 |
 |
| Home |
MORAL IMAGINATION This is excerpted from "Transformations: Ethics & Design," Andrew Lau, Richard Devon, et. al., 2001 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Albuquerque, NM, June 2001. This term and concept can now be found in many of the recent books on ethics, particularly professional ethics. In fact, one of the books is titled Moral Imagination1. This book defines moral imagination as "an ability to imaginatively discern various possibilities for acting in a given situation and to envision the potential help and harm that are likely to result from a given action."1 If we examine this definition it involves at least two skills, one being able to imagine many possibilities and their consequences, let's say a creative element, and the other being able to morally evaluate the possibilities, a more rational element (but not purely rational). The parallel with the engineering design process is obvious, but rather than being limited to engineering, moral imagination is called for by everyone (including especially engineers and other professionals) in any situation that is not black and white. It is quite possible that if we become more proficient at it, we would realize, by examining choices with this additional lens, we would have less black and white choices. Many of our problems with technology can be described as the revenge of unintended consequences. Decisions that appeared B&W ended up having serious moral consequences. With better moral imagination, we hope that many unintended consequences can be imagined and considered in the decision making process. The process of being morally imaginative has been described2:
Disengaging, the first step in this process, is crucial in opening up a larger realm of possibilities for action, and for more thoroughly accounting for the moral implications of an action. For example, Interface, a major carpet manufacturer, was designing a new facility in Shanghai, and one of the processes required a piping loop. Conventional design recommended a certain piping size and requisite pump of 95 hp3. But by recognizing the assumptions in that conventional design process, and by considering the impact of the conventional design on energy use and resultant resource use and pollution production, Interface engineer Jan Schilman redesigned the piping system to use only 7 hp, a 92% reduction. This was achieved in two ways, by using larger diameter pipes and by reducing the pipe length and number of turns. It turned out that conventional design wisdom results in relatively small diameter pipes and large horsepower pumps, and does not consider the placement of components to allow for short, straight runs. That wisdom is based on keeping first costs low and to some extent tradition. It is also based on effectively ignoring the resource and environmental consequences. Switching to large pipes allows the pumps to be smaller power and size, thereby reducing their cost and offsetting the higher cost of the piping. Furthermore, the large pipe system uses drastically less operating energy, reducing resource use and the resultant pollution. By thinking outside the box and considering the moral implications of energy inefficiency, Mr. Schilman designed a system that did not cost more to purchase, saves enormously on energy cost, and reduces resource use and pollution production. And the job of moving the fluid from point to point is achieved. In this example, the alternative is an all-around winning situation, making it a straightforward decision and not really requiring much evaluation as in step three of the process described earlier. One can imagine a similar situation where the more efficient alternative costs more and thus requires a look at the economics such as return-on-investment or payback period, and weighing this with the benefit to the environment and society. One could also take this example and point out other angles that aren't considered in conventional thinking that maybe should be. For example, the larger diameter, more efficient piping system may use more copper or steel, so one may be additionally comparing increased use of one resource with decreased use of another. Maybe the larger diameter piping is only available form a distant source, increasing transportation energy use, truck travel, and decreasing the benefit to the local economy. And so on. As Gorman et al acknowledge2: "Developing this process is, at best, difficult, …. But not to do so, …, risks moral and technological bankruptcy, threatens ecological sustainability in some cases, and prevents engineers from exercising their talents in ways that will benefit all of us." This enlarged role of engineers is recognized as an evolution from the historical occupation of providing employers with competent technical advice "into a profession that serves the community in a socially and environmentally responsible manner."4
Penn State is committed to affirmative action, equal opportunity, and the diversity of its workforce.
|
