ES110 Homework 5
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Clarkson University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
110
Subject
English
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by PresidentProton14208
ES 110 -10 & 11
Engineering and Society – Fall 2023
Homework 5:
11/13/2023, DUE DATE Monday 11/20/2023
Name ________________________________________
Student ID Number _______________
Instructions: Read Engineering Ethics: Ethical Problem-Solving (linked on Moodle). Answer the
following questions/do the following problems.
1.
Examine the line drawing example shown below, where P is an ethical dilemma, PP and NP are the
positive paradigm and negative paradigm, respectively, and H1 through H5 are hypothetical
examples:
Please answer the following questions:
A)
Even though we don’t know specifics about this ethical dilemma, if we know that the line
drawing technique is appropriate for finding a solution we can assume that it (the dilemma being
considered) must have a particular characteristic. What is that characteristic?
B)
Using hypotheses H1 – H5, briefly explain why the proposed solution “P” (indicated by the red
star) appears to be an ethical solution to the problem?
C)
Briefly explain why careful selection and placement of H1 – H5 is important for line-drawing to
be an effective tool for ethical problem solving.
You can use an example to illustrate your
answer.
Negative Paradigm
(NP)
Positive Paradigm
(PP)
(H1)
(H4)
(H3)
(H2)
(H5)
(P)
ES 110 -10 & 11
Engineering and Society – Fall 2023
2.
Read the case of Cellular Phones and Cancer below that has been excerpted from Fleddermann
(2012). Identify and list the (a) factual issues, the (b) conceptual issues, and (c) decide and state
which moral issues you think apply in this case. Explain why. Hint – this is a good example of the
factual issues being controversial.
This case will seem different from many of the other cases we will study, since there is no disaster or
wrongdoing that has to be analyzed after the fact. Rather, this is a case about the experimental nature of
engineering and deals with issues of what engineers should do early in the design cycle for a new
product or system in order to avoid possible harm to customers or the public in general. It also deals
with what engineers should do after a product has been released when possible dangers are brought up.
Concerns about potential adverse health effects of cell phones began in 1992 with a lawsuit fi led in
Florida. In this suit, David Reynard claimed that his wife’s fatal brain cancer had been caused by her use
of a cell phone. Although the suit was dismissed in 1995 due to a lack of scientific evidence to support
Reynard’s claim, this and other similar suits received a great deal of media attention and caused some
concern among frequent cell phone users. The possible problems with cell phones are clear. In using a
cell phone, you are placing a source of electromagnetic radiation in close proximity to your brain. It
doesn’t take much imagination to see the potential for problems: Microwave ovens use electromagnetic
radiation to cook food. Of course, cell phones operate at a different frequency and at much lower power
levels than do microwave ovens, but the analogy is clear. The human body evolved in an environment
that did not contain significant levels of radiofrequency (rf) radiation, so it is plausible that the ubiquity
of rf fields in our modern industrial world might cause some adverse health effects.
The biological effects of rf energy have been studied for many years. Some of the early studies go back to
the 1940s. What types of studies related to exposure to rf radiation have been performed? Typically,
these were epidemiological studies and were retrospective looks at people who have used cell phones.
The goal of these studies was to try to determine the levels of exposure to rf radiation from cell phones
of every person in the study and to try to correlate the levels with subsequent health effects, especially
cancers. While the studies all generally indicated that there is no harm in cell phone use, problems
remain. Many of the problems are due to the fact that the studies relied on self-reporting of cell phone
use. They asked people to report how much time they spent talking on their phones. Many people
reported their phone use accurately, but many others either didn’t really know how much they used
their phones or misestimated their use. Epidemiological studies are also difficult to analyze, since it is
hard to know the power levels each individual has been exposed to. The power emitted by the phone
depends on what model of phone you use and how far you are from the base station while talking. Also,
brain cancers generally take a long time to develop. There may not have been enough time since the
widespread use of cell phones for a significant number of cancers to have developed. Solid links between
cell phone use and brain cancers might not show up for another 10 to 20 years. Studies have also been
performed on laboratory animals. Typically, these are done by placing the animals in an environment
containing rf fields designed to mimic those of cell phones. Like the epidemiological studies, the research
studies on laboratory animals have not indicated any significant increase in health problems for the
animals. Of course, since laboratory animals are not humans, the results may not be directly applicable
to humans. There have been some studies of the effects of rf radiation on laboratory tissue and cell
cultures. The results of these studies and their applicability to human health are controversial. Some
theoretical studies have examined how rf energy might be deposited into a human brain during cell
phone use. These studies are very difficult to benchmark because it is difficult to make measurements of
energy deposition directly into a human brain. Studies of the biological effects of cell phones continue. In
February of 2011, the New York Times reported the results of a study performed by researchers at the
National Institutes of Health. This study found that cell phone use leads to a 7% increase in brain activity
in areas of the brain closest to the phone’s antenna. These results are significant because although the
ES 110 -10 & 11
Engineering and Society – Fall 2023
levels of radiation emitted by cell phones is low, nevertheless this radiation causes measurable effects on
the human brain. How important this increase in brain activity is and how it might affect human health
remains to be determined. What is an engineer working for a cell phone company or some other
company making products that emit rf radiation to do when confronted with the ongoing concerns
about the health effects of rf fields? Cell phones can certainly be redesigned to reduce or eliminate this
problem, but, of course, any design that will lead to reduced emission will probably cost more. We won’t
know for many years what the final answer is regarding cell phone health effects. For now, it seems that
cell phones are probably safe to use. What is the prudent and ethical thing to do in designing such
products in an atmosphere where some doubt about safety exists? This case illustrates the problems
that engineers have in dealing with and managing the unknown. Many of the designs that engineers
produce are experimental in nature or deal with effects that aren’t fully understood. It is incumbent on
the designer to be informed about the potential risks to users of her designs and to seek to minimize
these risks to the extent possible.
References
Fleddermann, C.B. (2012
) Engineering Ethics
(4
th
Ed.). Prentice Hall, Upper saddle River, NJ, USA.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
ES 110 -10 & 11
Engineering and Society – Fall 2023
3.
Use the line drawing technique to place the four examples (H1 through H4 below) like those given in
section 4.6.2 as hypotheticals on a line with the following positive paradigm (PP), negative paradigm
(NP) and with the ethical dilemma (P). Is P ethical (is it a bribe, or essentially a bribe)?
H1 – A sales representative offers you a coffee mug with his company’s name and logo on it. The
value of the mug is $5.00.
H2 -
Your meeting with a sales representative lasts through the lunch hour. She invites you to go get
lunch. You go to a fast food restaurant and you pay for your own lunch.
H3 -
A sales representative with whom you often do business invites you to play tennis on the
weekend at an exclusive club and he will pay for your guest fee.
H4 – A sales representative invites you to attend a one day sales seminar in Lake Tahoe, CA. The
travel expenses will be paid for through a mysterious third party and free ski lift passes and ski
equipment rental vouchers will be provided. You don’t have to agree to buy anything.
PP – A sales representative is always strictly business, never offers any gifts or company branded
items, and sticks to the pros, cons, quality and price while offering her company’s products for
purchase.
NP – A sales representative offers you the chance to enter a drawing for a free $1500.oo gas card.
The drawing is a part of a promotion campaign that her company is running. Your name can
only be entered in the drawing if your company places a $20,000.00 minimum order with her
company.
P – A sales representative offers you the chance to enter a drawing for a free $100.oo gas card. The
drawing is a part of a promotion campaign that her company is running. There is no obligation to
purchase their product.