What Are The Arguments Against The Code Of Ethics

To solidify my arguments, I reviewed the codes of ethics upheld by governing engineering organizations. Evidence and claims supported by the clauses of the codes would solidify my argument when I approached the heads of the firm with the issue. I began with the code of ethics held by the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPA) [3]. Following the guidelines under the third section of the document, “Professional Obligations”, I found clauses that aligned well with my decision. Under the statement calling for all engineers to serve eh public interest, I found the statement, “Engineers are encouraged to adhere to the principles of sustainable development1 in order to protect the environment for future generations “ [3]. By calling to
Under the code’s statement that “Engineers shall avoid all conduct or practice that deceives the public”, which was perfectly applicable to the situation itself, I found the more specific clause “Engineers shall avoid the use of statements containing a material misrepresentation of fact or omitting a material fact” [3]. These statements further solidified my objections to the intentional, deceptive manipulation of data that Greg was presenting to out clients. To find further support to confirm the ethicality of my decision, I then consulted the World Federation of Engineering Organizations’ (WEFO’s) Code of Ethics [4]. Under the section titled “Demonstrate Integrity”, specifications included demands to “refrain from fraudulent, corrupt or criminal practices” [4]. This once again reinforced the basis of my argument, that Greg’s claims were fraudulent and therefore
including situations in which senior officials of a firm make “executive” decisions which clearly and substantially alter the engineering aspects of the work, or protection of the public welfare or the environment arising from the work” [4]. This specification depicted a situation quite similar to the one occurring within my project, in which a senior member of the firm had decided to misrepresent the project data. In this section of the code, my decision to report Greg’s unethical engineering was directly supported. Under the section titled, “Protect the Natural and Built Environment”, I located a specification for the discussion of ”the consequences of proposals and actions, direct or indirect, immediate or long term, upon the health of people, social equity and the local system of values” [4]. This further confirmed the validity of my concern, as allowing the deception to go unchallenged would create indirect consequences to people and the environment. through the unaccounted for excess carbon dioxide emissions that would result from the altered data presented. Reassured by my compilation of support for my decision in existing engineering codes of ethics, I felt prepared to take action to reveal Greg’s deceptive