Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Engineering Management

ISSN 2095-7513

ISSN 2096-0255(Online)

CN 10-1205/N

Postal Subscription Code 80-905

Front. Eng    2014, Vol. 1 Issue (1) : 62-70    https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FEM-2014009
ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT TREATISES
The Construction of Tetrahedral Model of Engineering Ethical Evaluation
Jin Wang()
School of Civil Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410004, China
 Download: PDF(432 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

To achieve greatprojects, great attention should be attached to ethical issues of engineering. But endless immoralities in the field of engineering expose the lack of attention and the ineffectiveness of implementation of engineering ethical evaluation. The “Mirror” and the "Lamp" — these two metaphors used by M. H. Abrams vividly expose the differences in people's way of understanding which inspires author's study of the model of engineering ethical evaluation. With four elements of the project —artifact, engineer, user and environment, a tetrahedral model of integrity, strong restoring force and high stability is built. While their roles and responsibilities differ, each has to demonstrate a commitment to professional and ethical standards. In this model, four "Lamps" — i. e, four elements of engineering — in four corners provide light while four "Mirrors" — the result of reflection of four elements — reflect whether the tetrahedral model can truthfully evaluate the level of engineering ethics. The combination of the "Lamps" and "Mirrors" illuminates engineering ethical evaluation and leads to a plurality of evaluation standards, while simultaneously fostering both the avoidance of simple de-instrumentalization and the sustainability of ethical evaluation. Plurality of evaluation standards means the consideration of value differences in a multi-value state. The avoidance of de-instrumentalization means to prevent the engineer's expertise from fossilization. The sustainability of ethical evaluation accelerates the fulfillment of our dream, for the ultimate benefit of humankind. Ethical evaluation of the project not only helps more engineers to use expertise in pursuit of the public good, but also make more projects to meet people's short-term expectations and long-term cares.

Keywords tetrahedral model      ethical evaluation      engineering      Lamps and Mirrors     
Issue Date: 25 May 2014
 Cite this article:   
Jin Wang. The Construction of Tetrahedral Model of Engineering Ethical Evaluation[J]. Front. Eng, 2014, 1(1): 62-70.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/10.15302/J-FEM-2014009
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fem/EN/Y2014/V1/I1/62
Figure 1.  Abrams' scheme.
Figure 2.  James Liu's scheme.
Figure 3.  Donald Keesey's scheme.
Figure 4.  Tetrahedral model.
1 Mutual Dissolving (1-1) Incarnation (Artifact→Environment)
(1-2) Dissolution (Environment→Artifact)
2 Mutual Guidance (2-1) Integration (Engineer→Environment)
(2-2) Guide(Environment→Engineer)
3 Mutual Respect (3-1) Respect(User→Environment)
(3-2) Support(Environment→User)
4 Mutual Promotion (4-1) Experience(Artifact→Engineer)
(4-2) Inoculation(Engineer→Artifact)
5 Mutual Adaptation (5-1) Satisfaction(Artifact→User)
(5-2) Application(User→Artifact)
6 Mutual Benefit (6-1) Accountability(Engineer→User)
(6-2) Boosting(User→Engineer)
Table 1  The Explanation of Figure 4
1 Abrams, M. H. (1971). The Mirror and the lamp: romantic theory and the critical tradition. New York: Oxford University Press
2 Dearden, R. F. (1984). The Theory and practice in education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paulchap.S
3 Dessauer,F. (1956).Streit um die technik [The Controversy Concerning Technology].Frankfurt:Verlag Josef Knecht
4 Feenberg, A. (2002). Transforming technology: a critical theory revisited. New York: Oxford University Press
5 Georg, W.(1991). Elements of the philosophy of right (Nisbet, H.B., Trans.).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
6 Harms A. A., Baetz B. W.,&Volti R. R. (2004).Engineering in time: the systematics of engineering history and its contemporary context. London: Imperial College Press
7 Harris E.H.,&Pritchard M. S. (2008). Engineering ethics: concepts and cases. Stamford: Wadsworth Publishing
8 James, Y. L. (1976).Chinese theories of literature. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
9 Keesey D.(1994). Contexts for criticism (2nd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company
10 McGuinness, B. F. (1985). Moritz Schlick. New York : Springer
11 Mitcham, C. (2003).Co-responsibility for research integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics. 9, 278-281
12 Plato. (2007). The Republic (Penguin Classics) (Desmond Lee, Trans.). London: Penguin Group
13 Richard.T.,& George D. (2009).Business ethics.New York: Pearson, 27
14 Stufflebeam D. L., Madaus G. f., &Kellaghan.T. (2000).Evaluation model:viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2nd ed.). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers
15 UNESCO. (2010). Engineering: issues challenges and opportunities for development. Paris: UNESCO Publishing
16 Xing H., Liu H., & Wang Q. (2008).Analysis of the innovative ability of engineering scientists and technicians. Technoeconomics& Management Research, 5, 26-28
[1] Zachary A. COLLIER, James H. LAMBERT. Managing obsolescence of embedded hardware and software in secure and trusted systems[J]. Front. Eng, 2020, 7(2): 172-181.
[2] Žiga TURK, Andreja ISTENIČ STARČIČ. Toward deep impacts of BIM on education[J]. Front. Eng, 2020, 7(1): 81-88.
[3] Andrew LOCKLEY. Distributed governance of Solar Radiation Management geoengineering: A possible solution to SRM’s “free driver” problem?[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(4): 551-556.
[4] He LIU, Jianwen YAN, Siwei MENG, Qinghai YANG, Zixiu YAO, Shijia ZHU. Practice and understanding of developing new technologies and equipment for green and low-carbon production of oilfields[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(4): 517-523.
[5] Chunfang LU, Junfei LIU, Yanhong LIU, Yuming LIU. Intelligent construction technology of railway engineering in China[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(4): 503-516.
[6] Jack Xunjie LUO. Fully automatic container terminals of Shanghai Yangshan Port phase IV[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(3): 457-462.
[7] Bing WANG, Qingbin CUI, Shuibo ZHANG. Evaluation of the contract reliability for alternative infrastructure project delivery: a contract engineering method[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(2): 239-248.
[8] Andrew LOCKLEY. Security of solar radiation management geoengineering[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(1): 102-116.
[9] Andrew LOCKLEY, Zhifu MI, D’Maris COFFMAN. Geoengineering and the blockchain: Coordinating Carbon Dioxide Removal and Solar Radiation Management to tackle future emissions[J]. Front. Eng, 2019, 6(1): 38-51.
[10] Shanlin YANG, Jianmin WANG, Leyuan SHI, Yuejin TAN, Fei QIAO. Engineering management for high-end equipment intelligent manufacturing[J]. Front. Eng, 2018, 5(4): 420-450.
[11] Yongkai ZHOU, Hongfeng CHAI. Research and practice on system engineering management of a mobile payment project[J]. Front. Eng, 2017, 4(2): 127-137.
[12] Eric SCHEEPBOUWER, Douglas D. GRANSBERG, Carla Lopez del PUERTO. Construction engineering management culture shift: Is the lowest tender offer dead?[J]. Front. Eng, 2017, 4(1): 49-57.
[13] Jonathan Jingsheng SHI, Saixing ZENG, Xiaohua MENG. Intelligent data analytics is here to change engineering management[J]. Front. Eng, 2017, 4(1): 41-48.
[14] Lieyun DING, Jie XU. A review of metro construction in China: Organization, market, cost, safety and schedule[J]. Front. Eng, 2017, 4(1): 4-19.
[15] David A. Wyrick,Warren Myers. Strategic Project Management to Use the Grand Challenge Scholars Program to Address Urban Infrastructure[J]. Front. Eng, 2016, 3(3): 203-205.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed