|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
 |
Interpretations
a) and b) |
|
| |
The
various models of engineering practice can also be considered
when interpreting Canon 1. The Malpractice (or minimalist)
model would assert that as long as standards are being
followed, you have acted appropriately. The Reasonable
Care (or Due-Care) model suggests that you must consider
likely outcomes of your work and provide for them in the
engineering design. The Good Works model extends the Reasonable
Care approach to consider what "should" be done to protect
the public health and welfare.
Consider, for example, the location and support of the
Ford Pinto gas tank. Was the Ford design a minimalist,
reasonable care, or good works approach?
A minimalist might suggest that proper use of a car does
not include accidents, and from this point of view, the
original design is acceptable. Reasonable people know
that accidents do happen, however, and most consumers
would argue that vehicle designers should take a reasonable
care approach and consider probable accidents, such as
moderate-impact, rear-end collisions. According to this
approach, the gas tank assembly should have been redesigned.
A "good works" design might include a multi-cell bladder
such as those in racecars, so that fuel spill and fire
hazard are minimized if an accident occurs. But would
consumers pay the additional cost for a "good works" design?
Canon 1 states that engineers will hold paramount the
safety, health, and welfare of the public in the performance
of their duties, but in reality, engineers must make tradeoffs
between safety and cost when designing vehicles. The $11
bracket for the Pinto ($36.50 in 2002) does not seem like
much, and increasing the price by this amount would probably
not affect a purchase decision. There could be hundreds
of such parts, though, and upgrading all of them might
add thousands to the sticker price. To put things in perspective,
note that the inflation-adjusted value of a human life,
which was $200,000 in 1970, according to the NHTSA, is
about $650,000 now.
Under Canon 1, what is the responsibility of the engineers
working on the Pinto design or performing the economic
analysis to justify a redesigned gas tank assembly? They
could use the reversibility principle and ask themselves
whether they would drive the car or, better still, whether
they would let their teenage child drive it. |
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
