Engineering ethics

double-spaced in Times New Roman , font 12.

The papers will have two parts: a summary and an ethical analysis/commentary on the material.
   
 Click Here to Get this or a similar Assignment done for you by an Expert at EssayCradle.com

    1) The summary should be no more than 50% of the paper. For the summary part, your goal is to present the material to an audience that HAS NOT read the material you have. Assume your audience is both intelligent and ignorant of the issue you just read about--your job is to present the material intelligently and clearly. To this end, be clear about whether or not the material you are summarizing is making any ethical arguments. Some of articles we will read will be purely factual in nature--they will convey information and it will be up to you to figure out what ought to be done. Other articles we read will convey not just information but will offer up ethical proposals about what should be done.  Don't attribute ethical arguments to authors who aren't making them and if you are summarizing an ethical argument (or several) present that argument as clearly and fairly as possible (in the analysis/commentary section you can vigorously critique the argument, but first you need to present the argument so your reader can understand).
    Remember: A good summary doesn't try and cover everything, a good summary tries to convey enough such that your reader can understand. It is better to summarize 2 points well rather than summarize 4 points poorly.
    On days with multiple readings you can summarize material from all of the readings or several of the readings or perhaps even one of the readings. Again, what matters is not that you cover everything but that what you do cover, you do well. Summarize what interests you/what you what to discuss in the analysis part of the paper.

     2) The analysis/commentary/critique part of the paper is where you deal with the material. How does this material relate to your particular engineering field? Do you think that most people or most engineers know the material in question? Should they? Do you agree with the argument(s) the author(s) are making? If you do, say why. If you don't say why.
    While you do not have to explicitly invoke Kant or Mill in your ethical analysis and commentary you should be aware of the type ethical analysis you are engaged in--are you concerned with rights and respect for humanity dignity OR are you concerned with quality and length of life? And if you're thinking about Mill, remember that Mill is concerned with not just five people or twenty people or the people of Columbus, OH but with ALL of humanity who is potentially impacted by the decision. If you're thinking about government policy or business decisions remember that you have to think about everyone.
    If you've summarized an ethical proposal from the readings, feel free to say you disagree with the proposal and then explain in detail why you disagree with that proposal. Or if you agree with an author's ethical proposal but think that there is something important that he or she has left out, feel free to talk about that. If you want to bring in outside information, by all means please do so, but you will have to properly cite that information.

 Click Here to Get this or a similar Assignment done for you by an Expert at EssayCradle.com