Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [1]

Unit-III
Engineering as Social Experimentation –Framing the problem –Determining the facts –Codes
of Ethics –Clarifying Concepts –Application issues –Common Ground -General Principles –
Utilitarian thinking respect for persons.

Engineers’ Characteristics:
1. They are generally technically qualified and are able to realize the technical
consequences of any decision made.
2. Their professional loyalty goes beyond their immediate bosses.
3. Their primary function within the organization is to use their technical knowledge and
training to create engineering products and processes that are of value to the
organization and customers.
4. They must assess the safety of the product and process and ensure that the processes
and products are safe and environment friendly. They should embed in the standards
certain criteria like efficiency and economy of design, the degree of vulnerability to
improper manufacturing and the extent to which state-of-the art technology is used.
5. They should have special concern for quality in all aspects of manufacture.
6. They must advise the management on the above and technical matters relating to the
processes and products.
7. They must uphold the standards that the profession has decided and follow their
guidelines.
Engineering as Social Experimentation:
The function of the engineer is to develop new products and processes. Since each stage
of the design or development is experienced for the first time, there are uncertainties at every
stage and the engineer is bound to make presumptions either from data books or from his
experience. These uncertainties can be in the form of
◆ Models used for the design calculations
◆ Performance characteristics of the materials
◆ Inconsistencies in the materials purchased
◆ Nature of the pressure the finished product encounters
His success lies in his capacity to accomplish his task with this partial knowledge. This
brings forth the need to develop prototype or simulation models at every stage and conduct
experiments to test them. Rough designs are thus developed from simulation tests conducted
from time to time which form the basis for developing more detailed designs, till the final
product or the process emerges. Thus, it is clear that every engineering activity is based on
experimental processes. These experiments are done not only in the laboratory but also in the
field from the point of view of public safety and performance.
As per Murphy’s law, if anything is to go wrong, it will go wrong, sooner or later. It
means that all products of technology present potential hazards to some extent due to failure,
making engineering a risky activity. Thus, each engineering project, whether development of
processes or setting up a new plant or building a new railway track or even preparing for
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [2]

launching a luxury cruiser like Titanic with a full load of passengers should be viewed as an
experimental process. Before introducing to the public, every engineering product must
undergo various experiments not only in the laboratory but also from the point of safety to the
public, especially wherever the lives of several people are involved. That is the reason why the
engineer is called not only an experimenter, but a responsible experimenter in view of his
concern for public safety as he is experimenting with his design with the society at stake. The
engineer, being a responsible experimenter, should bear in mind and appreciate fully the fact
that the experiments are to be done from the society and safety point of view.
◆ His major duty is to protect the safety of human beings and respect the rights of consent.
◆ He should have a clear awareness of the experimental nature of the project, forecasting
its possible side effects.
◆ He should monitor these effects, or side effects, meticulously and record any significant
issues that arise.
◆ He should ensure full personal involvement in all the steps of the project.
◆ He should have a fairly well-developed moral autonomy. His moral beliefs and attitudes
must be held only on basis of critical reflection rather than merely through the passive
adoption of the conventions of the society.
◆ He should be accountable for the results of the project.
◆ He should exhibit their technical competence and other characteristics of
professionalism.
Framing the Problem:
Problem Framing is a process, which occurs early in and throughout the practice of
Engineering Design that involves outlining one’s mental interpretation of a problem situation
by identifying the goals and essential issues related to developing a desired solution. This
includes identifying design parameters to formulate a problem statement that
 considers multiple perspectives,
 removes perceived assumptions that unnecessarily limit the problem-solving
process, and
 frames the design scenario in such a manner that helps guide the problem-
solving process.
This core concept is important to the practice of Engineering Design as design problems
are, by nature, ill-structured and open-ended. Problem framing is a thinking method used to
understand, define, and prioritize difficult business obstacles and issues. In layman’s terms, it’s
a way to better comprehend specific problems so that you know how to solve them in real time.
Context: The business context of the problem includes background information about when
the problem occurred and in which system or process it occurred. For example,
inconsistent data is being gathered during the planning stage of the process.
Issue: The issue details what the problem is and why it’s an issue in the first place. For example,
this inconsistent data is creating a discrepancy during the implementation phase.
Relevance: The relevance of the problem details how it is related to a particular system and
why it is important to be solved. For example, the discrepancy then requires the team
to go back and pinpoint where the issue began, causing deadline delays.
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [3]

Objective: The objective states the timeline or priority of when the solution needs to be
implemented and the goal of said solution. For example, the team needs to solve the
problem before the end of the quarter given it’s a high priority issue.
From defining the problem to approving the solution, let’s dive into the four steps of the
problem framing process.
1. Define the problem
Analyze your problem in context with the system or process it presents itself in. Ask
questions such as, “Where does this problem live within the system?” and, “What is the
root cause of the problem?”
Defining contextual questions helps place the problem within your existing processes
and pinpoint what could be causing the issue.
For example, if you’re working on launching a new marketing initiative and you run
into a problem with development, you might define the problem as a lack of
development resources.
2. Prioritize the problem
Next, prioritize the pain points based on other issues and project objectives. Questions
such as, “Does this problem prevent objectives from being met?” and, “Will this
problem deplete necessary resources?” are good ones to get you started.
These questions help rank your problems by importance so you can visualize the
potential outcome of solving the problem vs. waiting until a later time.
3. Understand the problem
To understand the problem, collect information from diverse stakeholders and
department leaders. This will ensure you have a wide range of data.
Ask questions and gather details from as many different team members as possible to
help diversify your perspective on the problem. In turn, this will lead you to more
innovative solutions that serve the majority of team members.
For example, to fully understand why there aren’t enough development resources, it
would be helpful to ask the development head to help reprioritize necessary resources.
4. Approve the solution
Finally, it's time to get your solution approved. Quality assure your solution by testing
in one or more internal scenarios. This way you can be sure it works before introducing
it to external customers.
You may also need to get it approved by leadership before it goes live, though this will
depend on your unique situation. Once approved, analyse the success of your solution
and continue testing new ideas until you reach your desired outcome.
Problem framing techniques and tips
Since problem framing is a way of shifting your perspective in order to see different
results, it can help workplaces thrive. By motivating your team to use this technique, you can
build everyone’s problem solving skills as a whole.
Here are some ways that you can use problem framing to discover innovative solutions in the
workplace:
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [4]

Frame problems using organized statements: While the method of problem framing
can be used in almost any situation where a problem exists, there is a right and wrong
way when it comes to reframing issues. A problem statement may differ from situation
to situation, but each one should follow the basic components outlined above. This
includes the context, issue, relevance, and objective. All of which help stakeholders
understand how the problem relates back to the project at hand.
Lead effective brainstorming sessions: Problem framing can be used during
brainstorming sessions to encourage different perspectives and new insights. You can
use this brainstorming technique by asking stakeholders to frame their ideas using a
whiteboard or sticky notes. This way all ideas are supported by data.
Frame the problem with the end in mind: The technique of beginning with the end in
mind involves working backward. This way you can shift your team’s mindset and
encourage goal-oriented thinking. Not to mention, this technique can help your team
members learn to prioritize personal development and strategic thinking.

1. Define the Problem: The engineering design process starts when you ask the following
questions about problems that you observe:
What is the problem or need?
Who has the problem or need?
Why is it important to solve?
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [5]

2. Do Background Research: Learn from the experiences of others — this can help you find
out about existing solutions to similar problems, and avoid mistakes that were made in the past.
So, for an engineering design project, do background research in two major areas:
Users or customers
Existing solutions
3. Specify Requirements: Design requirements state the important characteristics that your
solution must meet to succeed. One of the best ways to identify the design requirements for
your solution is to analyse the concrete example of a similar, existing product, noting each of
its key features.
4. Brainstorm Solutions: There are always many good possibilities for solving design
problems. If you focus on just one before looking at the alternatives, it is almost certain that
you are overlooking a better solution. Good designers try to generate as many possible solutions
as they can.
5. Choose the Best Solution: Look at whether each possible solution meets your design
requirements. Some solutions probably meet more requirements than others. Reject solutions
that do not meet the requirements.
6. Develop the Solution: Development involves the refinement and improvement of a solution,
and it continues throughout the design process, often even after a product ship to customers.
7. Build a Prototype: A prototype is an operating version of a solution. Often it is made with
different materials than the final version, and generally it is not as polished. Prototypes are a
key step in the development of a final solution, allowing the designer to test how the solution
will work.
8. Test and Redesign: The design process involves multiple iterations and redesigns of your
final solution. You will likely test your solution, find new problems, make changes, and test
new solutions before settling on a final design.
Code of Ethics
A code of ethics or ethical code refers to a set of guidelines, standards, and principles that
a company adopts and that must be adhered to by its workers.
A code of ethics is usually in a written form. It is a document that outlines the core values
and ethics of a business that professionals must live by.
Codes of ethics are often determined by the professional body, company management or
the association.
Some of the ethics are;
 Integrity, competence and diligence in all deals and transactions.
 Ethical conduct that reflects professionalism and credibility of the profession.
 Acting in the best interest of their clients and putting the integrity of their profession
first before personal interests.
 Striving to maintain and improve professional competence and promote the viability of
global market.

In other words, ‘codes of ethics’ exhibit, rights, duties, and obligations of the members of
a profession and a professional society. The codes exhibit the following essential roles:

Need of Codes of Ethics

Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [6]

There are several reasons why engineers follow a code of ethics. Some of these reasons include;
maintaining safety, integrity and honesty, upholding proper decision making in issues of
dilemma and maintaining discretion in their jobs.
1. Maintaining Safety
The work of engineers entails working on projects that impact the lives of members of society.
Many times, their work involves building structures that people use daily. Therefore, engineers
need to have a code of ethics that guide them in their daily work to ensure that they uphold the
best interest of society.
Engineering code of ethics ensures that engineers put the safety of the members of the society
first when doing their work. It means that an engineer will work with standard and approved
material and that they will follow the set engineering procedures during their career.
2. Integrity and Honest
Engineers, like all other professions, require integrity and honesty in their jobs. Codes of ethics
enable them to be accountable for their actions. They act as guiding principles for determining
what is right or wrong.
A code of ethics for engineers ensures that they remain honest in all their transactions. Even
when faced with a dilemma or other pressures in their duty, when they adhere to the code of
ethics, they will remain honest. By following the code of ethics, engineers can be frank with
their clients, and at all times ensure that they keep the interests of the clients in mind.
3. Builds Public Trust and Confidence in the Profession
Engineering codes of ethics should be considered a crucial part of the engineering profession
because it helps create faith among the population that engineers are ethical people who will
do what is right even when no one else is looking. It also provides assurance to others in
different fields like construction, manufacturing, software development, etc., that they have
someone on their side with respect to safety or quality standards.
Without these guidelines in place, every engineer would need to develop his or her own set of
rules which could lead to problems such as not knowing what constitutes appropriate behavior
and how important decisions should be made about design specifications without first
consulting relevant stakeholders.
4. Protects Clients and Employers
The code of ethics also ensures that engineers maintain discretion when dealing with their
clients’ information. Generally, the principle of ethics places client’s personal information
privileged, and engineers must ensure that that information remains so.
They should not disclose any details regarding the client such as their name, age, gender,
location or even the project at hand. The engineers must preserve such information unless the
client states otherwise. Likewise, the engineer should not disclose any information regarding
their employer unless otherwise stated.
5. Ensures Ethical Decision Making in Areas of Uncertainty
A dilemma or a predicament refers to a situation where there is a difficult choice to make
between two or more alternatives. Dilemmas are relatively common occurrences in everyone’s
lives. Occasionally, people have to make difficult decisions in life where the other options
present as equally destructive.
Like all people, engineers face dilemmas in their line of duty. A code of ethics guides engineers
in making these difficult decisions by ensuring that they choose what is moral. They give a
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [7]

clear guideline into what decision is ethical and serves the interests of the society rather than
individual gain.
Some Fundamental Principles of Engineering Code of Ethics that Every engineer in
their line of duty is expected to follow are:
 Uphold the safety, welfare and health of the society at all times
 Be truthful and honest when issuing public statements
 Offer their services in their areas of expertise only
 Be honest and trustful with their employers and clients
 Be honourable, responsible, lawful and ethical in their professional capacity to ensure
good reputation and honour among the society
 Treat all people with fairness with respect and dignity regardless of their personality,
gender, race or other personal identification issues
 Use their knowledge and skills for the improvement of humanity
 Anticipate the current needs of society and fulfil them
Advantages of good code of ethics
1. Inspiration and guidance- The codes express the collective commitment of the profession
to ethical conduct and public good and thus inspire the individuals. They identify primary
responsibilities and provide statements and guidelines on interpretations for the
professionals and the professional societies.
2. Support to engineers- The codes give positive support to professionals for taking stands
on moral issues. Further they serve as potential legal support to discharge professional
obligations.
3. Deterrence (discourage to act immorally) and discipline (regulate to act morally)- The
codes serve as the basis for investigating unethical actions. The professional societies
sometimes revoke membership or suspend/expel the members, when proved to have acted
unethical. This sanction along with loss of respect from the colleagues and the society are
bound to act as deterrent.
4. Education and mutual understanding- Codes are used to prompt discussion and reflection
on moral issues. They develop a shared understanding by the professionals, public, and the
government on the moral responsibilities of the engineers. The Board of Review of the
professional societies encourages moral discussion for educational purposes.
5. Create good public image- The codes present positive image of the committed profession
to the public, help the engineers to serve the public effectively. They promote more of self-
regulation and lessen the government regulations. This is bound to raise the reputation of
the profession and the organization, in establishing the trust of the public.
6. Protect the status quo- They create minimum level of ethical conduct and promotes
agreement within the profession. Primary obligation namely the safety, health, and welfare
of the public, declared by the codes serves and protects the public.
7. Promotes business interests- The codes offer inspiration to the entrepreneurs, establish
shared standards, healthy competition, and maximize profit to investors, employees, and
consumers.
Limitations and Application issues

1. General and vague wordings: Many statements are general in nature and hence unable
to solve all problems.
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [8]

2. Not applicable to all situations: Codes are not sacred, and need not be accepted without
criticism. Tolerance for criticisms of the codes themselves should be allowed.
3. Often have internal conflicts: Many times, the priorities are clearly spelt out, e.g.,
codes forbid public remarks critical of colleagues (engineers), but they actually
discovered a major bribery, which might have caused a huge loss to the exchequer.
4. They cannot be treated as final moral authority for professional conduct: Codes have
flaws by commission and omission. There are still some grey areas undefined by codes.
They cannot be equated to laws. After all, even laws have loopholes and they invoke
creativity in the legal practitioners. Only a few enroll as members in professional
society and non-members cannot be compelled. Even as members of the professional
society, many are unaware of the codes
5. Different societies have different codes: The codes cannot be uniform or same!
Unifying the codes may not necessarily solve the problems prevailing various
professions, but attempts are still made towards these unified codes.
6. Codes are said to be coercive: They are sometimes claimed to be threatening and
forceful.

Code of ethics vs code of conduct:

Code of Ethics: It is a set of guidelines containing core ethical values, principles and ideals of
the organization. It gives a general idea of what types of behavior and decisions are acceptable
and encouraged at a business or organization. For example, it might stipulate that ABC
Corporation is committed to environmental protection and green initiatives.

Code of Conduct: It is more focused and defines how employees or members should act in
specific situations. It outlines specific practices and behavior that are required or restricted
under the organization. For example, it might forbid sexual harassment, racial intimidation or
viewing inappropriate or unauthorized content on company computers.

Differences between Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct:

Code of Ethics Code of Conduct

1. It is general and broad in nature. It is specific and narrow in range.

2. It governs decision making. It governs actions.

3. It is focused on values and principles. It is focused on compliance and rules etc

It is publicly available and addressed to

It is generally addressed to and intended for
4. anyone with an interest in an institution's
employees alone.
activities.

They generally require little judgment; One

They are wide-ranging and non-specific,
has to obey or incur a penalty, and the code
enable employees to make independent
5. provides a fairly clear set of expectations
judgments about the most appropriate
about which actions are required,
course of action.
acceptable or prohibited.
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [9]

Common Ground:
The Need for Common Ground
It seems clear that we need to involve ourselves in effective ethical discussions. And in
order to make real progress on the ethical issues that confront us, we desperately need an ethical
approach or method that will enable us to establish some type of common ground. Without
common ground, the prospect of reaching consensus or a workable compromise on pressing
ethical issues is unlikely, if not impossible. Without some form of common ground we are left
with the spectacle of advocates of diverse ethical positions exchanging set ideas in an
intellectual atmosphere that, to say the least, is non-conducive to learning, much less producing
a fruitful ethical system. Lack of common ground also causes a great deal of wasted time and
talent. Good intentioned, talented people on each side of a controversial ethical issue often
spend most of their time defending their position and/or attacking the position of others who
disagree, rather than joining with others in a common search for truth. Without a common
ground - common focus, common method, common goals - true communication (cum -with,
unio-union) is most difficult, because participants are often speaking in a foreign intellectual
language.
Some Failed Attempts to Establish a Common Ground for Ethics
The following are notable post-Medieval attempts to establish a universal ethic:
 The sentimentalist option - An appeal to common human moral feelings or sentiments,
rather than reason. This approach held that the human sentiments of kindness,
friendliness, honesty, gentleness, etc., would be chosen by most over cruelty,
dishonesty etc. (David Hume 1711-76)
 The rationalist option - An appeal to human reason to establish a “categorical
imperative”—what we have a duty to do, no matter what the consequences. This
“categorical imperative” included a demand to act only on principles that could be made
universal. Also treat people as ends in themselves and never as means to our own ends.
(Immanuel Kant 1724-1804)
 The utilitarian option - An attempt to base ethics on utility or “the greatest happiness
of the greatest number” defined in terms of pleasures and pain common to all human
beings. (Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832 and John Stuart Mill 1806-73)
 The contractarian option - An appeal made to a social contract that all reasonable
persons, despite their differing values, could agree upon. (Thomas Hobbs 1588-1679,
John Locke 1632-1704, Jean-Jacques Rousseau 1712-78 and John Rawls 1921-)
The natural law offers two secular components which can serve as a basis to establish
a common ground for discussion in the search for an objective, universal human ethic. These
components are:
1) human nature
2) human reason
Those committed to a natural law tradition assume the possibility that reasonable people
can discover together what it means to be human and what ethical principles need to be adopted
and what civil laws need to be enacted in a society so that human life can flourish. This assumes
that we share a common human nature and that through a rational process we can discover
what constitutes our nature and what are some of the necessary social circumstances, (ethical
consensus and laws), that will enable our natures to grow and flower. The natural law is not
envisioned as some kind of ethical code existing above and beyond human experience and
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [10]

imposed on humans and their societies from the outside. It is not an extrinsic set of laws or
ethical principles.
That the natural law must be discovered implies that the employment of the natural law
in moral discourse is a rational process. Rational establishes that the ground for discussion is
human reason, something human beings share in common. Process means that there is an
element of discovery in understanding the natural law. It is not simply a process of referencing
a set of immutable principles, but a discovery of “what works” for human beings in the
particular circumstances of their individual and social lives.
Utilitarian thinking and the General Principles
Utilitarian thinking or utilitarianism, in normative ethics, a tradition stemming from the
late 18th- and 19th-century English philosophers and economists Jeremy Bentham and John
Stuart Mill according to which an action (or type of action) is right if it tends to
promote happiness or pleasure and wrong if it tends to produce unhappiness or pain—not just
for the performer of the action but also for everyone else affected by it. Utilitarianism is a
species of consequentialism, the general doctrine in ethics that actions (or types of action)
should be evaluated on the basis of their consequences. Utilitarianism and other
consequentialist theories are in opposition to egoism, the view that each person should pursue
his or her own self-interest, even at the expense of others, and to any ethical theory that regards
some actions (or types of action) as right or wrong independently of their consequences
(see deontological ethics). Utilitarianism also differs from ethical theories that make the
rightness or wrongness of an action dependent upon the motive of the agent—for, according to
the utilitarian, it is possible for the right thing to be done from a bad motive. Utilitarian’s may,
however, distinguish the aptness of praising or blaming an agent from whether the action was
right.
Utilitarianism is a theory of morality that advocates actions that foster happiness or
pleasure and oppose actions that cause unhappiness or harm. When directed toward making
social, economic, or political decisions, a utilitarian philosophy would aim for the betterment
of society as a whole.
In the notion of consequences, the utilitarian includes all of the good and bad produced
by the action, whether arising after the action has been performed or during its performance. If
the difference in the consequences of alternative actions is not great, some utilitarians would
not regard the choice between them as a moral issue. According to Mill, acts should be
classified as morally right or wrong only if the consequences are of such significance that a
person would wish to see the agent compelled, not merely persuaded and exhorted, to act in
the preferred manner.
This theory suggests that we find the meaning of ethics by looking at the consequences.
In particular something is right if it maximizes the good, producing the greatest good for the
greatest number (Mill 1806–73). The classic example of this theory is the scenario of the portly
potholer who is stuck in the cave exit, with fifty of his colleagues behind him. If there is no
alternative but to use explosives to blow open the hole then it is acceptable to sacrifice him for
the good of the majority. The stress in all this is social good. Hence, if we look at abortion, for
instance, we cannot say that this is wrong in itself. It can be right if it maximizes utility. In this
case the argument would be that making abortion legal saves the lives of many pregnant
women, who in the 1960s only had recourse to back street abortionists, and enables greater life
choices for women as a whole. Principles can be a rule of thumb, but cannot be absolute, and
can reasonably be broken if they do not produce the most good. But what is the good? Mill’s
answer to that is happiness. All other goods are simply a means to that intrinsic good.
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [11]

In assessing the consequences of actions, utilitarianism relies upon some theory of

intrinsic value: something is held to be good in itself, apart from further consequences, and all
other values are believed to derive their worth from their relation to this intrinsic good as a
means to an end. Bentham and Mill were hedonists; i.e, they analyzed happiness as a balance
of pleasure over pain and believed that these feelings alone are of intrinsic value and disvalue.
Utilitarians also assume that it is possible to compare the intrinsic values produced by two
alternative actions and to estimate which would have better consequences. Bentham believed
that a hedonic calculus is theoretically possible. A moralist, he maintained, could sum up the
units of pleasure and the units of pain for everyone likely to be affected, immediately and in
the future, and could take the balance as a measure of the overall good or evil tendency of an
action. Such precise measurement as Bentham envisioned is perhaps not essential, but it is
nonetheless necessary for the utilitarian to make some interpersonal comparisons of the values
of the effects of alternative courses of action.
The 3 Generally Accepted Principles of Utilitarianism State That
 Pleasure, or happiness, is the only thing that has intrinsic value. To say that
something has intrinsic value means that it is simply good in itself. Intrinsic value
contrasts with instrumental value. Something has instrumental value when it is a means
to some end.
 Actions are right if they promote happiness, and wrong if they promote
unhappiness.
This principle is quite controversial, since it involves that the moral quality of an action
is decided by the size of its consequences. So long as an action produces maximum
benefits for the greatest number of people, utilitarianism does not care whether the
results are driven by immoral motives. However, this principle can be refuted since
most people would agree that the moral quality of an action depends on the motive or
intention behind it.
 Everyone's happiness counts equally. Although this axiom may seem quite obvious,
this principle of equality was radical and progressive in Bentham's time. By then, it was
commonly accepted that some lives and some people's happiness were simply more
important and valuable than others. Betham's principle of equality makes the
government responsible for creating policies that would benefit all equally, not just the
elite.
In workplace, most companies have a formal or informal code of ethics, which is shaped
by their corporate culture, values, and regional laws. Today, having a formalized code of
business ethics is more important than ever. For a business to grow, it not only needs to increase
its bottom line, but it also must create a reputation for being socially responsible. Companies
also must endeavour to keep their promises and put ethics at least on par with profits.
Consumers are looking for companies that they can trust, and employees work better when
there is a solid model of ethics in place.
On an individual level, if you make morally correct decisions at work, then everyone's
happiness will increase. However, if you choose to do something morally wrong—even if
legal—then your happiness and that of your colleagues, will decrease.

Utilitarian Ethics
 "Rule" Utilitarian Ethics
An example of rule utilitarianism in business is tiered pricing for a product or service for
different types of customers. In the airline industry, for example, many planes offer first-,
Huma Values and Professional Ethics Unit-III: Engineering as Social Experimentation Page [12]

business-, and economy-class seats. Customers who fly in first or business class pay a much
higher rate than those in economy seats, but they also get more amenities—simultaneously,
people who cannot afford upper-class seats benefit from the economy rates. This practice
produces the highest good for the greatest number of people. And the airline benefits, too. The
more expensive upper-class seats help to ease the financial burden that the airline created by
making room for economy-class seats.
 "Act" Utilitarian Ethics
An example of act utilitarianism could be when pharmaceutical companies release drugs that
have been governmentally approved, but with known minor side effects because the drug is
able to help more people than are bothered by the side effects. Act utilitarianism often
demonstrates the concept that “the end justifies the means”—or it's worth it.
Quantitative Utilitarism vs. Qualitative Utilitarism
 Quantitative utilitarianism is a branch of utilitarianism that was developed out of the
work of Jeremy Bentham. Quantitative utilitarians focus on utility maximization, that
is, maximizing the overall happiness of everyone, and use a hedonic approach to
determine the rightness or wrongness of actions. Bentham defined as the foundation of
his philosophy the principle that “it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that
is the measure of right and wrong”.
 Qualitative utilitarianism is a branch of utilitarianism that arose from the work of
John Stuart Mill. Qualitative utilitarians categorize pleasures and pains in a more
qualitative manner, depending on the level of their consequences, and disregarding any
quantifiable proof of their importance.