The Ethical Dilemma Of Industrial Engineers Essay

All of the above, Kant was the philosopher of human autonomy. He was of the view that human beings can determine and manage to live up to the basic principles of knowledge and action without assistance of anyone else, even without any divine support or intervention (Guyer). In this paper we will discuss the extent to which Kant's view of human nature provides a sustainable ground work for his views on the relationship between nations. In order to determine this, different opinions of Kant will be discussed regarding what his views about the human nature and how he compared it with the nations or states.

​We live in a society where we must fit and understand social justice. Its justice in terms of how wealth is distributed and the different opportunities and privileges amongst the people. Viewing things in an ethical manner allows people to make decisions based on position of self and society. People all over transpire from many different ethnic backgrounds leaving the world very diverse. What people fail to realize is that not everyone can be the same. If that was the case it would be unusual to see different races, gender, and language. The things that make up our community is what makes us unique and stand out as a nation. People must not become blind to the things that make

Kant had a different ethical system which was based on reason. According to Kant reason was the fundamental authority in determining morality. All humans possess the ability to reason, and out of this ability comes two basic commands: the hypothetical imperative and the categorical imperative. In focusing on the categorical imperative, in this essay I will reveal the underlying relationship between reason and duty.

The phenomenon of morality has fascinated people for centuries. Since the development of this phenomenon, humans have longed to discover the good and bad in both their actions and themselves. Naturally, countless philosophers have struggled to answer this question of morality. Although none have successfully found a definite answer, they have exhausted an abundance of ways to attack the question. One philosopher, in particular, by the name of Immanuel Kant, attempted to determine the morality of actions by focusing on their nature. As Kant developed his theory, his approach toward proving moral knowledge soon became widely known as Kantian deontology.

In the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals by Emmanuel Kant, we are presented with this conception of Kant’s called “the Form of Law.” With the discussion of the Form of Law, we will also come to encounter both moral law and the categorical imperative. Kant’s notion of the Form of Law, we will later see has a great deal of significance within the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Within the discussion of the Form of Law’s significance in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant also provides us with a response to a claim offered by David Hume. Also, provided in this paper will be both a discussion of correctness of action and the normative requirement. In this paper, I will present Kant’s conception of the Form of Law, as well as its significance in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, and finally I will conclude the paper by evaluating this analysis of the structure of correctness in action and the normatively required.

As an individual, it becomes the duty of one to display good morals and to act according to the society's expectations. Kant continues on with his theories by expressing his reasons behind what is good and bad behavior shown from individuals. Individuals have the decision to make choices in order to maintain the moral principals. Furthermore, to have a better understanding of Immanuel Kant it is important to introduce contexts from the chapter about his theories and reasoning's behind what he believed

Kant’s philosophy was based around the theory that we have a moral unconditional obligation and duty that he calls the “Categorical Imperative.” He believes that an action must be done with a motive of this moral obligation, and if not done with this intention then the action would hold no moral value. Under this umbrella of the “Categorical Imperative” he presents three formulations that he believes to be about equal in importance, relevance, and could be tested towards any case. The first formulation known as the Formula of Universal Law consists of a methodical way to find out morality of actions. The second formulation is known as

Kant’s Categorical Imperative outlines a significant section of his ethics, concerning the search for moral knowledge. This is a mechanism used in accordance with knowing how we ought to act, rather than how we act instinctively through desires and appetites. The identification of the Categorical Imperative is found through rationality and indeed must be equally applicable for all reasonable human beings. Within this essay, I will initially outline Kant’s first formulation of the Categorical Imperative then proceed to show that its credibility as an account of moral obligation is lacking.

Within the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant drafted the Doctrine of Virtue as a means to further develop his ethical theory, which he first laid out in the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. In addition to discussing Kant’s doctrine of virtue, I will reconstruct Kant’s argument for beneficence as a duty of virtue. In the course of this reconstruction, I will explain what a duty of virtue is, from what it derives and the extent to which one must fulfill that duty. Likewise, I will explain the way one must fulfill their duty of virtue, how it relates to duties of right, and how it relates to the duty to pursue one’s perfection. Lastly, I will offer an evaluation of the argument.

My last chapter will present a resolution of these problems by reconsidering them in a non-formal sense. I have two main concerns. First, I will show how a Kantian ethic obviates the need for Kant’s formalistic (and unconvincing) answer to the problem of universalization in the first two Critiques. Second, I would suggest a revised ethic based on the Kantian values of impartiality, freedom, and dignity.

In Canada, individual regulating bodies are in place to licence and regulate practitioners in their respective professions. It is in the public’s best interest that these professionals are knowledgeable and driven to progress society in a responsible manner. This includes acting in an ethical manner that aligns with the personal and corporate standards expected of members in a particular profession. The Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) is in place to regulate such behavior among engineers and protect the common interest of the Ontario community. At the end of this paper it will be evident that public welfare is paramount. This will be shown by how it ought to be enforced under the PEO, and how failure of the Ford Pinto was fueled by

In Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, he aims to identify and establish “the supreme principle of morality” (4:392). In other words, his work sets out to demonstrate the function of what Kant calls the “Categorical imperative”. The purpose of this essay is to first explain the conception of Kant’s Categorical imperative. It will then discuss the application of this within his Universal Law formulation, as well as within the formula of Humanity. Finally, it will investigate and critique the inconsistency of Kant’s Categorical imperative theory.

Engineers are trusted individuals which the public has set high standards for. The public relies on engineers to efficiently, and accurately determine the safety of all products they create. Engineers are required to follow safety procedures in order to ensure the quality of the products they create. However, are these procedures enough to ensure the safety of the public? Or can additional actions be taken in order to improve the safety of a product? If so, to what extent should engineers be required to take matters into their own hands and ensure the safety of products, in return reducing the number of injuries and fatal accidents?

There are many ethical dilemmas that an industrial engineer may face throughout their career. One major dilemma would be having to lay someone off because of a change you may have made to a process to make it more efficient. Industrial engineers are always trying to find a more efficient way of doing something, whether it’s in a factory, in an office, or the route of a delivery driver. Sometimes these things aren’t always as simple as they may seem. There are often consequences to these seemingly simple changes. People can and do get laid off because of a change to a process.

Engineering is a pylon of human development and technology,having a significant impact on people’s daily lives. Engineering has improved humanity in every aspect (e.g. transportation, communication, medicine) and it has the potential to overcome the challenges that mankind still faces. However, engineers have responsibility for their actions and they must learn to follow a set of ethical principles relating to their work. All of which have to be followed to the letter otherwise there can be severe consequences.