Ethical, Duty Ethics, And Utilitarianism

Engineers have the ability to create advanced products out of basic material. With this powerful ability comes a tremendous amount of responsibility. In order to introduce advancements safely into society, engineers must abide by certain ethical standards. One derives these ethical standards from three ethical theories: Rights Ethics, Duty Ethics, and Utilitarianism. Each theory is unique and one can utilize one of the three in most situations. If one is to become an engineer, one must understand the basics of the three ethical theories.

Although each ethical theory can provide guidance in any given situation, duty ethics provide engineers with the necessary rules to succeed. Duty Ethics provides people with a series of duties to follow.

After creating a prototype, testing began. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, it was required that all new automobiles in 1972 have the ability to withstand a rear-end collision at 20 mph without fuel loss. (2) After the NHTSA and Ford conducted several tests, the results concluded that the Pinto prototypes failed this test. For every prototype, the results indicated that the gas tank would rupture and begin to leak a dangerous amount of fuel. Various factors lead to this defect. First, the filler neck would tear away from the fuel tank upon impact. As the filler neck tore off, fuel began to spill out of the tank. Additionally, the tank was susceptible to puncture from several bolts protruding from the differential and several nearby brackets. (3) Once the tank was punctured, fuel began to spill at an expedited rate. Ben Wokdyla’s article, The Top Automotive Engineering Failures: The Ford Pinto Fuel Tank, states that it only took one minute for the Pinto’s tank to empty its fuel contents. (3) In order to compensate for these design failures, and to avoid another prototype failure, Ford modified several prototypes. The modifications to the initial design included adding a rubber bladder within the gas tank or a steel beam between the tank and the rear bumper. (2) With these new modifications, the Pinto withstood the testing conditions. These new modifications not only illustrated the severe design issues with the Pinto, but also provided a dilemma for the executives at Ford. Should the designers change the Pinto to meet safety regulations, or should Ford use the original design and preserve the shortened timetable? Should Ford produce an unsafe automobile or redesign and risk another year out of the sub-compact market? For Ford, the choice was simple, use the original design to gain access into the sub-compact marketplace. However, the basis