Ethical issues in engineering design - 3TU.Centre for Ethics and ...

Ethical issues in engineering design
design problem formulation can refer to the working principle and the normal
configuration and thereby imply a normal design without explicitly asking for a
normal design. The choice between radical and normal design is ethically
relevant. The design type influences the kind of ethical questions that need to be
answered and the way these are answered during the design process. A
regulative framework might be available for a normal design process, therefore
more operationalisation I kind of problems can be expected. More
operationalisation II kind of problems have to be solved in radical design. There
might be ethical reasons for choosing a radical design. For example, in the
DutchEVO lightweight car case the wish to produce a more sustainable car made
the design process a radical design. A downside of radical design is that it
usually implies a larger degree of uncertainty or ignorance than normal design.
Radical designs are probably more prone to risks and unintended effects than
normal designs [Van de Poel and Van Gorp, 2006]. This uncertainty may be a
good reason to choose for a normal design. The influence on the kind of ethical
issues the engineer must face, the possibility of better meeting ethically relevant
requirements in a radical design process, and the additional uncertainty in
radical design make the choice between radical and normal design ethically
relevant. Therefore, engineers should reflect on the design problem formulation.
If a design team formulates the design problem then the design team can
and should take into account all the moral reasons for and against normal and
radical design. The design team should establish whether there are signs, for
example in the media, that the regulative framework for the product is contested.
If such signs are visible then this provides a moral reason against using (part of)
the regulative framework and for making a more radical design. This
consideration should be weighted against the fact that a more radical design will
lead to more uncertainty and ignorance regarding the actual effects of a radical
design.
Engineers sometimes believe that if a customer has defined the design
problem they have no, or only little, influence on the formulation of the design
problem. According to this point of view, engineers are hired to make a design to
solve a certain design problem, not to reformulate the design problem. So even if
there are strong moral reasons to make a radical instead of a normal design (or
vice versa) engineers cannot change the design problem formulation. This claim
overlooks the fact that the customer is hiring the engineering company for its
knowledge and experience. The customer usually hires engineers to make a
design because he or she lacks the knowledge and experience to make the
168
design process turns out to be too difficult. A normal design process can become more radical
during the design process if, for example, during the design process another material is chosen
then was planned earlier.