首页> 外文会议>American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition >Framing Engineering Ethics Education with Pragmatism and Care: A Proposal
【24h】

Framing Engineering Ethics Education with Pragmatism and Care: A Proposal

机译:框架工程伦理教育用实用主义和关怀:提案

获取原文

摘要

This paper considers the philosophical principles of pragmatism and the ethic of care as a broad framework for integrating ethics in undergraduate engineering. We propose an approach to integrate ethics into the teaching of engineering that accommodates the realities in which engineering operates and can bring up ethical considerations naturally. Increasingly engineering educators have been looking for ways to bring multiple affective perspectives smoothly into classroom and field practices of the student experience. Engineering is about working within external constraints and engineering practice is based on a way of thinking that is not applied science, but rather an evolving set of heuristics toward better design. Bulleit (2015) calls this the "engineering way of thinking" (EWT). A usable framework of engineering ethics should complement this, and include microethics, the engineer's individual responsibility and macroethics, which deals with the collective responsibility of the profession (Herkert 2001). Schmidt (2013) proposed an ethical framework based on virtue ethics that addresses "what engineers do, how they do it, and why it matters". Pantazidou and Nair (1999) articulated how the ethics of care fits naturally within the process of engineering design. Kardon (2015) examined how the legal definition of "standard of care" fits with engineering practice. Bulleit (2017) explored the similarities between engineering and pragmatism to show how pragmatism fits with the EWT. A combination of two American-born philosophical worldviews - Care and Pragmatism - provides flexibility and openness to address professional ethics realistically within the ethos and culture of engineering. Care and pragmatism are both systems for action and practice. They embed values into practice, promote reflective thinking, are cognizant of the context, and emphasize the need for thinking about the practical consequences of an action. Because of this, they are open in definition and are flexible, aspects that are hard to navigate in the current ways of teaching the issues in engineering ethics, based on traditional philosophical frameworks. As engineered systems become more complex, determining whether a decision is ethical becomes problematic due to the extreme uncertainty about the future. Furthermore, the decisions being made affect the future, but so do other events out of the control of the designer, and some of those events may be produced by the system being built. Whether a decision is ethical is particularly problematic in the design of large-scale engineered systems, including complex and complex adaptive systems such as social-technological-natural systems like the earth. This paper is a reflective proposal. It reviews recent work and asks how care and pragmatism can articulate and contribute to addressing thorny problems- simple and complex, local and global-- that engineers face. We review recent empirical work on the ethics of care and the role of empathy in engineering. Campbell (2013) asked how engineering "professors can teach students to care". Other work (Walther et al. 2012; Hess et al. 2014) has begun to build a background of how we could begin this integration. We suggest that these approaches are more consonant with design approaches and hence familiar to engineering faculty. Engineering ethics can then integrate seamlessly into engineering education. This paper considers a combination of the philosophical principles of pragmatism and the ethic of care as a broad framework for integrating ethics in undergraduate engineering. Such an approach would integrate ethics into the teaching of engineering in a way that accommodates the realities in which engineering operates, reflects the engineering ethos, and can address ethical considerations naturally. Care and pragmatism can contribute to addressing thorny problems- simple and complex, local and global- that engineers of today face. We suggest that these two approaches are more c
机译:本文考虑了实用主义的哲学原则以及作为整合本科工程伦理的广泛框架的哲学原则。我们提出了一种方法,将道德纳入工程教学中,以满足工程运营的现实,并可自然地提高道德考虑因素。越来越多的工程教育者一直在寻找如何平滑地带来多种情感视角,进入学生经历的课堂和现场实践。工程是关于在外部限制内工作,工程学实践基于一种不应用科学的思维方式,而是一种不断发展的启发式设计,更好的设计。 Bulleit(2015)称之为“工程思维方式”(EWT)。可用的工程伦理框架应补充这一点,并包括微斯特,工程师的个人责任和宏观,这些责任涉及专业的集体责任(Herkert 2001)。 Schmidt(2013)提出了一个基于德形伦理的道德框架,该德伦德伦理地解决了“哪些工程师,以及它们是如何做到的,以及为什么重要”。 Pantazidou和Nair(1999)阐述了护理道德的道德如何适应工程设计过程中。 Kardon(2015)审查了如何使用工程实践的“护理标准”的法律定义方式。 Bulleit(2017)探讨了工程和实用主义之间的相似之处,以展示务实用EWT的务实。两位美国出生的哲学世界观 - 护理和实用主义的组合 - 提供灵活性和开放性,以便在ETHOS和工程文化中逼真地解决职业道德。护理和实用主义是行动和实践的系统。他们将值嵌入实践中,促进反思思维,是认识到的背景,并强调需要思考行动的实际后果。因此,它们的定义是开放的,并且是灵活的,基于传统哲学框架的工程伦理问题的当前难以导航的方面。由于工程系统变得更加复杂,因此由于未来的极端不确定性,确定决定是否是有问题的。此外,所做的决定会影响未来,但是如此脱离设计者的其他事件,以及其中一些事件可以由建立的系统产生。在大规模工程系统的设计中,决定是否尤其有问题,包括复杂和复杂的自适应系统,例如像地球的社会技术 - 自然系统。本文是一项反思性建议。它评论最近的工作,并询问如何关心和务实如何表达并有助于解决棘手的问题 - 简单而复杂,当地和全球 - 工程师面临。我们审查了最近关于护理道德的实证工作和同理心在工程中的作用。坎贝尔(2013年)询问了工程如何“教授可以教学学生”。其他工作(Walther等,2012; Hess等,2014)已经开始建立了如何开始这种整合的背景。我们建议这些方法与设计方法更加辅音,从而熟悉工程学院。然后工程伦理可以无缝地整合到工程教育中。本文考虑了实用主义的哲学原则以及作为整合本科工程伦理的广泛框架的哲学原则的结合。这种方法将融入道德,以适应工程经营的现实,反映工程精神的方式,并可以自然地解决道德考虑因素。护理和实用主义有助于解决棘手的问题 - 简单而复杂,当地和全球 - 今天的工程师。我们建议这两种方法更多

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号