In his article “Codes of Ethics and the Moral Education of Engineering”, Luegenbiehl claims that the current codes of ethics available to Engineers are vague and in desperate need of alteration. In other words, the aim of his paper is to demonstrate how the codes have little value and are often ignored making them unusable and thus should be thrown out altogether, “the avoidance of the codesis justified because the codes of engineering ethics, in their present form, should not be utilized as a set of ethical rules of behavior” (Luegenbiehl 137). This statement clearly demonstrates just how adamant the author is about replacing the present codes of ethics because they are unethical. Obviously this is the exact opposite of what it should be for the primary purpose of the codes should be to show the engineer the ethical thing to do in the situation they are in.
Instead of revising the current codes of ethics, however, Luegenbiehl proposes to replace them with what he calls “a set of ‘guides’ for ethical engineering decision making” (137). From what I can understand from the rest of the paper by this proposition is that Luegenbiehl felt that there was a serious lack of morality in the engineering field which was not only affecting their profession but the public as well. He supports this claim with hypothesized situations where the engineer is faced with situations where he finds himself conflicted between the ethics of his organization and his own morals which Luegenbiehl argues should not happen for no one should have to go against their own morals especially when the person is rational. For who is better to know what is good for the public than a fellow human being than confusing codes of ethics that no one follows anyway?
Luegenbiehl then points out how the codes emphasized status instead of the effects that the consequences of the engineer’s work can have on the population which makes one wonder if those who wrote it were more worried about their position than the lives of others (140). This becomes even more evident when one reads about situations where an engineer’s work deals with chemicals that could harm thousands if something were to happen but their employers tell them to continue with the work anyway. This is precisely why Luegenbiehl illustrates that his “guides” will help to educate engineers to arrive at “morally correct decisions” (146) which is clearly the best course of action since what engineers decide to do affects not only them but the rest of us as well. While this seems all well and good, not only will the removal of the codes of ethics and the establishing of these “guides” take an extensively long time, there is no guarantee that engineers will even utilize them when making important, possibly life altering decisions.
Nevertheless I do agree with him that there needs to be something done about the codes of ethics, whether it’s revising them or getting rid of them, for engineers need more than vague guidelines that they cannot understand when making these big decisions. I also feel that anything that goes against someone’s morality should not be possible for if we cannot rely on our morals when taking part in a project that could affect the public, than what do we look to? Certainly not the owners of the organizations or the employers for they have their own self-interests and will not act without thinking about whether or not the decision will affect them. Thus I do believe that Luegenbiehl’s “guides” may be the way for if the engineers are to know what to do in a specific situation it is prudent that they are educated first and are allowed to make judgements based off of their own sense of morality.
Work Cited
Luegenbiehl, Heinz C. Codes of Ethics and the Moral Education of Engineering. Chicago: Second National Conference, Mar. 1982. PDF.
