Talk:Engineering ethics

The "History" section

This reads more like a history of technological development that one of engineering ethics. The material on James Watt is interesting but uncited. I'm expecting to yank this.

The impression this gives is that ethical development in engineering has revolved around the strucutral failures. That certainly addresses the "hold paramount the public" ethic, but it's only part of the whole story. Many case studies revolve around conflicts-of-interest and other more "business ethics" issues. There's a huge emphasis now on bribery and corruption. ASCE, NSPE, ICE, and no doubt others are all over this now. This passage will need to be addressed.

There are some spectacular failures that drove the public to demand that engineers be placed in charge. The Boston molasses flood was instrumental in moving licensure laws onto the books in New England at the time.

There's a fair amount of non-neutral tone to this as well that need to be cleaned up.

I've got to get some sleep and will be tackling this tomorrow. I'll leave the {{inuse}} tag on for a bit. Thank you for your patience. MARussellPESE 02:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Whoopee! I'm done! MARussellPESE 05:21, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Military?

"Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties." This seems totally at odds with the vast majority of military work, which is a disturbing and significant proportion of professional engineering. This concern isn't even so much as implied in the article. Why?

--Jammoe (talk) 07:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Nuclear Bombs? Weapons of Mass Destruction?

They are technically possible, but should they be constructed and built? Does this fall under Engineering Ethics? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.82.143.78 (talk) 07:41, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Engineering ethics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203133506/http://www.asce.org/Ethics/Principles-Study-Application/ASCE-Code-of-Ethics--Principles,-Study,-and-Application/ to http://www.asce.org/Ethics/Principles-Study-Application/ASCE-Code-of-Ethics--Principles,-Study,-and-Application/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930165346/http://www.asce.org/pressroom/news/display_press.cfm?uid=1794 to http://www.asce.org/pressroom/news/display_press.cfm?uid=1794
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://164.109.88.17/ethics/FINALReporttoNSPEBoard-June2006.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:23, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Licensing requirement

@Engineeringworld2: @Guy Macon: Seeing as there's a potential edit war about to happen with discussion that was made on each other users' pages. Can discussion about the disagreement pertaining to licensing requirements be mentioned here? I'm just a neutral party that sees the discussion pretty interesting and perhaps a chance to get a better view or a chance to weigh in with discussion on here. Let me know. – TheGridExe (talk) 01:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Alas, I am at the moment swamped with an issue you can read about on Jimbo's talk page, plus I find Engineeringworld2 to be pretty much impossible to reason with. When I asked him "What part of 'This chapter shall not be construed to apply to the activities of a private corporation or other business entity, or the activities of the full-time employees or other personnel under the direct supervision and control of the business entity' are you having trouble understanding?" he stuck to his absurd claim that "[offering your services to the] public also includes other businesses". I see no point in debating with someone who refuses to acknowledge that offering your services to the public is not the same thing as offering your services to a business. WP:CIR. Eventually, when I get more free time, I am going to post an RfC and settle this dispute. Until then, I have higher priorities. --Guy Macon (talk) 02:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@TheGridExe: @Guy Macon:

Well, the following are the Texas Law associated with businesses (how do you explain these):

To: Guy Macon "SUBCHAPTER D: FIRM AND GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY COMPLIANCE §137.71 Firm Names Pursuant to §1001.405(e), a business entity that is not registered with the board may not represent to the public by way of letters, signs, or symbols as a part of any sign, directory, listing, contract, document, pamphlet, stationery, advertisement, signature, or business name that it is engaged in the practice of engineering by using the terms: (1) “engineer,” (2)”engineering,” (3)”engineering services,” Texas Engineering Practice Act and Rules Page 62 of 74 Effective 3/15/18 (4)”engineering company,” (5)”engineering, inc.,” (6)”professional engineers,” (7)”licensed engineer,” (8)”registered engineer,” (9)”licensed professional engineer,” (10) “registered professional engineer,” (11)”engineered,” or (12) any abbreviation or variation of those terms listed in (1)-(11) above, or directly or indirectly use or cause to be used any of those terms in combination with other words."

Added this for completeness: "§ 1001.002. Definitions In this chapter: (1) “Board” means the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. (2) “Engineer” means a person licensed to engage in the practice of engineering in this state."

@Guy Macon: You really need to read at least the below. You could be dangerous running around writing about things you don't know what you are talking about:

To: Guy Macon more for you "§ 1001.405. Practice by Business Entity; Registration (a) In this section, “business entity” includes a sole proprietorship, firm, partnership, corporation, or joint stock association. (b) A business entity may not engage in the practice of engineering in this state unless: (1) the business entity is registered with the board; and (2) the practice is carried on only by engineers. (c) A business entity may register under this section by filing an application with the board on a form provided by the board. In addition to any other information required by board rule, the application must list the name and address of each officer or director of the business entity and each engineer who engages in the practice of engineering on behalf of the business entity. (d) The registration of a business entity issued under this section expires on the first anniversary of the date the registration is issued. The registration may be renewed by the filing of an updated application under Subsection (c). (e) A business entity may not represent to the public that it is engaged in the practice of engineering under any business name or use or cause to be used the term “engineer,” “engineering,” “engineering services,” “engineering company,” “engineering, inc.,” “ professional engineers,” “licensed engineer,” “registered engineer,” “licensed professional engineer,” “registered professional engineer,” or “engineered,” or any abbreviation or variation of those terms, or directly or indirectly use or cause to be used any of those terms in combination with other words, letters, signs, or symbols as a part of any sign, directory, listing, contract, document, pamphlet, stationery, advertisement, signature, or business name unless: (1) the business entity is registered under this section; (2) the business entity is actively engaged in the practice of engineering; and (3) each service, work, or act performed by the business entity that is part of the practice of engineering is either personally performed by an engineer or directly supervised by an engineer who is a regular full-time employee of the business entity. (f) This section does not prohibit an engineer from performing engineering services on a part-time basis. (g) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section, the board by rule may provide that a business entity that has not previously registered with the board and that is engaged in the practice of engineering in violation of Subsection (b) is not subject to disciplinary action for the violation if the business entity registers with the board not later than the 30th day after the date the board gives written notice to the business entity of the registration requirement. This subsection does not apply to a business entity whose registration has expired. "

To: Guy Macon And some more, read the item (10) in particular is got the "private entity" for you: "§ 1001.003. Practice of Engineering (a) In this section: (1) “Design coordination” includes the review and coordination of technical submissions prepared by others, including the work of other professionals working with or under the direction of an engineer with professional regard for the ability of each professional involved in a multidisciplinary effort. (2) “Engineering survey” includes any survey activity required to support the sound conception, planning, design, construction, maintenance, or operation of an engineered project. The term does not include the surveying of real property or other activity regulated under Chapter 1071. (b) In this chapter, “practice of engineering” means the performance of or an offer or attempt to perform any public or private service or creative work, the adequate performance of which requires engineering education, training, and experience in applying special knowledge or judgment of the mathematical, physical, or engineering sciences to that service or creative work. (c) The practice of engineering includes: (1) consultation, investigation, evaluation, analysis, planning, engineering for program management, providing an expert engineering opinion or testimony, engineering for testing or evaluating materials for construction or other engineering use, and mapping; (2) design, conceptual design, or conceptual design coordination of engineering works or systems; (3) development or optimization of plans and specifications for engineering works or systems; (4) planning the use or alteration of land or water or the design or analysis of works or systems for the use or alteration of land or water; (5) responsible charge of engineering teaching or the teaching of engineering; (6) performing an engineering survey or study; (7) engineering for construction, alteration, or repair of real property; (8) engineering for preparation of an operating or maintenance manual; (9) engineering for review of the construction or installation of engineered works to monitor compliance with drawings or specifications; (10) a service, design, analysis, or other work performed for a public or private entity in connection with a utility, structure, building, machine, equipment, process, system, work, project, or industrial or consumer product or equipment of a mechanical, electrical, electronic, chemical, hydraulic, pneumatic, geotechnical, or thermal nature; or (11) providing an engineering opinion or analysis related to a certificate of merit under Chapter 150, Civil Practice and Remedies Code; or (12) any other professional service necessary for the planning, progress, or completion of an engineering service." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Engineeringworld2 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@TheGridExe: @Guy Macon:

And like I have said before you are confusing things:

Here is where you are getting your stuff: "§ 1001.057. Employee of Private Corporation or Business Entity (a) This chapter shall not be construed to apply to the activities of a private corporation or other business entity, or the activities of the fulltime employees or other personnel under the direct supervision and control of the business entity, on or in connection with: (1) reasonable modifications to existing buildings, facilities, or other fixtures to real property not accessible to the general public and which are owned, leased, or otherwise occupied by the entity; or (2) activities related only to the research, development, design, fabrication, production, assembly, integration, or service of products manufactured by the entity."

The rest of it. Nowhere in there it said that the private corporation is free to offer engineering services, or practice engineering. It has to do with manufactured goods (manufacturing) of that entity, and what a company can do with their own property (as long as public don't have access to it). Again, nowhere in there it says anything about engineering services and practice of engineering. Like I have said before, you are confusing things.

References

User talk:Engineeringworld2#Please leave me alone. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)