BAHRIA UNIVERSITY (KARACHI CAMPUS)

FINALTERM EXAMINATION – SPRING SEMESTER – 2024

Department of Computer Engineering
[Engineering Ethics]
[HSS-424]
Class: BCE-8
Course Instructor: Engr. Usra Sami Time Allowed: 150 mins
Date: 26th June 2024, Session: II Max Marks: 50 Marks
Student’s Name: ____________________ Reg. No: _________

Question1: CLO-1 (C2: COMPREHENSION) (4*5=20 Marks)

Name and describe the understanding of the idea stated in I, II and III, and write about it.

I. “Society is made up of individuals and we need to protect each individual’s right to happiness.
Primarily, rules are generated which if everyone follows will generally result in more happiness.”

Society and Individual Rights:

Ethical principles in engineering emphasize the protection of individual rights and the pursuit of
happiness for all. Rules and standards are established to ensure fairness, safety, and well-being. By
adhering to these principles, engineers contribute to the overall happiness and welfare of society.

II. A company offers a government official money in exchange for awarding a lucrative contract without
following the proper bidding process. In this case, the company is attempting to influence the decision-
making process by providing the official with a financial incentive to act in their favor. This act is
illegal and unethical, as it undermines fair competition, distorts the allocation of resources, and
compromises the integrity of public institutions.
Bribery and Public Integrity:
• Offering bribes to government officials to secure contracts is unethical and illegal. Such actions
compromise the integrity of public institutions, distort fair competition, and undermine trust.
Engineers must uphold transparency and fairness in all professional dealings.

III. The approach in ethics is based on the principle of treating others as you would like to be treated
yourself. This ethical guideline, often referred to as the ethic of reciprocity, advocates for empathy,
compassion, and fairness in human interactions.
Ethic of Reciprocity:

Page 1 of 5
 • The ethic of reciprocity, or the "Golden Rule," is foundational in engineering ethics. It calls for treating
others with the same respect and fairness one would expect in return. This principle fosters a culture
of empathy, accountability, and mutual respect in engineering practices.

IV. What are the areas of moral concerns that are especially relevant to the trustworthiness of engineers?
Moral Concerns for Engineers:
• Trustworthiness: Engineers must demonstrate reliability and honesty in their work.
• Public Safety: The paramount concern is ensuring the safety and well-being of the public.
• Fair Competition: Engineers should avoid conflicts of interest and ensure fair practices.
• Professional Integrity: Upholding ethical standards and rejecting any form of deception is crucial.

Question1: CLO-2 (C3: APPLICATION) (6*5=30 Marks)

I. In the past, engineering societies have generally portrayed participation by engineers in unions
and collective bargaining in engineering as unprofessional and disloyal to employers. Critics
reply that such generalized prohibitions reflect the excessive degree to which engineering is still
dominated by corporations’ interests. Think and write this issue with regard to the following
case. What options might be pursued, and would they still involve “collective coercive action”?
[The question is about Workplace Rights and Ethics]

“Managers at a mining and refinery operation have consistently kept wages below industry-wide
levels. They have also sacrificed worker safety to save costs by not installing special structural
reinforcements in the mines, and they have made no effort to control excessive pollution of the
work environment. As a result, the operation has reaped larger-than-average profits.
Management has been approached both by individuals and by representatives of employee
groups about raising wages and taking the steps necessary to ensure worker safety but to no
avail. A nonviolent strike is called, and the metallurgical engineers support it for reasons of
worker safety and public health.”

1. Workplace Rights and Ethics:

• Case Analysis: Engineering societies’ traditional views on unions reflect a conflict between
professional independence and corporate interests. Engineers must balance their loyalty to employers
with their ethical duty to advocate for fair wages and safe working conditions.
• Options: Engineers can support collective actions such as nonviolent strikes to improve conditions,
provided they maintain professional conduct and focus on ethical obligations to workers’ safety and
fairness.

II. “The majority of employers have adopted mandatory random drug testing on their employees,
arguing that the enormous damage caused by the pervasive use of drugs in our society carries
over into the workplace. Typically, the tests involve taking urine or blood samples under close
observation, thereby raising questions about personal privacy as well as privacy issues about

Page 2 of 5
 drug use away from the workplace that is revealed by the tests. Present and defend your view
concerning mandatory drug tests at the workplace.”
In your answer, take account of the argument that, except where safety is a clear and present
danger (as in the work of pilots, police, and the military), such tests are unjustified.

2. Mandatory Drug Testing:

• Arguments Against: Mandatory drug testing raises significant privacy concerns, especially when
unrelated to workplace safety. It can be seen as an overreach into personal lives, undermining trust
between employers and employees.
• Arguments For: In safety-critical roles, drug testing can be justified to prevent accidents and ensure
a safe working environment.
• Conclusion: Drug testing should be limited to situations where it directly impacts safety, aligning
with ethical considerations of privacy and fairness.

III. You are a civil engineer and work with the KDA (Water and Sewer Department). While driving
through a small town, you notice a large storage tank filled with Chlorine gas situated next to
an urban area. The land on which the storage tank is located and the storage tank itself are
owned by a local manufacturing company that uses chlorine for various business-related
purposes.
This is a disaster in the making. A leak in the storage tank or any similar accident could occur,
that would endanger the lives of the people living in the urban vicinities. Chlorine gas was used
during World War I to kill soldiers hiding in trenches.

Should you initiate (do) something about this, given that it is not a part of your job and that, as a civil
engineer, it is not within your area of expertise? [The question is about Ethics and Professionalism]

3. Ethics and Professionalism:

• Case Analysis: As a civil engineer noticing a potentially hazardous chlorine tank, there is an ethical
obligation to act in the interest of public safety, even if it falls outside direct professional duties.
Reporting the issue to relevant authorities is a responsible action.

IV. Can utilitarianism provide a moral justification for engineers who work for tobacco companies,
for example, in designing cigarette-making machinery? In your answer take account of the
following facts (and others you may be aware of). Cigarettes kill more than 8 Million people in
the world each year, which is more than the combined deaths caused by alcohol and drug abuse,
car accidents, suicide, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Cigarette companies
do much good by providing jobs (Philip Morris employs more than 150,000 people worldwide),
through taxes (more than $4 billion paid by Philip Morris in a typical year), and through
philanthropy. Most new users of cigarettes are teenagers (younger than eighteen years of age).
There is disagreement over just how addictive cigarettes are, but adults have some choice in
deciding whether to continue using cigarettes, and they may choose to continue using for reasons
beyond the addictive potential of nicotine.

Page 3 of 5
 4. Utilitarianism and Tobacco Companies:
• Case Analysis: Utilitarian ethics weigh the overall benefits against harms. While tobacco companies
provide economic benefits, the health detriments far exceed these positives. Engineers must consider
the broader impact of their work on public health.
• Conclusion: Working for tobacco companies may be ethically unjustifiable due to the significant harm
caused to public health.

V. You are the CEO of a large manufacturing company that produces plastic products. Your
company has been operating for many years and has been very successful financially. However,
recent studies have shown that plastic waste is causing significant harm to the environment and
wildlife. Your company is one of the major contributors to this problem.
As the CEO, you are facing a dilemma. On one hand, continuing to produce plastic products
will generate profits for your company and keep your shareholders happy. On the other hand,
doing so will contribute to further environmental damage and go against ethical practices of
sustainability and responsibility.
What ethical considerations do you need to take into account in this situation? How would you
balance the financial interests of your company with the environmental impact of your
operations? What steps could you take to mitigate the harm caused by your company's plastic
production?
[Relate your understanding of Environmental Ethics in answering the question].

5. Environmental Ethics:
• Case Analysis: As a CEO of a plastic manufacturing company, ethical considerations include
environmental sustainability and corporate responsibility. The duty to mitigate environmental harm
must be balanced with financial obligations to shareholders.
• Steps to Mitigate Harm:
o Develop sustainable alternatives to plastic.
o Enhance recycling programs and reduce waste.
o Commit to reducing the company’s environmental footprint.

VI. You are a senior researcher in a leading academic institution, and you are working on a
groundbreaking research project in your field. The project has the potential to significantly
advance scientific knowledge and has garnered a lot of attention and funding.
However, during the course of your research, you notice that some of your data points are not
aligning with your initial hypothesis. You are under pressure to produce results that will satisfy
your funders and the academic community, and you are tempted to fabricate or falsify some
data to make your results more compelling.
As a researcher committed to ethical practices, you are faced with a dilemma. Fabricating or
falsifying data goes against the principles of honesty and integrity in research, but doing so could
also jeopardize the future of your project and potentially damage your reputation as a
researcher.
How would you navigate this ethical dilemma? What steps could you take to ensure the integrity
of your research while also satisfying the expectations of your funders and the academic

Page 4 of 5
 community? How would you address the pressure to produce desirable results in a competitive
research environment?
[Use headings to support your answer].

6. Research Ethics:
• Case Analysis: Fabricating data undermines the integrity of scientific research. Engineers and
researchers must adhere to principles of honesty, even under pressure to produce favorable results.
• Steps to Ensure Integrity:
o Maintain open communication with stakeholders about research challenges.
o Seek peer reviews to ensure transparency and accountability.
o Prioritize long-term credibility and ethical standards over short-term gains.
• Conclusion: Upholding ethical standards in research ensures trust and reliability in scientific
advancements.

Page 5 of 5