www.psljournal.com/archives/newsedit/oconnell.cfm
Ethical and
Social Issues in Engineering and Computing –
The Spring
Regional Meeting of the IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology
Brian M. O'Connell, J.D.*
* Associate Professor of Ethics, Law
& Computing, Departments of Computer Science & Philosophy, Central Connecticut State University; Vice President, IEEE Society on Social Implications of
Technology
The
IEEE Society on Social Implications of Technology (SSIT) is comprised of an
international membership of over 2000 practitioners and academics. In addition
to those working within mainstream engineering fields, the Society includes
among its members, a substantial number of individuals primarily engaged in
such diverse disciplines as communication, philosophy, law and public policy
studies. This varied composition offers an excellent foundation for
wide-ranging dialogue, informed by multiple perspectives and expertise.
The
Society sponsors the annual International
Symposium on Technology and Society and publishes Technology & Society Magazine. On April
4, 2003, it's forums were further expanded
with the commencement of a regional meeting program. The inaugural event was
organized by Professor Michael Loui of the College of Engineering at the University of Illinois,
Champaign-Urbana and hosted by the Coordinated Science Laboratory. A dynamic
group of invited speakers and their chosen topics produced an afternoon of
synergistic discussion and reflection.
Following
welcoming remarks from Dean David E. Daniels of the College of Engineering and Ravi K.
Iyer, Director of the Coordinated Science Laboratory,
the presentations began with Dr. Steve Jones, Professor and Head of the
Communication Department, University of Illinois at Chicago and President
of the Association of Internet Researchers. His remarks focused upon emerging
ethical challenges relating to virtual reality (VR). After presenting a brief
history of VR within educational contexts, Dr. Jones outlined his work on a
current project to digitally represent the Harlem Renaissance. "Virtual Harlem" is a
prototype for the narrative conveyance of history and employs its graphical and
audio effects to immerse its visitors in decades of cultural heritage. In
detailing the processes employed to achieve these highly-technical goals, he
outlined the emergence of decidedly humanistic concerns. These were
characterized as "the ethics of virtual history". They included the
confronting of such value-laden choices as how to preserve authenticity while
engaging an audience, how to balance historical realism against logistical
necessity and how to create choice and completeness within programmed, finite
environments.
The
insights which Dr. Jones related as being the consequences of these
explorations centered upon the implementation of an interdisciplinary approach
to problem-solving. We are, he suggested, too often trapped within the
rhetorical construction of the "lone scholar", becoming
overly-reliant upon our own hermetic knowledge and individual technical skills.
The lessons of virtual ethics are demonstrating that this "solo"
model is ill-suited to projects in which both technical and humanistic elements
are interweaved. An emphasis, he concluded, must be
placed upon an increased appreciation for the breadth of virtual endeavors and
consequently, on the adoption of interdisciplinary approaches, uniting
humanistic and technical viewpoints to achieve ethically desirable
outcomes.
The
effects of the virtual upon ethical and social dynamics continued as a theme in
the presentation of Dr. Wendy Robinson, Assistant Professor of Communication at
the University of Cincinnati. Her remarks
focused upon the penetration of the physical world into the formerly
disembodied and anonymous realm of "cyberspace". With the advent of
such technologies as global positioning, advanced digital communication and
"24/7" ubiquitous access, the online dynamic has increasingly become
"physicalized". The result is a disruption of assumed boundaries
between online and physical environments. As this dichotomy disintegrates, so
too will the stability of our prior notions concerning autonomy, privacy,
property, identity and freedom within electronic spaces. According to Dr.
Robinson, if the well-known assumption that on the "Net", one could
be a dog without detection was ever true, it shall be no more. These
observations engendered a spirited dialogue with the audience, which included
such issues as the future role of social classification within networks, the
equitable ramifications posed by the creation of new electronic needs and the
likely effects of these changes upon standards of online civility. Discussion
also emerged regarding the possible transformations which new communication
technologies will produce in mainstream attitudes about such fundamental issues
as intellectual property and privacy.
The
final two presentations focused attention upon professional issues. Dr. Keith
Miller, Professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, examined the
current status of software engineering. Consistent with the observations of
prior speakers, his remarks emphasized the unique effects of digital technology
upon the formation of an accepted professional definition. He noted that while
the malleability of computational dynamics is a positive attribute, it is also
a factor in the existence of multiple, sometimes contradictory descriptions of
its practitioners' activities. This was illustrated by a comprehensive account
of various initiatives undertaken by professional societies such as the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the Association
for Computing Machinery (ACM). These have included attempts to build
definitional consensus on a body of fundamental knowledge as well as
cooperative work toward the establishment of a shared code of ethics.
Descriptions of controversies and impasses encountered within these dialogues
highlighted the conflicting array of interests, self-images and traditions
which have yet to be reconciled.
Given
the history of computing's self-examination process, it is not surprising that
the controversies are replicated at the interface between the profession and
the public. Dr. Miller described the state of licensing within computer
engineering, reporting its operation in Texas, currently the only American
jurisdiction requiring this certification. More broadly, he outlined the
ethical and theoretical arguments for and against the imposition of legal
regulation, citing the aforementioned instability of definitional consensus, the
problems raised by an attempted standardization or measurement of competence
and the effects of licensing upon public safety. This latter consideration
formed the basis for an active discussion concerning the interaction of
professionalization and the law, particularly as related to the ability of the
judiciary to unilaterally define professional standards through litigation.
Issues
of public accountability were further explored by Dr. Sarah K.A. Pfatteicher,
Assistant Dean for Engineering Academic Affairs, University of Wisconsin,
Madison. Her remarks centered upon her analysis of investigations concerning
the World Trade Center collapse, particularly, their response to the question
of whether it would have been technically possible to forestall or even prevent
a total structural failure. Her research included reviews of various reports
from both popular and technical sources and revealed sharp differences in
investigative approaches. She described how professional evaluations have, at
least initially, focused upon design and construction issues, exploring only
minimally and uncritically, the quality of decisions made by engineering
personnel. In contrast, through an impressive multi-media presentation, Dr.
Pfatteicher demonstrated that "popular" analyses of the events, such
as those undertaken by the Public Broadcasting System's Nova series, devoted significant consideration to the effects of
individuals' judgments and actions. She suggested that the difference in
methodologies reflected, in part, long-standing engineering review practices,
in which failure teaches lessons through an examination of "what"
rather than "who" is accountable. The mode of approach, Dr.
Pfatteicher concluded, carries obvious consequences and imports an array of
suppositions which merit continued examination. The subsequent discussion
included an interdisciplinary exchange of methodologies and problems within
evaluative procedures and as well as thoughts about the applicability of wider,
historical approaches within the review process.
In
keeping with the day's themes of practice, profession and social
responsibility, the conference concluded with the presentation of the SSIT Carl
Barus Award for Outstanding Service in the Public Interest to David Monts.
Former SSIT President, Dr. Stephen Unger related Monts' tireless efforts as an
engineer within the Physical Plant Services Department of the University of
Louisiana to report and rectify safety risks created by what he perceived to be
the result of improper planning and budgetary constraints. Monts' positions
inevitably resulted in his termination and a subsequent and protracted civil
suit. In contrast with such widely-followed issues as the World Trade Center
investigation and policies surrounding licensing, Dr. Unger noted that Mr.
Mont's actions were important examples of the everyday ethical challenges which
engineers face within modern practice.
