Abstract
The relationship between ethics and engineering has largely been depicted as one-directional in which ethics enlightens engineers and their practices. The opposite contribution, from engineering to ethics, which has received far less attention, can be organized in three main categories. First, engineering leads to a wider separation between intention and ends, which are often unclear and sometimes not obtained, and a multiplication of means and mediation, which can increase uncertainty in ethical assessments. Second, engineering reduces the amount of time spent satisfying basic needs, which increases the amount of time and energy directed toward voluntary goals while amplifying human power and providing the material and social conditions that have been associated with philosophical activity since the time of the ancient Greeks. Third, engineering successes have also brought into relief an innovative understanding of desire and its social implications, catalyzed a more expansive scope of moral reasoning and universal imperatives, and illuminated the interrelated nature of existence between humans and the non-human world. Taken together, such insights have rejuvenated ethical inquiry and so have led to better understandings of the “good life” and authentic development. Engineering can be thought of as a “gadfly” that can shake the dogmatic ethical “horse” into action.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As Mitcham notes, this definition has largely been accepted to the present. The same definition holds in McGraw-Hill Concise Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, s.v. “Engineering,” accessed December 01, 2012, https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?qurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.credoreference.com/entry/conscitech/engineering.
- 2.
I owe the inspiration for this clever comment to C. E. (Ed) Harris.
- 3.
In fairness to Kant, the individualist aspect of this thought should be balanced by his efforts to move between the subjective and universal, which undergirds his First Critique.
- 4.
A wealth of social science data that supports Girard’s claims has also been produced after the publication of Deceit, Desire, and the Novel (1961 in French, 1966 in English), such as Richard Easterlin’s “paradox” that the correlation between happiness and wealth weakens after basic needs are satisfied.
- 5.
Whatever its other shortcomings, it is worth noting that utilitarianism addresses these problematic tendencies, at least to a degree.
- 6.
I am indebted to Diane Michelfelder for this insight.
References
Anders, G. (1961). Commandments in the atomic age. In C. Fatherly & G. Anders (Eds.), Burning conscience (New York: Monthly Review Press). Reprinted in C. Mitcham & R Mackey (Eds.), Philosophy and technology: Readings in the philosophical problems of technology. New York: Free Press, 1972.
Aristotle. (2002). Nicomachean Ethics (J. Sachs, Trans.). Newburport: Focus Publishing.
Borgmann, A. (1984). Technology and the character of contemporary life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bormgann, A. (2006). Real American ethics: Taking responsibility for our country. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dupuy, J.-P. (2002). Detour and sacrifice: Ivan Illich and René Girard. In L. Hoinacki & C. Mitcham (Eds.), Challenges of Ivan Illich: A collective reflection (pp. 189–204). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Dupuy, J. -P. (2013). Mark of the sacred (M. B. Debevoise, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society (J. Wilkinson, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books.
Feenberg, A. (1995). Alternative modernity: The technical turn in philosophy and social theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fuller, S. (2009). Sociology of intellectual life: The career of the mind in and around the academy. London: Sage.
Girard, R. (1966). Deceit, desire, and the novel: Self and other in literary structure (Y. Freccero, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Girard, R. (1986). The scapegoat (Y. Freccero, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Guthrie, W. K. C. (1962). History of Greek philosophy: The earlier Presocratics and the Pythagoreans (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haberl, H. et al. (2006). From LTER to LTSER: Conceptualizing the socioeconomic dimension of long-term socioecological research. Ecology and Society 11(2). http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art13/. Accessed 13 Jan 2107.
Institution of Civil Engineers. (1828). Royal charter. In Charter, supplemental charters, by-laws, and list of members of the Institution of Civil Engineers. London: Institution of Civil Engineers. As cited in Mitcham “Philosophical Inadequacy”, p. 345.
Johnstone, J. (2012). Capabilities and technology. In P. Brey, A. Briggle, & E. Spence (Eds.), The good life in a technological age (pp. 77–90). New York: Routledge.
Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Maffi, L. (Ed.). (2001). On biocultural diversity: Linking language, knowledge, and the environment. Washington: Smithsonian Institute Press.
McDonnell, M. J., & Pickett, S. T. A. (Eds.). (1993). Humans as components of ecosystems: The ecology of subtle human effects and populated areas. New York: Springer.
McIntosh, R. (1985). Background of ecology: Concept and theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mitcham, C. (2009). A philosophical inadequacy of engineering. The Monist, 92(3), 339–356.
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mitcham, C., & Briggle, A. (2012). Theorizing technology. In P. Brey, A. Briggle, & E. Spence (Eds.), The good life in a technological age (pp. 35–51). New York: Routledge.
Soper, K. (2009). Introduction: The mainstreaming of counter-consumerist concern. In K. Soper, M. Ryle, & L. Thomas (Eds.), The politics and pleasures of consuming differently (pp. 1–21). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Spence, E. (2012). Consumption and sustainability: A neo-epicurean approach to a sustainable good life in a technological age. In P. Brey, A. Briggle, & E. Spence (Eds.), The good life in a technological age (pp. 168–180). New York: Routledge.
Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Moralizing technology: Understanding and designing the morality of things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics. Daedalus, 109, 121–136.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Miller, G. (2018). What Ethics Owes Engineering. In: Fritzsche, A., Oks, S. (eds) The Future of Engineering. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91029-1_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-91028-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-91029-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)