Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893415
Tamara Bonaci, Ryan Calo, H. Chizeck
An increasing number of Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are being developed in medical and nonmedical fields, including marketing, gaming and entertainment industries. BCI-enabled technology carries a great potential to improve and enhance the quality of human lives. It provides people suffering from severe neuromuscular disorders with a way to interact with the external environment. It also enables a more personalized user experience in gaming and entertainment. These BCI applications are, however, not without risk. Established engineering practices set guarantees on performance, reliability and physical safety of BCIs. But no guarantees or standards are currently in place regarding user privacy and security. In this paper, we identify privacy and security issues arising from possible misuse or inappropriate use of BCIs. In particular, we explore how current and emerging non-invasive BCI platforms can be used to extract private information, and we suggest an interdisciplinary approach to mitigating this problem. We then propose a tool to prevent this side-channel extraction of users' private information. This is a first step towards making BCI-enabled technologies secure and privacy preserving.
{"title":"App stores for the brain: Privacy & security in Brain-Computer Interfaces","authors":"Tamara Bonaci, Ryan Calo, H. Chizeck","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893415","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893415","url":null,"abstract":"An increasing number of Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are being developed in medical and nonmedical fields, including marketing, gaming and entertainment industries. BCI-enabled technology carries a great potential to improve and enhance the quality of human lives. It provides people suffering from severe neuromuscular disorders with a way to interact with the external environment. It also enables a more personalized user experience in gaming and entertainment. These BCI applications are, however, not without risk. Established engineering practices set guarantees on performance, reliability and physical safety of BCIs. But no guarantees or standards are currently in place regarding user privacy and security. In this paper, we identify privacy and security issues arising from possible misuse or inappropriate use of BCIs. In particular, we explore how current and emerging non-invasive BCI platforms can be used to extract private information, and we suggest an interdisciplinary approach to mitigating this problem. We then propose a tool to prevent this side-channel extraction of users' private information. This is a first step towards making BCI-enabled technologies secure and privacy preserving.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"216 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120991030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893433
D. Biezad
Ethics education in the engineering curriculum is required by ABET. This requirement is being met in the aerospace engineering department at the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, by an unconventional approach which is intended to have a lasting impact on engineering graduates throughout their working career. Instead of relying solely on exposing students to a particular code of ethics, or on primarily reviewing engineering case studies of ethical situations, a topical history of philosophy and mathematics is presented in intermittent bursts of weekly storytelling that lasts five to ten minutes with the intent of showing the evolution of ethics from antiquity to the present day. The engineering students appreciate the historical mathematical and philosophical focus on ethics. Their comments say the approach appears both interesting and unique for this type of presentation, and that they enjoy the topical links to many subjects normally confined to the humanities. Initial survey results are at Appendix A; final survey results and comments are in progress and therefore limited to the oral presentation.
{"title":"Ethics as philosophical history for engineers","authors":"D. Biezad","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893433","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893433","url":null,"abstract":"Ethics education in the engineering curriculum is required by ABET. This requirement is being met in the aerospace engineering department at the California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, by an unconventional approach which is intended to have a lasting impact on engineering graduates throughout their working career. Instead of relying solely on exposing students to a particular code of ethics, or on primarily reviewing engineering case studies of ethical situations, a topical history of philosophy and mathematics is presented in intermittent bursts of weekly storytelling that lasts five to ten minutes with the intent of showing the evolution of ethics from antiquity to the present day. The engineering students appreciate the historical mathematical and philosophical focus on ethics. Their comments say the approach appears both interesting and unique for this type of presentation, and that they enjoy the topical links to many subjects normally confined to the humanities. Initial survey results are at Appendix A; final survey results and comments are in progress and therefore limited to the oral presentation.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134009876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893373
P. Gardoni, C. Murphy, R. Hillerbrand, B. Taebi
Worldwide the need for energy is growing. Particularly electricity demands seem to grow twice as fast as overall energy demands, rising by 73% by 2035. The production of nuclear power is also substantially growing in order to meet these electricity demands. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that some 50 countries will have nuclear reactors by 2030, up from 30 today, with the latest entrant being Iran. If these projections are borne out, the 432 nuclear reactors currently operable around the world will be joined by more than 500 others within the next few decades. Nuclear technology has evident advantages for energy production purposes, but it also raises a variety of safety and security concerns. The recent nuclear accident in Fukushima Daiichi in Japan has again brought the nuclear debate to the forefront of controversy. While Japan is trying to avert further disaster, many nations are reconsidering the future of nuclear power in their region. Discussions about the desirability of nuclear power involve many intricate and distinctive ethical issues. Yet, there is currently surprisingly little scholarly work that explicitly addresses these ethical issues. The major academic discussions date back to the eighties and early nighties of the last century. A forthcoming volume with the Cambridge University Press on The ethics of nuclear energy: risk, justice and democracy in the post-Fukushima Era' [1] aims to revive the field of nuclear ethics. Four authors will present their contributions to this volume.
全世界对能源的需求正在增长。特别是电力需求的增长速度似乎是总体能源需求的两倍，到2035年将增长73%。为了满足这些电力需求，核能的生产也在大幅增长。国际原子能机构(International Atomic Energy Agency)估计，到2030年，将有大约50个国家拥有核反应堆，比目前的30个有所增加，最新加入的是伊朗。如果这些预测得到证实，那么在接下来的几十年里，世界上目前可运行的432座核反应堆将增加500多座。核技术在能源生产方面具有明显的优势，但它也引发了各种安全问题。最近发生在日本福岛第一核电站的核事故再次将核争论推上了风口浪尖。在日本努力避免进一步灾难的同时，许多国家正在重新考虑本地区核能的未来。关于核能的可取性的讨论涉及许多复杂而独特的伦理问题。然而，令人惊讶的是，目前很少有学术工作明确地解决这些伦理问题。主要的学术讨论可以追溯到上世纪八十年代和八十年代初。剑桥大学出版社即将出版的《核能伦理:后福岛时代的风险、正义和民主》[1]旨在复兴核伦理领域。四位作者将介绍他们对这一卷的贡献。
{"title":"Panel - The ethics of nuclear energy in the post- Fukushima Era","authors":"P. Gardoni, C. Murphy, R. Hillerbrand, B. Taebi","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893373","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893373","url":null,"abstract":"Worldwide the need for energy is growing. Particularly electricity demands seem to grow twice as fast as overall energy demands, rising by 73% by 2035. The production of nuclear power is also substantially growing in order to meet these electricity demands. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that some 50 countries will have nuclear reactors by 2030, up from 30 today, with the latest entrant being Iran. If these projections are borne out, the 432 nuclear reactors currently operable around the world will be joined by more than 500 others within the next few decades. Nuclear technology has evident advantages for energy production purposes, but it also raises a variety of safety and security concerns. The recent nuclear accident in Fukushima Daiichi in Japan has again brought the nuclear debate to the forefront of controversy. While Japan is trying to avert further disaster, many nations are reconsidering the future of nuclear power in their region. Discussions about the desirability of nuclear power involve many intricate and distinctive ethical issues. Yet, there is currently surprisingly little scholarly work that explicitly addresses these ethical issues. The major academic discussions date back to the eighties and early nighties of the last century. A forthcoming volume with the Cambridge University Press on The ethics of nuclear energy: risk, justice and democracy in the post-Fukushima Era' [1] aims to revive the field of nuclear ethics. Four authors will present their contributions to this volume.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133046570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893378
L. Schoedel
In their jobs, engineers may be exposed to patents if they are inventing new products, features, or processes. Engineers may also be asked to compare their company's products and processes with patents owned by other companies or inventors. Engineers may also be exposed to patents if they are involved in production and need to ensure that the proper patent numbers are marked on the product or product documentation. In each of these scenarios, the engineer faces ethical issues.
{"title":"Ethics and patents","authors":"L. Schoedel","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893378","url":null,"abstract":"In their jobs, engineers may be exposed to patents if they are inventing new products, features, or processes. Engineers may also be asked to compare their company's products and processes with patents owned by other companies or inventors. Engineers may also be exposed to patents if they are involved in production and need to ensure that the proper patent numbers are marked on the product or product documentation. In each of these scenarios, the engineer faces ethical issues.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115747264","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893383
W. Marcy, Nael Barakat, D. Johnson, S. Starrett
This panel discussion seeks to engage engineering professionals in a discussion of their responsibilities and obligations to perform duties in an ethical manner. Specifically, the panel will explore how learned professionals learn about these responsibilities and the potential consequences resulting from different responses to a myriad of unforeseen circumstances. The roles of formal education, continuing education, and on-the-job experience are examined as key components of the educational process.
{"title":"Panel - How do practitioners become learned professionals on ethical issues?","authors":"W. Marcy, Nael Barakat, D. Johnson, S. Starrett","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893383","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893383","url":null,"abstract":"This panel discussion seeks to engage engineering professionals in a discussion of their responsibilities and obligations to perform duties in an ethical manner. Specifically, the panel will explore how learned professionals learn about these responsibilities and the potential consequences resulting from different responses to a myriad of unforeseen circumstances. The roles of formal education, continuing education, and on-the-job experience are examined as key components of the educational process.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124471792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893454
S. Starrett, A. Lara
When an engineer suspects that there is a public safety hazard in a project he or she is assigned to, what is the engineer's ethical obligation? If the engineer believes that the possible hazard should be investigated, but his/her supervisor does not, how should the engineer proceed? We examine a realistic case of a disagreement between an engineer and his supervisor. We argue that the engineer's obligations in this case are not obvious, and that we need to draw on both the IEEE code of ethics and the underlying philosophical principles of that code to formulate and justify an ethical response to the situation.
{"title":"Case study: Engineer discovers problem but supervisor wants to ignore","authors":"S. Starrett, A. Lara","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893454","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893454","url":null,"abstract":"When an engineer suspects that there is a public safety hazard in a project he or she is assigned to, what is the engineer's ethical obligation? If the engineer believes that the possible hazard should be investigated, but his/her supervisor does not, how should the engineer proceed? We examine a realistic case of a disagreement between an engineer and his supervisor. We argue that the engineer's obligations in this case are not obvious, and that we need to draw on both the IEEE code of ethics and the underlying philosophical principles of that code to formulate and justify an ethical response to the situation.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"230 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125031528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893438
S. Pase, Sean P. Thoennes, G. hare, C. Connors, J. Hogg
Developing technologies such as augmented reality merges an individual's real life with a digital life that enhances both the visual and the physical experience. Augmented reality creates many ethical concerns in regards to impact on society and human behavior. Blurring the lines between what's real and what's artificial is a significant concern in the future development of augmented reality. This panel examines the ethical considerations from a cognitive and media-focused psychology perspective in developing and deploying mixed and augmented reality (MAR) applications to help improve your understanding of key psychological factors in technological development.
{"title":"Panel - Ethics and emerging technology: Ethical concerns from a cognitive, media & technology focused psychology perspective concerning augmented reality, privacy, and sigularity","authors":"S. Pase, Sean P. Thoennes, G. hare, C. Connors, J. Hogg","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893438","url":null,"abstract":"Developing technologies such as augmented reality merges an individual's real life with a digital life that enhances both the visual and the physical experience. Augmented reality creates many ethical concerns in regards to impact on society and human behavior. Blurring the lines between what's real and what's artificial is a significant concern in the future development of augmented reality. This panel examines the ethical considerations from a cognitive and media-focused psychology perspective in developing and deploying mixed and augmented reality (MAR) applications to help improve your understanding of key psychological factors in technological development.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123948709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893419
John Aycock, Anil Somayaji, John P. Sullins
Computer security attacks are frequent fodder for ethical analyses, but the ethics of computer security defenses are not often examined. We address this by considering a topical problem in computer security. In an age of so-called “advanced persistent threats” that lurk undetected on computer systems for long periods of time, it is increasingly unrealistic to expect a computer system to be permanently free of malicious software. Recognizing this, we posit the idea of a “cosecure system” - a cosecure system, by design, would allow legitimate software and malicious software to coexist safely on the same machine. We take an unusual tack to software design and use ethical concerns to guide the design of a cosecure system, rather than building a cosecure system and then performing an ex post facto ethical analysis. The principal tenets of security that must be upheld are confidentiality, integrity, and availability, and any system purporting to be secure has an ethical duty to the system user to uphold these. This is the starting point for our design process, and we proceed to look at how a cosecure system may be implemented. What we arrive at by going through this ethics-based software design becomes a proof by contradiction: we are forced to conclude that it is not possible, in fact, for malicious and legitimate software to coexist; a cosecure system as we have described it cannot be built. This allows us to see traditional computer security defenses in a new light. If we cannot uphold key security properties in the best case, where a system is expressly designed to allow coexistence of malicious and legitimate software, what does that imply about the defenses of the actual computer systems we use? We propose that a community defense is an alternative that eludes previous ethical issues, as well as being defensible from an information ethics point of view.
{"title":"The ethics of coexistence: Can I learn to stop worrying and love the logic bomb?","authors":"John Aycock, Anil Somayaji, John P. Sullins","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893419","url":null,"abstract":"Computer security attacks are frequent fodder for ethical analyses, but the ethics of computer security defenses are not often examined. We address this by considering a topical problem in computer security. In an age of so-called “advanced persistent threats” that lurk undetected on computer systems for long periods of time, it is increasingly unrealistic to expect a computer system to be permanently free of malicious software. Recognizing this, we posit the idea of a “cosecure system” - a cosecure system, by design, would allow legitimate software and malicious software to coexist safely on the same machine. We take an unusual tack to software design and use ethical concerns to guide the design of a cosecure system, rather than building a cosecure system and then performing an ex post facto ethical analysis. The principal tenets of security that must be upheld are confidentiality, integrity, and availability, and any system purporting to be secure has an ethical duty to the system user to uphold these. This is the starting point for our design process, and we proceed to look at how a cosecure system may be implemented. What we arrive at by going through this ethics-based software design becomes a proof by contradiction: we are forced to conclude that it is not possible, in fact, for malicious and legitimate software to coexist; a cosecure system as we have described it cannot be built. This allows us to see traditional computer security defenses in a new light. If we cannot uphold key security properties in the best case, where a system is expressly designed to allow coexistence of malicious and legitimate software, what does that imply about the defenses of the actual computer systems we use? We propose that a community defense is an alternative that eludes previous ethical issues, as well as being defensible from an information ethics point of view.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"140 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120831733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893410
J. May, A. Mead, J. K. Ellington
The following paper explores the concept of ethical climate in undergraduate interdisciplinary project teams. Ethical climate is formed from the shared perceptions of individuals working in some organization toward the moral situations that occur. At the team level, ethical climate is the shared moral attitudes formed by individuals in a group after working together for some time. The paper introduces a new instrument for ethical climate developed for teams, the Team Ethical Climate Survey (TECS). This measure is based on the Ethical Climate Questionnaire [1], which was formulated around Kohlberg's (1981) cognitive stage theory of moral development. The authors initially proposed eight scales covering the spectrum of team ethics considerations: team interest, laws and codes, personal morality, rules and procedures, self-interest, care, shared ethics, and interdisciplinary professional ethics. These scales include supported scales from the ECQ as well as additional considerations that might be unique to multidisciplinary team decision-making. Initial findings of the TECS, including Cronbach's alpha reliability estimates for each scale are discussed. The authors used a commonly used test development tool, the content validation panel, in which subject matter experts evaluate the overlap between the test and the domain of interest. In the present study, subject matter experts (applied ethicists, engineers, and ethics researchers) evaluated relevance and wording of each test item and suggested several new questions for incorporation. Additional findings and implications for engineering faculty and professionals are provided. This paper presents the results of research to date on the ethics component of a collaborative effort involving team-based project programs at four universities funded by the National Science Foundation under a Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science (TUES) Phase 2 grant.
{"title":"Measuring Team Ethical Climate: Development of the TECS","authors":"J. May, A. Mead, J. K. Ellington","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893410","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893410","url":null,"abstract":"The following paper explores the concept of ethical climate in undergraduate interdisciplinary project teams. Ethical climate is formed from the shared perceptions of individuals working in some organization toward the moral situations that occur. At the team level, ethical climate is the shared moral attitudes formed by individuals in a group after working together for some time. The paper introduces a new instrument for ethical climate developed for teams, the Team Ethical Climate Survey (TECS). This measure is based on the Ethical Climate Questionnaire [1], which was formulated around Kohlberg's (1981) cognitive stage theory of moral development. The authors initially proposed eight scales covering the spectrum of team ethics considerations: team interest, laws and codes, personal morality, rules and procedures, self-interest, care, shared ethics, and interdisciplinary professional ethics. These scales include supported scales from the ECQ as well as additional considerations that might be unique to multidisciplinary team decision-making. Initial findings of the TECS, including Cronbach's alpha reliability estimates for each scale are discussed. The authors used a commonly used test development tool, the content validation panel, in which subject matter experts evaluate the overlap between the test and the domain of interest. In the present study, subject matter experts (applied ethicists, engineers, and ethics researchers) evaluated relevance and wording of each test item and suggested several new questions for incorporation. Additional findings and implications for engineering faculty and professionals are provided. This paper presents the results of research to date on the ethics component of a collaborative effort involving team-based project programs at four universities funded by the National Science Foundation under a Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science (TUES) Phase 2 grant.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121332666","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2014-05-23DOI: 10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893464
Alexandra Sibole
This paper provides a framework to evaluate the ethical implications of using different construction materials. Knowing information about the product lifecycle is crucial to identifying key environmental, social, economic, political, and practical concerns. Normative ethical theory can help assign priority to these issues so that consumers and developers can make an informed moral decision regarding their materials use.
{"title":"An ethical framework for evaluating construction materials","authors":"Alexandra Sibole","doi":"10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893464","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ETHICS.2014.6893464","url":null,"abstract":"This paper provides a framework to evaluate the ethical implications of using different construction materials. Knowing information about the product lifecycle is crucial to identifying key environmental, social, economic, political, and practical concerns. Normative ethical theory can help assign priority to these issues so that consumers and developers can make an informed moral decision regarding their materials use.","PeriodicalId":101738,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Symposium on Ethics in Science, Technology and Engineering","volume":"2009 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127327926","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：