Philosophy

Essay
For every individual there is always a reason for every choice made. A situation was given to us in relation to the field of engineering. The situation started with a backgrounder, the need for safety is proportional to the danger of having an accident. Nothing is foolproof, yet we must try to minimize risks, and then continued with the question, if the public is still willing to run or to take such risks, who are engineers to refuse, and to say no. The question presented an argument. There are two enquiries that an engineer would deal upon. First is how will an engineer refuse from the demand of the public because of some ethical issues that one ought to consider Second is the fact of the demands of the tasks or the roles of the engineer Thus, what is an engineer Is there a good and bad engineer What makes them

Engineer practices the profession that deals upon or the person in-charge with the improvements of every institution, like the social, cultural, legal, economic, technological, and organizational system (Geistauts, Baker IV,  Eschenbach, 2008, p.21). Their role is to master mathematics and physics, science of engineering (Harris Jr., 2008) to be able to practically solve the technical problems from designs demanded, and to consistently produce high-class or astounding masterpieces (e.g. infrastructures such as roads, buildings, bridges, etcetera.). However, due to popular demands of the people and the society itself of a developed state reflected through their high buildings and world class bridges, some engineers are pushed beyond capacity making them decide unethical blueprint and projects. Still, this statement is yet to be proven.

An engineer is expected to have an ethics class. As a matter of fact, there were lots of engineers, and their each professional group who demands for due process to anyone who passed their limits, as recounted by Paul T. Durbin (2008, p.226). Engineer ethics focuses on the importance of acting ethically or on an analysis of what should be done in a particular situation or class of situations, which are incorporated to engineering training and teaching of engineering and management (Geistauts, Baker IV,  Eschenbach, 2008, p.21). As a foundation of ethics, engineering ethics implies the importance of determining the relation between risk and safety, difference between good or (competent) engineer and bad (incompetent) engineer, and the standards of due diligence.

 An engineer just like in any profession has codes to follow. A concrete example, which may serve as the overall- overview of a kind of a moral concerns of engineers is the one that the CIAPR or the Colegio de Ingenieros y Agrimensores de Puerto Rico follows. CIAPR or the Puerto Rico State Society of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors in English determined codes of professionals through the following professional context or that identifies who can or cannot practice engineering in Puerto Rico the context of corruption, that condemns anyone, through removal from profession and imprisonment, who uses their profession just for corruption context of social justice, is the most sensitive part as the context aims to discover the harmful social and environmental effects which are caused by the large scale government and private industry projects such as copper mining, designing and operating systems lastly, the context of craft where the value of the artistic side of the engineers are celebrated because of continuously providing large scales solutions (Frey  Carrillo, 2008, p.418).

 The following contexts seem to be improbable. Those were ideal, which is actually related to the relationship of risk and safety. Risk and safety in engineering was apparently implied in the context of social justice. The context of social justice risk is that it will expose or reveal the truth about large-scale businesses and companies whenever they crossed to the boundaries of the majority. This means that the engineers are responsible to deliver their services or formulate and make their crafts for the large people, at the same time they are responsible to safety the whole population or the majority. The environment is included in this because that is the source of the basic needs of people.

 Same story goes with enforcing due diligence, or the act by which engineers carefully create blueprints and formulate next steps. In a mishap or an accident for example, the engineer must know how to deal with it through knowing their people or the workers, the community and the site. The codes of ethics in Puerto Rico are applicable in this through, first, in preparing for the project an engineer must know how to act in professional matters for each employer or client as a faithful agent or fiduciary and avoid conflicts of interest or even the mere appearance of conflict of interest, and work to maintain independence in the exercise of professional judgment (Frey  Carrillo, 2008, p. 420). This can avoid possible accidents or conflicts making the project a less-conflict-faster-service project. Second from the codes number 5 and 6 that tell, topromote only relevant experiences and qualifications in seeking engineering work and avoid unfair competition with other engineers, and avoid deception in seeking employment and in offering professional services (Frey  Carrillo, 2008, p.420). This can avoid or prevent possible movements against the project that looses the projects place in other people. And, lastly, the first in the list, to avoid any accidents, an engineer must always, guard the safety, environment, health, and welfare of the community above all other considerations in the execution of professional responsibilities (Frey  Carrillo, 2008, p.420).

 Above all else, of course an engineer, to be called an engineer must be technically competent, which also means passing all subjects required in the first education, then gaining their internships, thus their licenses and being able to have another degree in order to be established and prominent in the profession. George Geistauts, Elisha Baker IV, and Ted Eschenbach (2008) defined technical competence as, technical competence means the professional is capable of providing an acceptable, expected level of service (pp.21-22). Otherwise, the engineer without dealing with all of this is incompetent.

However, a technical competent engineer is not the last phase of the profession. Another technical competence is known that requires a high level of professional conduct, meaning moral, accepted conduct that has integrity in what he is doing (Geistauts, Baker IV,  Eschenbach, 2008, p.22). The difference between the two kinds of competency is that one masters the scientific aspect of engineering while the other masters the inner or inside justification of engineering.

Charles E. Harris Jr. (2008) put emphasis on virtue ethics as a key motivator for engineers to be competent. He described virtue ethics profoundly by rooting it from the ancient beliefs and philosophers such as Aristotles Nicomachean Ethics (p. 155). Engineers need this because virtue ethics is also their characters ethics, meaning, the disposition that they have are motivated by the inner self, like the commitments that they render or will render to their future clients.( Harris Jr., 2008, p.156). Likewise, it is just good that engineers are taking courses such as philosophy, social science and humanities to detach them from being too much positivist or empirical.

Consequently going back to the question that was raised before, if the public is still willing to run or to take such risks, who are engineers to refuse, and to say no The answer, based on the discussion above was engineers must refuse if what the public demanded were not for the good of the majority, or if it will destroy the ecosystem, and, or if it will cause social impacts that may lead to chaos or bigger mishaps. Of course and without question an engineer has a say on this, on one reason he or she is the engineer, the creator and starter, thus he or she can say no or refuse to any requests against his or her will or dispositions.

On the contrary, based on the answers, there is another approach to this issue on engineering ethics. This came from another thinker that proposed a unique different answer but relevant and with a cause. Paul T. Durbins (2008) argument was that ethics was less important than professional responsibility or the service itself (p.231), he named this paper, Engineering professional ethics in a broader dimension, where I would like to give further emphasis on broader dimension. Simply he wants to tell that it is the personal behavior of every engineer that will determine their responses to any solicited and unsolicited criticisms. He argues that every peoples behavior change and it is their responsibility to make their image to the public good or bad (Durbin, 2008, p.156). Hence, the image or the individuals approach on ethical issues ands misconducts are not the problem of the other individual in the same profession, but these efforts in solving the problem of each individual must be passed to improving or answering and forwarding the general problems that the society have.

In conclusion, it appears in all information that the answer to the question is also questions. These questions will ask all impending problems that may be thrown at the projects that the public wanted. In adieu, all perspectives and the last all aid, still to a proper way in addressing the ethical considerations in engineering.