Salt Lake City, Utah
June 23, 2018
June 23, 2018
July 27, 2018
Identifying Moral Foundations and Disciplinary Frameworks of Engineering Ethics
Engineering ethics has consistently focused on the ways in which individuals make ethical decisions and, in turn, the ways in which engineering ethics educators can cultivate ethical decision making in individual’s behaviors. The target of this type of inquiry has been on the explicit outcomes of ethics: increasing reasoning skills, developing ethical motivation, evidencing ethical sensitivity. While this focus has been important for analyzing and shaping the ways that engineers develop, it often ignores the value positions from which individual start in favor of attention to frameworks that can shape continued development. Yet engineers often need to work across value and motivation differences, suggesting that cultivating ethical outcomes may not be solely linked to the frameworks that facilitate such outcomes but also connected to the implicit values – the foundations – that shape individuals. In response to this problem, we argue that engineering ethics education ought to work to identify ethical orientations—made up of both moral foundations and ethical frameworks — present in engineering sub-disciplines and determining how these orientations might support (or inhibit) effective decision-making across disciplinary boundaries.
Moral foundations, as defined by moral foundations theory (MFT), are an individual’s system of intuitive normative orientations to a particular ethical problem. Moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt spear-headed the development of this moral foundations theory in his 2012 The Righteous Mind. While MFT was developed with an eye toward better understanding political differences, we argue that these same moral foundations operate generally as threshold concepts (Meyer and Land 2006), creating the possibility for engaging in a previously inaccessible way of thinking and irreversibly altering ethical thought and practice – in the context of STEM disciplines as much as in the context of political thought. As such, we expect that disciplines with shared moral foundations are more likely to share modes of thought and practice, making the process of building shared decision-making frameworks more readily possible for those who share disciplinary and ethical homogeneity than for those who do not.
A diversity of frameworks for cultivating ethical decision-making have been developed and implemented within and across STEM disciplines. For example, some frameworks have focused on the moral sensitivity of individuals as a necessary condition for ethical decision-making. Other work has focused even more narrowly on individuals in specific disciplines. Specifically within engineering, several additional frameworks have been proposed to capture the essence of individual ethical decision-making; however, there is not one that has been widely adopted across all sub-disciplines of engineering. This diversity of framework compounds the diversity of moral foundations to such an extent that the ethicists failure to make sufficient differentiations among them will lead inevitably to a poor understanding of ethical decision-making.
Beever, J., & Pinkert, L. A. (2018, June), Identifying Moral Foundations and Disciplinary Frameworks of Engineering Ethics Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--30595
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2018 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015