Question No.

1
From the Web site of an engineering professional society, select a code of ethics of interest to you,
given your career plans; for example, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American Institute
of Chemical Engineers, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, or the Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers. Compare and contrast the code with the NSPE code (see Appendix),
selecting three or four specific points to discuss. Do they state the same requirements with the same
emphasis?

Discussion

Ethical Code by American society of Mechanical Engineering:

1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the
performance of their professional duties.
2. Engineers shall perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Engineers shall continue their professional development throughout their careers and shall
provide opportunities for the professional development of those engineers under their
supervision.
4. Engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or
trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest.

Ethical Code by NSPE:

According to NSPE the codes of ethics for a engineer are following:

1. Engineers and firms may individually refuse to bid for engineering services.
2. Clients are not required to seek bids for engineering services.
3. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
4. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
5. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
6. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
7. Avoid deceptive acts.
8. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the
honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

Comparison:
NSPE elaborate that project cannot be given to unlawful and unethical person and nor work
with such kind of person because it may lead to great loss. To a great extent, the ethical codes are
same for both of societies like responsibility, safety, integrity etc.
Question No.2

With regard to the same two codes you used in question 1, list three examples of responsibilities that
you believe would be incumbent on engineers even if the written code did not exist, and explain why.
Also list two examples, if any, of responsibilities created (entirely or in part) because the code was
written as a consensus document within the profession.

Discussion
According to Question no. 1 the three main responsibilities I believe that incumbent on engineers
are following:

1. Responsibility:
An engineer should be responsible for his every act that he commits.
e.g In a company, if to college work to gather and one wanted to cheat the company, then it is duty
of other to stop him from such kind of act if he stop then okay else informed to the company head.
Another example is that an engineer works as manager for the manufacturing of car body, so his
duty is, should use the right material for that.

2. Avoid Conduct that Deceives:

Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that deceives the public and avoid the use of
statements containing a material misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact.
If he do so, then it lead to great loss for her profession.

3. Well-informed
Engineer must be well-informed about the work to do and has thoroughly knowledge about that.
An engineer not to informed well about his work then there will be many problems that the society
faced e.g an engineer build a bridge and not to investigate the material he used then there will rise a
problem for the human life.

Question No.3

Is the following argument for ethical relativism a good argument? That is, is its premise true and
does the premise provide good reason for believing the conclusion?
a. People’s beliefs and attitudes in moral matters differ considerably from society to society. (Call
this statement “descriptive relativism,” because it simply describes the way the world is.)
b. Therefore, the dominant conventional beliefs and attitudes in the society are morally justified
and binding (ethical relativism).
Discussion
Yes, the belief and attitudes in society and a specific place are different. For example:
Our country has its on culture and tradition values that imparts only their livings. And we can say
that anything in our country that belong to our tradition are ethical but its not right for other
countries like Western Countries.
e.g. the Western culture are unethical for our country but not for them.So we can say there is a
relativism conflict of ehical code b/w different societies that change from one to another.

Question No.4
Reflection on the Holocaust led many anthropologists and other social scientists to reconsider
ethical relativism. The Holocaust also reminds us of the power of custom, law, and social authority
to shape conduct. Nazi Germany relied on the expertise of engineers, as well as other professionals,
in carrying out genocide, as well as its war efforts.
a. Do you agree that the Holocaust is a clear instance of where a cross-cultural judgment about
moral wrong and right can be made?
b. Judging actions to be immoral is one thing; blaming persons for wrongdoing is another
(where blame is a morally negative attitude toward a person). Present and defend your view about
whether the Nazi engineers and other professionals are blameworthy. Is blaming pointless, because
the past is past? Or is cross-cultural blame, at least in this extreme instance, an important way of
asserting values that we cherish?

Discussion
I concluded that Holocaust is a very clear example of where cross-cultural judgment
concerning moral and right could be made. What occurred in holocaust is that, the Nazi Germany
murdered millions of Jews as well as Fellow Germans who have been considered as undesirable,
people who don't contribute to a greater Face of their nation. The Nazi Germany also passed an
Antisemitic Law that aims to eliminate the Jews. This is all anti-Jews riots. The Jews were
prohibited to the majority of human rights. They weren't permitted to ride transport means, visit
grocery stores, visit their own gardens and were essentially prohibited from any Work halls. That
can be hostility, stereotyping, bias and discrimination. Most ethical views derive from deferent
faith and culture perspectives rather than one religion and culture approves of killing others
without a reason.
 Question No.5
Moral skeptics challenge whether sound moral reasoning is possible. An extreme form of moral
skepticism is called ethical subjectivism: Moral judgments merely express feelings and attitudes,
not beliefs that can be justified or unjustified by appeal to moral reasons. The most famous version
of ethical subjectivism is called emotivism: Moral statements are merely used to express emotions—
to emote—and to try to influence other people’s behavior, but they are not supportable by valid
moral reasons.19 What would ethical relativists say about ethical subjectivism?

What should be said in reply to the ethical subjectivist?