn’t you know? [The joints] were never welded at all because
Bethlehem Steel came to us and said they didn’t think we needed to do it.” The New York
office, as it was allowed to do, had approved the proposal that the joints be bolted instead.
But again the diagonal winds had not been taken into account.

At first, LeMessurier was not too concerned; after all, the tuned mass damper would still
take care of the sway. So he turned to his consultant on the behavior of high buildings in
wind, Alan Davenport at the University of Western Ontario. On reviewing the results of his
earlier wind tunnel tests on a scaled-down Citicorp Center, Davenport reported that a
diagonal wind load would exceed the perpendicular wind load by much more than the 40
percent increase in stress predicted by an idealized mathematical model. Winds sufficient to
cause failure of certain critical bolted joints—and therefore of the building—could occur in
New York every 16 years. Fortunately, those braces that required strengthening were
accessible, but the job would be disruptive and expensive, exceeding the insurance
LeMessurier carried.

LeMessurier faced an ethical dilemma involving a conflict between his responsibilities to

ensure the safety of his building for the sake of people who use it, his responsibilities to
various financial constituencies, and his self-interest, which might be served by remaining
silent. What to do? He retreated to his summerhouse on an island on Sebago Lake in Maine.
There, in the quiet, he worked once more through all the design and wind tunnel numbers.
Suddenly he was struck with “an almost giddy sense of power,” as he realized that only he
could prevent an eventual disaster by taking the initiative.

Having made a decision, he acted quickly. He and Stubbins met with their insurers, lawyers,
the bank management, and the city building department to describe the problem. A retrofit
plan was agreed upon: The wind braces would be strengthened at critical locations “by
welding two-inch-thick steel plates over each of more than 200 bolted joints.” Journalists, at
first curious about the many lawyers converging on the various offices, disappeared when
New York’s major newspapers were shut down by a strike. The lawyers sought the advice of
Leslie Robertson, a structural engineer with experience in disaster management. He alerted
the mayor’s Office of Emergency Management and the Red Cross so the surroundings of the
building could be evacuated in case of a high wind alert. He also arranged for a network of
strain gages to be attached to the structure at strategic points. This instrumentation allowed
actual strains experienced by the steel to be monitored at a remote location. LeMessurier
insisted on the installation of an emergency generator to assure uninterrupted availability of
the damper.

When hurricane Ella appeared off the coast, there was some cause for worry, but work on
the critical joints had almost been completed. Eventually the hurricane veered off and
evacuation was not required. Even so, the retrofit and the tuned mass damper had been
readied to withstand as much as a 200-year storm.

The parties were able to settle out of court, with Stubbins held blameless; LeMessurier and
his joint-venture partners were charged the $2 million his insurance agreed to pay. The total
repair bill had amounted to over $12.5 million. Not only did LeMessurier save lives and
preserve his integrity, but his reputation was enhanced rather than tarnished by the episode.
Page 15

1.2.2 Meanings of “Responsibility”

If we say that LeMessurier was responsible, as a person and as an engineer, we might mean
several things: he met his responsibilities (obligations); he was responsible (accountable) for
doing so; he acted responsibly (conscientiously); and he is admirable (praiseworthy). Let us
clarify these and related senses of “responsibility,” beginning with obligations—the core idea
around which all the other senses revolve.26
1. Obligations. Responsibilities are obligations—types of actions that are morally mandatory.
Some obligations are incumbent on each of us, such as to be honest, fair, and decent.
Other obligations are role responsibilities, acquired when we take on special roles such as
parents, employees, or professionals. Thus, a safety engineer might have responsibilities
for making regular inspections at a building site, or an operations engineer might have
responsibilities for identifying potential benefits and risks of one system as compared to
another.
2. Accountable. Being responsible means being accountable. This means having the general
capacities for moral agency, including the capacity to understand and act on moral
reasons. It also means being answerable for meeting particular obligations, that is, liable
to be held to account by other people in general or by specific individuals in positions of
authority. We can be called upon to explain why we acted as we did, perhaps providing a
justification or perhaps offering reasonable excuses. We also hold ourselves accountable
for meeting our obligations, sometimes responding with emotions of self-respect and
pride, other times responding with guilt for harming others and shame for falling short of
our ideals.
Wrongdoing takes two primary forms: voluntary wrongdoing and negligence. Voluntary
actions occur when we knew what we were doing was wrong and we were not coerced.
Some voluntary wrongdoing is recklessness, that is, flagrant disregard of known risks and
responsibilities. Other voluntary wrongdoing is due to weakness of will, whereby we give
in to temptation or fail to try hard enough. In contrast, negligence occurs when we
unintentionally fail to exercise due care in meeting responsibilities. We might not have
known what we were doing, but we should have. Shoddy engineering, due to sheer
incompetence, usually falls into this category.
3. Conscientious. Morally admirable engineers like LeMessurier accept their obligations and
are conscientious in meeting them. They diligently try to do the right thing, and they
largely succeed in doing so, even under difficult circumstances. Of course, no one is
perfect, and it is possible to be conscientious in some areas of life, such as one’s work,
and less conscientious in other areas, such as raising a child.
4. Blameworthy/Praiseworthy. In contexts where it is clear that accountability for Page 16
wrongdoing is at issue, “responsible” becomes a synonym for blameworthy. In
contexts where it is clear that right conduct is at issue, “responsible” is a synonym for
praiseworthy. Thus, the question “Who is responsible for designing the antenna tower?”
might be used to ask who is blameworthy for its collapse or who deserves credit for its
success in withstanding a severe storm.
The preceding meanings all concerned moral responsibility. Moral responsibility overlaps
with, but is distinguishable from, causal, job, and legal responsibility. Causal responsibility
consists simply in being a cause of some event. (A young child playing with matches causes
a house to burn down, but the adult who left the child with the matches is morally
responsible.) Job responsibility consists of one’s assigned tasks at the place of employment.
And legal responsibility is whatever the law requires—including legal obligations and
accountability for meeting them. Within large domains, the causal, job, and legal
responsibilities of engineers overlap with their moral responsibilities, but not completely.
Indeed, it makes sense to say that a particular law is morally unjustified. Moreover,
professional responsibilities transcend narrow job assignments. For example, LeMessurier
recognized and accepted a responsibility to protect the public even though his particular job
description left it unclear exactly what was required of him.

1.2.3 Dimensions of Engineering

Let us now gain a more detailed understanding of the complexity of sharing responsibility
within corporations. Doing so will also reveal to us a wider range of moral issues that arise
in engineering, as well as a richer appreciation of how moral values are embedded in all
aspects of engineering.

Ethical issues arise as a product develops from a mental concept to physical completion.
Engineers encounter both moral and technical problems concerning variability in the
materials available to them, the quality of work by coworkers at all levels, pressures imposed
by time and the whims of the marketplace, and relationships of authority within
corporations. Figure 1-2 charts the sequence of tasks that leads from the concept of a
product to its design, manufacture, sale, use, and ultimate disposal.
 FIGURE 1-2
Progression of engineering tasks (→ ideal progression, — typical
iterations)

For convenience, several terms are used in broad, generic senses. Products can be mass-
produced household appliances, an entire communication system, or an oil refinery
complex. Manufacturing can occur on a factory floor or at a construction site. Engineers
might be employees of large or small corporations, entrepreneurs, or consultants.
Organizations might be for-profit organizations, consulting firms, the public works
department of a city, or non-for-profit organizations devoted to community development.
Tasks include creating the concept of a new product, improving an existing product, detailed
design of part of an engine, or manufacture of a product according to complete drawings
and specifications submitted by another party.

The idea of a new product is first captured in a conceptual design, which will lead to Page 17
establishing performance specifications and conducting a preliminary analysis based on the
functional relationships among design variables. These activities lead to a more detailed
analysis, possibly assisted by computer simulations and physical models or prototypes. The
end product of the design task will be detailed specifications and shop drawings for all
components.

Manufacturing is the next major task. It involves scheduling and carrying out the tasks of
purchasing materials and components, fabricating parts and subassemblies, and finally
assembling and performance-testing the product.

Selling comes next, or delivery if the product is the result of a prior contract. Page 18

Thereafter, either the manufacturer’s or the customer’s engineers perform installation,

personnel training, maintenance, repair, and ultimately recycling or disposal.

Seldom is the process carried out in such a smooth, continuous fashion as indicated by the
arrows progressing down the middle of figure 1-2. Instead of this uninterrupted
sequence, intermediate results during or at the end of each stage often require backtracking
to make modifications in the design developed thus far. Errors need to be detected and
corrected. Changes may be needed to improve product performance or to meet cost and
time constraints. An altogether different, alternative design might have to be considered. In
the words of Herbert Simon, “Design is usually the kind of problem solving we call ill-
structured . . . you don’t start off with a well-defined goal. Nor do you start off with a clear
set of alternatives, or perhaps any alternatives at all. Goals and alternatives have to emerge
through the design process itself: one of its first tasks is to clarify goals and to begin to
generate alternatives.”27

This results in an iterative process, with some of the possible recursive steps indicated by the
thin lines and arrows on either side of figure 1-2. As shown, engineers are usually forced
to stop during an initial attempt at a solution when they hit a snag or think of a better
approach. They will then return to an earlier stage with changes in mind. Such
reconsiderations of earlier tasks do not necessarily start and end at the same respective
stages during subsequent passes through design, manufacture, and implementation. That is
because the retracing is governed by the latest findings from current experiments, tempered
by the outcome of earlier iterations and experience with similar product designs.

Changes made during one stage will not only affect subsequent stages but may also require
an assessment of prior decisions. Requests for design changes while manufacture or
construction is in progress must be handled with particular care, or else tragic consequences
such as the Hyatt-Regency walkway failure illustrated in figure 1-3 may result. Dealing
with this complexity requires close cooperation among the engineers of many different
departments and disciplines such as chemical, civil, electrical, industrial, and mechanical
engineering. It is not uncommon for engineering organizations to suffer from “silo
mentality,” which makes engineers disregard or denigrate the work carried out by groups
other than their own. It can be difficult to improve a design or even to rectify mistakes under
such circumstances. Engineers do well to establish contact with colleagues across such
artificial boundaries so that information can be exchanged more freely. Such contacts
become especially important when there is a need to tackle morally complex problems.
Page 19

(a) As designed (b) As modified (c) The result

(d) Loads for case (a) (e) Loads for case (b)
FIGURE 1-3
The Kansas City Hyatt-Regency walkway collapse. Two walkways—one above the other—along one wall of a large atrium are
to be supported by welded box-beams, which in turn are held up along the atrium side by long rods extending from the
ceiling. Because of perceived difficulties in implementing design (a), the modification (b) using two shorter rods to replace
each long rod was proposed and approved. What is the result? Let the expected load on each box-beam at its atrium end be
P (the same on each floor). Then, in design (a) an upper-floor beam would have to support P pounds as shown in sketch
(d), but the design change raised that to 2P as shown in (e). This overload caused the box-beam/rod/nut supports on the
upper floor to fail as shown in (c). In turn, the upper and lower walkways collapsed, causing a final death toll of 114
with 200 injured. Later it was found that the design change had been stamped “approved” but not checked. [(For more, see
M. Levy and M. Salvadori, Why Buildings Fall Down [Norton & Co., 1992].)]

To repeat, engineering generally does not consist of completing designs or processes one
after another in a straightforward progression of isolated tasks. Instead, it involves a trial-
and-error process with backtracking based on decisions made after examining results
obtained along the way. The design iterations resemble feedback loops,28 and like any well-
functioning feedback control system, engineering takes into account natural and social
environments that affect the product and people using it. Let us therefore revisit the
engineering tasks, this time as listed in table 1-1, along with examples of problems that
might arise.
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
It may be replied that the history of Rome, on which I dwelt a
moment ago, shews that arrested progress, and even decadence,
may be but the prelude to a new period of vigorous growth. So that
even those races or nations which seem frozen into eternal
immobility may base upon experience their hopes of an awakening
spring.
I am not sure, however, that this is the true interpretation of the facts.
There is no spectacle indeed in all history more impressive than the
thick darkness settling down over Western Europe, blotting out all
but a faint and distorted vision of Graeco-Roman culture, and then,
as it slowly rises, unveiling the variety and rich promise of the
modern world. But I do not think we should make this unique
phenomenon support too weighty a load of theory. I should not infer
from it that when some wave of civilisation has apparently spent its
force, we have a right to regard its withdrawing sweep as but the
prelude to a new advance. I should rather conjecture that in this
particular case we should find, among other subtle causes of
decadence, some obscure disharmony between the Imperial system
and the temperament of the West, undetected even by those who
suffered from it. That system, though accepted with contentment and
even with pride, though in the days of its greatness it brought
civilisation, commerce, and security in its train, must surely have
lacked some elements which are needed to foster among Teutons,
Celts, and Iberians the qualities, whatever these may be, on which
sustained progress depends. It was perhaps too oriental for the
occident, and it certainly became more oriental as time went on. In
the East it was, comparatively speaking, successful. If there was no
progress, decadence was slow; and but for what Western Europe
did, and what it failed to do, during the long struggle with militant
Mahommedanism, there might still be an Empire in the East, largely
Asiatic in population, Christian in religion, Greek in culture, Roman
by political descent.
Had this been the course of events large portions of mankind would
doubtless have been much better governed than they are. It is not so
clear that they would have been more ‘progressive.’ Progress is with
the West: with communities of the European type. And if their energy
of development is some day to be exhausted, who can believe that
there remains any external source from which it can be renewed?
Where are the untried races competent to construct out of the ruined
fragments of our civilisation a new and better habitation for the spirit
of man? They do not exist: and if the world is again to be buried
under a barbaric flood, it will not be like that which fertilised, though it
first destroyed, the western provinces of Rome, but like that which in
Asia submerged for ever the last traces of Hellenic culture.
We are thus brought back to the question I put a few moments since.
What grounds are there for supposing that we can escape the fate to
which other races have had to submit? If for periods which,
measured on the historic scale, are of great duration, communities
which have advanced to a certain point appear able to advance no
further; if civilisations wear out, and races become effete, why should
we expect to progress indefinitely, why for us alone is the doom of
man to be reversed?
To these questions I have no very satisfactory answers to give, nor
do I believe that our knowledge of national or social psychology is
sufficient to make a satisfactory answer possible. Some purely
tentative observations on the point may, however, furnish a fitting
conclusion to an address which has been tentative throughout, and
aims rather at suggesting trains of thought, than at completing them.
I assume that the factors which combine to make each generation
what it is at the moment of its entrance into adult life are in the main
twofold. The one produces the raw material of society, the process of
manufacture is effected by the other. The first is physiological
inheritance, the second is the inheritance partly of external
conditions of life, partly of beliefs[2], traditions, sentiments, customs,
laws, and organisation—all that constitute the social surroundings in
which men grow up to maturity.
I hazard no conjecture as to the share borne respectively by these
two kinds of cause in producing their joint result. Nor are we likely to
obtain satisfactory evidence on the subject till, in the interests of
science, two communities of different blood and different traditions
consent to exchange their children at birth by a universal process of
reciprocal adoption. But even in the absence of so heroic an
experiment, it seems safe to say that the mobility which makes
possible either progress or decadence, resides rather in the causes
grouped under the second head than in the physiological material on
which education, in the widest sense of that ambiguous term, has
got to work. If, as I suppose, acquired qualities are not inherited, the
only causes which could fundamentally modify the physiological
character of any particular community are its intermixture with alien
races through slavery, conquest, or immigration; or else new
conditions which varied the relative proportion in which different
sections of the population contributed to its total numbers. If, for
example, the more successful members of the community had
smaller families than the less successful; or if medical administration
succeeded in extinguishing maladies to which persons of a particular
constitution were specially liable; or if one strain in a mixed race had
a larger birth rate than another—in these cases and in others like
them, there would doubtless be a change in the physiological factor
of national character. But such changes are not likely, I suppose, to
be considerable, except, perhaps, those due to the mixture of races;
—and that only in new countries whose economic opportunities
tempt immigrants widely differing in culture, and in capacity for
culture, from those whose citizenship they propose to share.
The flexible element in any society, that which is susceptible of
progress or decadence, must therefore be looked for rather in the
physical and psychical conditions affecting the life of its component
units, than in their inherited constitution. This last rather supplies a
limit to variations than an element which does itself vary: though
from this point of view its importance is capital. I at least find it quite
impossible to believe that any attempt to provide widely different
races with an identical environment, political, religious, educational,
what you will, can ever make them alike. They have been different
and unequal since history began; different and unequal they are
destined to remain through future periods of comparable duration.
But though the advance of each community is thus limited by its
inherited aptitudes, I do not suppose that those limits have ever been
reached by its unaided efforts. In the cases where a forward
movement has died away, the pause must in part be due to arrested
development in the variable, not to a fixed resistance in the
unchanging factor of national character. Either external conditions
are unfavourable; or the sentiments, customs and beliefs which
make society possible have hardened into shapes which make its
further self-development impossible; or through mere weariness of
spirit the community resigns itself to a contented, or perhaps a
discontented, stagnation; or it shatters itself in pursuit of impossible
ideals, or for other and obscurer reasons, flags in its endeavours,
and falls short of possible achievement.
Now I am quite unable to offer any such general analysis of the
causes by which these hindrances to progress are produced or
removed as would furnish a reply to my question. But it may be
worth noting that a social force has come into being, new in
magnitude if not in kind, which must favourably modify such
hindrances as come under all but the last of the divisions in which I
have roughly arranged them. This force is the modern alliance
between pure science and industry. That on this we must mainly rely
for the improvement of the material conditions under which societies
live is in my opinion obvious, although no one would conjecture it
from a historic survey of political controversy. Its direct moral effects
are less obvious; indeed there are many most excellent people who
would altogether deny their existence. To regard it as a force fitted to
rouse and sustain the energies of nations would seem to them
absurd: for this would be to rank it with those other forces which
have most deeply stirred the emotions of great communities, have
urged them to the greatest exertions, have released them most
effectually from the benumbing fetters of merely personal
preoccupations,—with religion, patriotism, and politics. Industrial
expansion under scientific inspiration, so far from deserving praise
like this, is in their view, at best, but a new source of material well-
being, at worst the prolific parent of physical ugliness in many forms,
machine made wares, smoky cities, polluted rivers, and desecrated
landscapes,—appropriately associated with materialism and greed.
I believe this view to be utterly misleading, confounding accident with
essence, transient accompaniments with inseparable characteristics.
Should we dream of thus judging the other great social forces of
which I have spoken? Are we to ignore what religion has done for the
world because it has been the fruitful excuse for the narrowest
bigotries and the most cruel persecutions? Are we to underrate the
worth of politics, because politics may mean no more than the
mindless clash of factions, or the barren exchange of one set of
tyrants or jobbers for another? Is patriotism to be despised because
its manifestations have been sometimes vulgar, sometimes selfish,
sometimes brutal, sometimes criminal? Estimates like these seem to
me worse than useless. All great social forces are not merely
capable of perversion, they are constantly perverted. Yet were they
eliminated from our social system, were each man, acting on the
advice, which Voltaire gave but never followed, to disinterest himself
of all that goes on beyond the limits of his own cabbage garden,
decadence I take it, would have already far advanced.
But if the proposition I am defending may be wrongly criticised, it is
still more likely to be wrongly praised. To some it will commend itself
as a eulogy on an industrial as distinguished from a military
civilisation: as a suggestion that in the peaceful pursuit of wealth
there is that which of itself may constitute a valuable social tonic.
This may be true, but it is not my contention. In talking of the alliance
between industry and science my emphasis is at least as much on
the word science as on the word industry. I am not concerned now
with the proportion of the population devoted to productive labour, or
the esteem in which they are held. It is on the effects which I believe
are following, and are going in yet larger measure to follow, from the
intimate relation between scientific discovery and industrial
efficiency, that I most desire to insist.
Do you then, it will be asked, so highly rate the utilitarian aspect of
research as to regard it as a source, not merely of material
convenience, but of spiritual elevation? Is it seriously to be ranked
with religion and patriotism as an important force for raising men’s
lives above what is small, personal, and self-centred? Does it not
rather pervert pure knowledge into a new contrivance for making
money, and give a fresh triumph to the ‘growing materialism of the
age’?
I do not myself believe that this age is either less spiritual or more
sordid than its predecessors. I believe, indeed, precisely the reverse.
But however this may be, is it not plain that if a society is to be
moved by the remote speculations of isolated thinkers it can only be
on condition that their isolation is not complete? Some point of
contact they must have with the world in which they live, and if their
influence is to be based on widespread sympathy, the contact must
be in a region where there can be, if not full mutual comprehension,
at least a large measure of practical agreement and willing co-
operation. Philosophy has never touched the mass of men except
through religion. And, though the parallel is not complete, it is safe to
say that science will never touch them unaided by its practical
applications. Its wonders may be catalogued for purposes of
education, they may be illustrated by arresting experiments, by
numbers and magnitudes which startle or fatigue the imagination;
but they will form no familiar portion of the intellectual furniture of
ordinary men unless they be connected, however remotely, with the
conduct of ordinary life. Critics have made merry over the naive self-
importance which represented man as the centre and final cause of
the universe, and conceived the stupendous mechanism of nature as
primarily designed to satisfy his wants and minister to his
entertainment. But there is another, and an opposite, danger into
which it is possible to fall. The material world, howsoever it may have
gained in sublimity, has, under the touch of science, lost (so to
speak) in domestic charm. Except where it affects the immediate
needs of organic life, it may seem so remote from the concerns of
men that in the majority it will rouse no curiosity, while of those who
are fascinated by its marvels, not a few will be chilled by its
impersonal and indifferent immensity.
For this latter mood only religion or religious philosophy can supply a
cure. But for the former, the appropriate remedy is the perpetual
stimulus which the influence of science on the business of mankind
offers to their sluggish curiosity. And even now I believe this
influence to be underrated. If in the last hundred years the whole
material setting of civilised life has altered, we owe it neither to
politicians nor to political institutions. We owe it to the combined
efforts of those who have advanced science and those who have
applied it. If our outlook upon the Universe has suffered
modifications in detail so great and so numerous that they amount
collectively to a revolution, it is to men of science we owe it, not to
theologians or philosophers. On these indeed new and weighty
responsibilities are being cast. They have to harmonise and to
coordinate, to prevent the new from being one-sided, to preserve the
valuable essence of what is old. But science is the great instrument
of social change, all the greater because its object is not change but
knowledge; and its silent appropriation of this dominant function,
amid the din of political and religious strife, is the most vital of all the
revolutions which have marked the development of modern
civilisation.
It may seem fanciful to find in a single recent aspect of this revolution
an influence which resembles religion or patriotism in its appeals to
the higher side of ordinary characters—especially since we are
accustomed to regard the appropriation by industry of scientific
discoveries merely as a means of multiplying the material
conveniences of life. But if it be remembered that this process brings
vast sections of every industrial community into admiring relation
with the highest intellectual achievement, and the most disinterested
search for truth; that those who live by ministering to the common
wants of average humanity lean for support on those who search
among the deepest mysteries of Nature; that their dependence is
rewarded by growing success; that success gives in its turn an
incentive to individual effort in no wise to be measured by personal
expectation of gain; that the energies thus aroused may affect the
whole character of the community, spreading the beneficent
contagion of hope and high endeavour through channels scarcely
known, to workers[3] in fields the most remote; if all this be borne in
mind it may perhaps seem not unworthy of the place I have assigned
to it.
But I do not offer this speculation, whatever be its worth, as an
answer to my original question. It is but an aid to optimism, not a
reply to pessimism. Such a reply can only be given by a sociology
which has arrived at scientific conclusions on the life-history of
different types of society, and has risen above the empirical and
merely interrogative point of view which, for want of a better, I have
adopted in this address. No such sociology exists at present, or
seems likely soon to be created. In its absence the conclusions at
which I provisionally arrive are that we cannot regard decadence and
arrested development as less normal in human communities than
progress; though the point at which the energy of advance is
exhausted (if, and when it is reached) varies in different races and
civilisations: that the internal causes by which progress is
encouraged, hindered, or reversed, lie to a great extent beyond the
field of ordinary political discussion, and are not easily expressed in
current political terminology: that the influence which a superior
civilisation, whether acting by example or imposed by force, may
have in advancing an inferior one, though often beneficent, is not
likely to be self supporting; its withdrawal will be followed by
decadence, unless the character of the civilisation be in harmony
both with the acquired temperament and the innate capacities of
those who have been induced to accept it: that as regards those
nations which still advance in virtue of their own inherent energies,
though time has brought perhaps new causes of disquiet, it has
brought also new grounds of hope; and that whatever be the perils in
front of us, there are, so far, no symptoms either of pause or of
regression in the onward movement which for more than a thousand
years has been characteristic of Western civilisation.
 Notes:
[1] The ‘East’ is a term most loosely used. It does not here include
China and Japan and does include parts of Africa. The observations
which follow have no reference either to the Jews or to the
commercial aristocracies of Phœnician origin.
[2] Beliefs include knowledge.
[3] This remark arises out of a train of thought suggested by two
questions which are very pertinent to the subject of the Address.
(1) Is a due succession of men above the average in original
capacity necessary to maintain social progress? and
(2) If so, can we discover any law according to which such men are
produced?
I entertain no doubt myself that the answer to the first question
should be in the affirmative. Democracy is an excellent thing; but,
though quite consistent with progress, it is not progressive per se. Its
value is regulative not dynamic; and if it meant (as it never does)
substantial uniformity, instead of legal equality, we should become
fossilised at once. Movement may be controlled or checked by the
many; it is initiated and made effective by the few. If (for the sake of
illustration) we suppose mental capacity in all its many forms to be
mensurable and commensurable, and then imagine two societies
possessing the same average capacity—but an average made up in
one case of equal units, in the other of a majority slightly below the
average and a minority much above it, few could doubt that the
second, not the first, would show the greatest aptitude for
movement. It might go wrong, but it would go.
The second question—how is this originality (in its higher
manifestations called genius) effectively produced? is not so simple.
Excluding education in its narrowest sense—which few would regard
as having much to do with the matter—the only alternatives seem to
be the following:
Original capacity may be no more than one of the ordinary variations
incidental to heredity. A community may breed a minority thus
exceptionally gifted, as it breeds a minority of men over six feet six.
There may be an average decennial output of congenital geniuses
as there is an average decennial output of congenital idiots—though
the number is likely to be smaller.
But if this be the sole cause of the phenomenon, why does the same
race apparently produce many men of genius in one generation and
few in another? Why are years of abundance so often followed by
long periods of sterility?
The most obvious explanation of this would seem to be that in some
periods circumstances give many openings to genius, in some
periods few. The genius is constantly produced; but it is only
occasionally recognised.
In this there must be some truth. A mob orator in Turkey, a religious
reformer in seventeenth century Spain, a military leader in the
Sandwich islands, would hardly get their chance. Yet the theory of
opportunity can scarcely be reckoned a complete explanation. For it
leaves unaccounted for the variety of genius which has in some
countries marked epochs of vigorous national development. Athens
in the fifth and fourth centuries, Florence in the fifteenth and early
sixteenth centuries, Holland in the later sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, are the typical examples. In such periods the opportunities
of statesmen, soldiers, orators, and diplomatists, may have been
specially frequent. But whence came the poets, the sculptors, the
painters, the philosophers and the men of letters? What peculiar
opportunities had they?
The only explanation, if we reject the idea of a mere coincidence,
seems to be, that quite apart from opportunity, the exceptional stir
and fervour of national life evokes or may evoke qualities which in
ordinary times lie dormant, unknown even to their possessors. The
potential Miltons are ‘mute’ and ‘inglorious’ not because they cannot
find a publisher, but because they have nothing they want to publish.
They lack the kind of inspiration which, on this view, flows from social
surroundings where great things, though of quite another kind, are
being done and thought.
If this theory be true (and it is not without its difficulties) one would
like to know whether these undoubted outbursts of originality in the
higher and rarer form of genius, are symptomatic of a general rise in
the number of persons exhibiting original capacity of a more ordinary
type. If so, then the conclusion would seem to be that some kind of
widespread exhilaration or excitement is required in order to enable
any community to extract the best results from the raw material
transmitted to it by natural inheritance.

Cambridge: Printed at the University Press.

Transcriber’s Note
The formatting of the notes was substantially altered for this edition.
On page 41, “Greek in culture Roman by political descent” was corrected to “Greek in
culture, Roman by political descent.”
 *** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK DECADENCE
***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the
Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability,
costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or
indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur:
(a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project
Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.
It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and
donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the

assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a
secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help,
see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookmass.com