Derek Adams

Disclaimer-This paper partially fulfills a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering students at the University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering. This paper is a student, not a professional, paper. This paper is based on publicly available information and may not provide complete analyses of all relevant data. If this paper is used for any purpose other than these authors’ partial fulfillment of a writing requirement for first year (freshman) engineering students at the University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering, the user does so at his or her own risk.

mars: a question of ethics

Derek Adams ()

1

Derek Adams

INTRODUCTION

Ethics, ormoral principles that govern behavior, are needed in almost all decisions that individuals make. However, in engineering, ethics carry an even greater importance, because the choices and decisions an engineer makes will impact many people. Engineers must weigh personal belief and advancement of the profession, as well as consider and obey the strict code of engineering ethics laid out by engineering groups and organizations. In this paper, I will discuss a specific scenario that, although not real, could very well be real in the future. I will take a look into the ethical dilemma at hand, what steps I take to reach a decision, and my final conclusion.

An ethical dilemma

The topic of travel to Mars is one of great interest to many, particularly the idea of putting humans on Mars. However, this goal is not easily achievable. As stated in National Geographic, “We know how to get to Mars. We know how to land on Mars. Now comes the hard part: figuring out how to leave”[1].Mars One, an organization dedicated to working towards a solution to putting man on Mars, estimates that it will take about twenty years before they feel ready to launch humans toward the Red Planet, and still there will be many risks and challenges [2].

In this scenario, I will pose as a mechanical engineer in the year 2036. I work for a company that is trying to become the first to put humans on Mars, and there are several other companies competing to be the first to do the same. With the competition heated, it is important to focus our company’s energies towards this goal and to achieve it the fastest. After years of testing, as well as sending unmanned spacecraft to Mars to collect data and samples, our company is finally ready to send a select group of individuals to Mars.We have enough information that we are able to accurately assess what an individual’s needs will be while living on Mars, taking into consideration all factors, such as basic necessities like food and water as well as how the individual will need to adapt to the surrounding environment.

However, there is one major concern that is causing doubt over if the mission to Mars is ethical or not. Based on the current technologies we have available, we are not able to provide a way back to Earth for the astronauts we will be sending to Mars. The flight is a one-way ticket, and there will be no coming back. The individuals who plan to go on this mission will be well aware of this, and will have access to things such as email while on Mars so that they can contact loved ones on Earth. However, they will have to live on Mars and start a settlement there that will last them for the rest of their lifetime. The question then is as follows: Is it ethical to send individuals to a never-before-settled planet without a way to return back to home, or should the company wait and develop new technologies in hopes that there will be a way in the future to have astronauts go to and return from Mars?

the codes of ethics

The first step I would take to evaluate this ethical situation is to look at the engineering codes of ethics. These are important guidelines that are set up to ensure that engineers are properly performing in their job so that they have a positive influence on the world around them. There are many different sets of engineering codes of ethics, but many are specific to one type of engineering. Since my role in the company is a mechanical engineer, I would first look into the American Society of Mechanical Engineers(ASME) code of ethics and then the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) code of ethics.

The ASME code of ethics outlines ten basic canons that can be used to help in the decision making process when dealing with ethical dilemmas. The NSPE code of ethics contains six canons, some of which are the same as those outlined in the ASME code.

The first canon of the ASME code states that “engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public in the performance of their professional duties”[3]. The first canon of the NSPE code states this same rule [4]. When applying this canon to the ethical situation at hand, it appears evident that the suggested action does not violate the rule. The astronauts that would travel to Mars would be safe, and they would be given the proper materials to retain their health and welfare once settled on Mars.

Since the issue does not violate the first canon, the second canon of the ASME code is taken into consideration. This canon says that “engineers shall perform services only in the areas of their competence; they shall build their professional reputation on the merit of their services and shall not compete unfairly with others” [3]. Once again, the second canon of the NSPE code is the same as that of the ASME code [4]. This is an important section of the engineering code of ethics, because it would be dangerous for an engineer to work in an unfamiliar area, as it could possibly lead to damages or even the deaths of others. In the scenario, as a mechanical engineer, I would be responsible for making sure the mechanical systems in the rocket and the gear that will be used to set up a colony function properly and safely. This complies with the second rule in these codes since I would be working specifically on mechanical systems. In regards to the ethical predicament, however, I do not believe this rule applies as much as it would in other situations. Since no engineering-related systems are directly involved in the choice to leave people on Mars, it is up to the judgement of the one in charge as to whether or not the mission should run. As long as that person, in this case, me, checks with the codes of ethics, they should be able to carefully decide the best plan of action.

The third canon of the ASME code of ethics states that “engineers shall continue their professional development throughout their careers and shall provide opportunities for the professional and ethical development of those engineers under their supervision” [3]. The task at hand would certainly help to develop as an engineer, as sending humans to Mars and having them live there is no simple task. With regards to the second half of this canon, it would be important that I pass along what I have learned from this experience to future engineers. The last section of this paper will do just that. After making a decision, I will pass on what I have learned from this situation to future engineers.

The forth canon of the ASME code says that “engineers shall act in professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest” [3]. This goes hand-in-hand with the forth canon of the NSPE code, which states the same thing [4].Since the team of astronauts would be somewhat small, it would be very easy to ensure that no conflicts would arise between the company and the astronauts because they could be picked specifically to share the same vision as the company. With a common goal of exploration and furthering science, there would certainly be minimal conflict.

The fifth canon of the ASME code is as follows: “Engineers shall respect the proprietary information and intellectual property rights of others, including charitable organizations and professional societies in the engineering field”[3]. The sixth canon goes along with this one, saying that “Engineers shall associate only with reputable persons or organizations” [3].Since other companies are not involved in the Mars mission, this canon would not be of ethical concern. The only interaction with other rival companies would be friendly competition to be the first to land humans on Mars. If anything, this interaction is good because it promotes the drive to create new technologies.

In the ASME code of ethics, the seventh canon says that “Engineers shall issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner and shall avoid any conduct which brings discredit upon the profession” [3]. The third canon of the NSPE code of ethics says this as well, and it’s fifth canon says to “avoid deceptive acts” [4].This all relates to addressing the public in an honest and open manner. It would be important to make sure all astronauts who agree to go on the Mars mission are well aware of the vastness of the commitment. We would explain very thoroughly how they would be able to live on the surface of Mars and make sure each one of them understands that they will not be able to return back to Earth. We would also remind them, however, that they will still have contact to Earth through the use of things such as email.

The eighth canon of the ASME code is that “engineers shall consider environmental impact and sustainable development in the performance of their professional duties” [3]. This rule could come into play if it seemedas if an alternate rocket could be built in the future that would be cleaner for the environment, both on Earth and on Mars.However, this would always be a possibility since cleaner technologies continue to evolve and become even cleaner. Given the available resources and technologies at the time, we would make sure that the rocket would be as clean and environmentally friendly as possible.

Canons nine and ten of the ASME code of ethics are the longest of all ten codes, but the two can be summarized as such: engineers should report a case of unethical practiceif and only if such an act is committed[3]. Also, the NSPE code states that engineers must“conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession”[4]. In the hypothetical company I would work for, it would be mandatory for all engineers to carefullyfollow the codes of ethics and for them to report any unethical behavior to a superior. We would make sure that ethics come first and our mission second since we want to provide to best service we can for all who are impacted by the mission.

After analyzing each of the canons for two of the codes of engineering ethics, it appears to be clearto me that sending humans to Mars without a chance for a return trip does not violate any of the codes of ethics. However, to be certain of my decision, I would be sure to consult other sources for more advice on the subject. More specifically, I would discuss the situation with others who may have more experience or different viewpoints when it comes to the ethical dilemma at hand.

seeking additional advice

After looking into the codes of engineering ethics, my next step in determining whether or not the mission would be ethical would be to talk with those that I trust about the issue.

For the purposes of this scenario, I asked my father some questions about what he would do in this situation and what he thinks is ethical. My father has been an engineer for about thirty years, and he is now in charge of several engineers who work for him. This forces him to make important decisions on a day-to-day basis that often involve ethics. When I talked to him about this situation, he said that the most important part of this decision relied on the honesty of my company. It would be crucial for the company tobe honest, but as long as they are he sees no problem with the one-way flight. As he put it, “as long as the astronauts know they won’t be coming back to Earth and they agree to that, the mission should be fine to run” [5].

I also talked to my friend Gabe Detter, who is also currently an engineer studying at the University of Pittsburgh. In the context of the scenario, he would fill the role of an advisor or someone within the company that is also tasked with making the decision. Gabe’s thoughts on this dilemma were very similar to my father’s. He said that he would feel comfortable with sending people to Mars without a chance to return as long as they are aware of what they are committing to. Since the issue does not go against the engineering code of ethics, he would be comfortable in his choice [6].

my decision

After consulting the engineering codes of ethics and discussing the scenario with those that I trust, I feel confident to say that the proposed Mars mission is ethical. Since the astronauts would be aware of all that is involved in the mission and since they would be safe, healthy, and have contact to Earth while on the surface of Mars, it is ethical to send them to Mars with no way of return. Contact with the astronauts would be especially important so that we could address any concerns or problems they run into.Because of all of this, I can say with confidence that I would be willing to start a one-way Mars mission.

future advice

After considering the topic of ethics in regards to this hypothetical situation, I have learned much about the decision-making process that I would like to pass on to others. I have found that it is very important to carefully analyze each canon of ethics codes. They will help to guide your decision, as well as help you to consider other points about ethics that you have not yet considered. I also think it is important to talk to others about your specific ethical predicament.This will force you to see things from different points of view, and it can help you to better and more thoroughly analyze the situation before coming to a sudden conclusion.

Most importantly, I believe it is important to take your time and give serious thought to ethics in your work. It is important to put ethics before all you do so that all who are impacted by your work are affected in a positive and healthy manner.

sources

[1] M. Strauss. “How Will We Get Off Mars?” National Geographic. 10.02.2015. Accessed 11.22.2016.

[2]“Is It Ethical?” Mars One. Accessed 11.19.2016.

[3] American Society of Mechanical Engineers. “Code of Ethics of Engineers.” American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Adopted 03.07.1976. Revised 11.05.2006. Accessed 11.20.2016.

017-FA98-477E-8A73-77B04B36D410/P157_Ethics.aspx

[4] National Society of Professional Engineers. “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers.” National Society of Professional Engineers. Revised 07.2007. Accessed 11.20.2016.

[5]D. Adams. A discussion on ethics. 11.21.2016.

[6]G. Detter. A discussion on ethics. 11.21.2016.

additional sources

[3] “Engineer’s Obligation to Consider Feasible Options” National Society of Professional Engineers. 3.15.2016.Accessed 10.21.2016.

[3]“Case 1011 – An Engineering Exercise.” Texas Tech University. Accessed 11.21.2016.

[4]C. Bartlett. “Off the Clock” Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.8.26.2015. Accessed 10.21.2016.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Dr. Reed Boring for helping me discover my passion for engineering. Without him I may be in a different field entirely. I would also like to thank Gabe Detter, who helped to edit the paper and was available to discuss ideas for the paper, as well as be included as a source for an interview. He also has helped to shape me and my plans for the future as an engineer. Thirdly I would like to thank my father for participating in an interview and helping to give me some insight into this ethical dilemma. I would also like to thank Julian Pras, who helped spark my interest in space and space travel. Lastly I would like to thank Jonas Renksehelping me to see the positive outcomes from challenges that engineers have to face, such as the moral dilemma outlined in this paper.

1