Dealing with the learning process of professional ethics
1. applied Ethics within the training of engineering professionals
1.2. The teaching of professional ethics through virtue ethics
ofessor is essential when students are learning. Without doubt, the professor needs to master the subject and also has to know how to communicate it efficiently, whatever the subject may be.
When the subject is some type of applied ethics, trust becomes critical because in it, the goal is not to describe ethics theories,
but to convince the students that ethical points should be taken into account, and to show them how to do it (Basart, 2008).
As Aristotle would put it, “Here, we are not interested in what applied ethics is, but in how to integrate it in our life”.
The fact is that there is often a great gap between what is shown and analysed in classroom exercises and the tougher work-ing environment professionals meet (Lynch and Kline, 2000).
From one side, this disparity generates disbelief and scepticism among many students; they are aware of this gap and therefore feel that ethical considerations do not have any power when we leave the idealistic academic debates and come to the real world of business. The problem can be formulated by means of the ques-tion: “Dear professor: Why should I [a student] believe what you say about professional ethics?” A standard answer to this might explain how great the computers’ influence in so many activities of our day-to-day life is. Consequently, some - at least - profes-sional responsibility springs from the power of those technicians designing, manufacturing, programming or operating any kind of computer. “However -our student goes on- I agree that these reasons are convincing as long as these ethical requirements do not damage my personal interests. Otherwise, why should I harm myself?” On the other side, this strong challenge can make pro-fessors feel uneasy and somehow helpless when they are accused by students -or colleagues- of being too naïve.
When the main tool in classroom exercises is considered, that is to say real (or realistic) case analysis where serious ethi-cal dilemmas appear, virtue ethics appears to be the most useful approach; more so than deontological or utilitarian ethics. We note, firstly, that these stories and accounts allow the tutor to show the students concrete situations where several values are confronted, what personal interests are in opposition to profes-sional duties or responsibilities, who could be damaged or threat-ened and how, who and how could be benefited and how, what different outcomes are possible, and so on. In these accounts, it
is possible to show, through the main character’s behaviour, what attitudes and decisions are ethically preferable and why. This kind of analysis fits very well with the assumptions established in virtue ethics. One of those is that, in professional practice, it is not always possible or desirable to establish a clear cut distinction between personal responsibility and professional responsibility.
This is known to be the case with doctors, teachers and journal-ists. No doubt with engineers too, although not all of them are equally aware of this connexion.
This important feature in virtue ethics opens a good line of reasoning to take up, again, the student’s objection -although not to give a solution to his anguish, for serious moral dilemmas always require a risky personal commitment that no formal argu-ments can avoid. The “flourishing” or “well-being” translation of the Greek noun eudaimonia points to an integrated conception of the human being in which both moral and intellectual pow-ers (arête, virtues) develop together in harmony (Cafaro, 1998) this evolution happening in a social environment where self-interest is not opposed to social-self-interest because there is neither a community without people nor a person outside society. Any clear-cut separation between the values and attitudes I respect and promote as an engineer, and the ones important to me in my private life, is not only difficult, it becomes impossible. All attempts to keep oneself safe and sound under this moral schizo-phrenia are damned from the start, for what is really important to us is always important to us; it does not easily accord to frequent exceptions and conditions. Therefore, it is in my self-interest, not only as a person, but also as a competent professional, to firstly understand the social responsibilities attached to my work as an engineer and to secondly take care of them. Furthermore, this moral consistency among different spheres of a life has a twofold benefit, personal and public. On the one hand, to act with con-sistency provides sense (meaning) to one’s life. This sense is most valuable because it does not become established by something
external to the individual (as is the case with duty in deontologi-cal ethics or deontologi-calculation in utilitarian ethics), it comes from inside oneself. On the other hand, consistency is an essential quality in any one asking for trust.
Finally, we cannot forget the tutor on the other side in the learning process. So far, all said here was addressed to the stu-dent; now, what about our helpless educator? Again, coherence will make the difference. Being a tutor is to hold a position, but every tutor is, first of all, a person. In the classroom, all the words, gestures, acts and attitudes coming from the tutor count;
from day to day each one has an effect on the students. Thus, for tutors aiming at minds and hearts, confidence from students cannot be assured just by means of well organised speeches from third parties. It has to be earned, little by little.