WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.570 align:middle line:90% 00:00:00.570 --> 00:00:02.370 align:middle line:84% The following content is provided 00:00:02.370 --> 00:00:06.330 align:middle line:84% by MIT OpenCourseWare under a Creative Commons license. 00:00:06.330 --> 00:00:08.430 align:middle line:84% Additional information about our license 00:00:08.430 --> 00:00:10.800 align:middle line:84% and MIT OpenCourseWare in general 00:00:10.800 --> 00:00:12.730 align:middle line:90% is available at ocw.mit.edu. 00:00:12.730 --> 00:00:15.300 align:middle line:90% 00:00:15.300 --> 00:00:17.970 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: On this particular class, 00:00:17.970 --> 00:00:22.510 align:middle line:84% I intentionally did not make an assignment, 00:00:22.510 --> 00:00:25.208 align:middle line:84% because I didn't want you to know 00:00:25.208 --> 00:00:27.000 align:middle line:84% what the answer in the back of the book is. 00:00:27.000 --> 00:00:33.330 align:middle line:90% 00:00:33.330 --> 00:00:40.430 align:middle line:84% But this is a preliminary to the discussion tomorrow Dr. 00:00:40.430 --> 00:00:43.130 align:middle line:90% [? Eng's ?] class. 00:00:43.130 --> 00:00:52.111 align:middle line:84% But I want to put ethics in scientific and engineering 00:00:52.111 --> 00:00:54.890 align:middle line:90% problems. 00:00:54.890 --> 00:00:55.390 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:00:55.390 --> 00:00:57.250 align:middle line:84% Now, here's what I'm going to have to do. 00:00:57.250 --> 00:01:00.340 align:middle line:90% I want to make a metaphor. 00:01:00.340 --> 00:01:03.430 align:middle line:90% I've made this metaphor. 00:01:03.430 --> 00:01:07.270 align:middle line:84% It went over so well, somebody actually-- 00:01:07.270 --> 00:01:12.870 align:middle line:90% it wasn't my invention Hi. 00:01:12.870 --> 00:01:19.050 align:middle line:84% And it went over so well that actually I 00:01:19.050 --> 00:01:21.810 align:middle line:84% published this little metaphor as a joke, 00:01:21.810 --> 00:01:23.370 align:middle line:90% but it has poetic value. 00:01:23.370 --> 00:01:26.040 align:middle line:90% 00:01:26.040 --> 00:01:37.585 align:middle line:84% The metaphor is called "the barbecue metaphor." 00:01:37.585 --> 00:01:42.140 align:middle line:90% 00:01:42.140 --> 00:01:48.110 align:middle line:84% I was on sabbatical one year before this one, 00:01:48.110 --> 00:01:52.690 align:middle line:84% and I was down at Duke University 00:01:52.690 --> 00:01:54.910 align:middle line:90% in Durham, North Carolina. 00:01:54.910 --> 00:01:58.120 align:middle line:90% 00:01:58.120 --> 00:02:00.310 align:middle line:84% And one of the faculty had a picnic. 00:02:00.310 --> 00:02:03.990 align:middle line:90% 00:02:03.990 --> 00:02:15.730 align:middle line:84% And this highly-spirited good-natured debate 00:02:15.730 --> 00:02:21.250 align:middle line:84% broke out between the North Carolinians and the Texans 00:02:21.250 --> 00:02:24.620 align:middle line:90% on who made the best barbecue. 00:02:24.620 --> 00:02:25.120 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:02:25.120 --> 00:02:26.995 align:middle line:84% If you know anything about the United States, 00:02:26.995 --> 00:02:30.810 align:middle line:84% those two states claim to make the best barbecue 00:02:30.810 --> 00:02:34.110 align:middle line:90% and this was a barbecue cookout. 00:02:34.110 --> 00:02:37.590 align:middle line:84% Incidentally, the person who was the host was from India, 00:02:37.590 --> 00:02:39.840 align:middle line:84% but he claimed to have the best North Carolina 00:02:39.840 --> 00:02:42.180 align:middle line:90% barbecue in the world. 00:02:42.180 --> 00:02:51.640 align:middle line:84% And the sides of the debate did come to one agreement. 00:02:51.640 --> 00:02:55.310 align:middle line:90% 00:02:55.310 --> 00:02:57.260 align:middle line:90% Don't ask me to defend this. 00:02:57.260 --> 00:03:05.480 align:middle line:84% But they agreed that North Carolina barbecue was a verb 00:03:05.480 --> 00:03:09.780 align:middle line:84% and that Texas barbecue was a noun. 00:03:09.780 --> 00:03:11.850 align:middle line:84% That is to say, North Carolina barbecue 00:03:11.850 --> 00:03:15.720 align:middle line:84% is what it is by virtue of the method 00:03:15.720 --> 00:03:20.220 align:middle line:84% and Texas barbecue is what it is by what 00:03:20.220 --> 00:03:22.900 align:middle line:84% you put in your mouth, what you get later. 00:03:22.900 --> 00:03:26.990 align:middle line:90% 00:03:26.990 --> 00:03:29.530 align:middle line:84% So we had a big time over that, and one 00:03:29.530 --> 00:03:31.615 align:middle line:84% of the faculty members who was there 00:03:31.615 --> 00:03:32.740 align:middle line:90% was a young faculty member. 00:03:32.740 --> 00:03:38.710 align:middle line:84% And I started talking about an ethical situation, which 00:03:38.710 --> 00:03:40.000 align:middle line:90% we later published. 00:03:40.000 --> 00:03:46.000 align:middle line:84% And what we did was we said that almost all engineering ethics 00:03:46.000 --> 00:03:47.350 align:middle line:90% at the time-- 00:03:47.350 --> 00:03:51.160 align:middle line:90% this was in the early '90s. 00:03:51.160 --> 00:03:53.305 align:middle line:84% I was there academic year '90-'91. 00:03:53.305 --> 00:03:57.590 align:middle line:90% 00:03:57.590 --> 00:04:01.560 align:middle line:84% That engineering ethics at the time 00:04:01.560 --> 00:04:06.350 align:middle line:84% was all done like the Texas barbecue, if that in case 00:04:06.350 --> 00:04:10.730 align:middle line:84% is true, that you see the ethical situation 00:04:10.730 --> 00:04:12.801 align:middle line:84% and then you comment on it afterwards. 00:04:12.801 --> 00:04:16.959 align:middle line:90% 00:04:16.959 --> 00:04:18.850 align:middle line:84% So we began to ask ourselves, well, 00:04:18.850 --> 00:04:22.110 align:middle line:84% what about an ethical situation in the engineering 00:04:22.110 --> 00:04:23.920 align:middle line:84% where the ethical question comes up 00:04:23.920 --> 00:04:28.450 align:middle line:84% either before or during the engineering analysis? 00:04:28.450 --> 00:04:34.460 align:middle line:84% And we dealt with during the engineering analysis, 00:04:34.460 --> 00:04:36.980 align:middle line:84% and we talked about this particular problem. 00:04:36.980 --> 00:04:40.233 align:middle line:90% 00:04:40.233 --> 00:04:40.733 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:04:40.733 --> 00:04:53.244 align:middle line:90% 00:04:53.244 --> 00:04:54.656 align:middle line:90% Yes. 00:04:54.656 --> 00:04:55.156 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:04:55.156 --> 00:05:02.050 align:middle line:90% 00:05:02.050 --> 00:05:09.200 align:middle line:84% It turns out, this particular problem 00:05:09.200 --> 00:05:12.056 align:middle line:90% caused a lot of discussion. 00:05:12.056 --> 00:05:15.720 align:middle line:84% I got notes from doctoral students 00:05:15.720 --> 00:05:17.760 align:middle line:84% telling me how miserable their lives were 00:05:17.760 --> 00:05:19.652 align:middle line:84% made because their faculty advisors made 00:05:19.652 --> 00:05:20.610 align:middle line:90% them read that article. 00:05:20.610 --> 00:05:23.157 align:middle line:90% 00:05:23.157 --> 00:05:24.490 align:middle line:90% I'll give you the article later. 00:05:24.490 --> 00:05:27.040 align:middle line:90% 00:05:27.040 --> 00:05:37.340 align:middle line:84% And it came out of a journal, it's 00:05:37.340 --> 00:05:44.240 align:middle line:84% called Engineering Education and it's published by the-- 00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:46.740 align:middle line:90% oh, did it go up the wrong way? 00:05:46.740 --> 00:05:51.840 align:middle line:84% It was published by the American Society 00:05:51.840 --> 00:05:53.310 align:middle line:90% for Engineering Education. 00:05:53.310 --> 00:05:59.210 align:middle line:90% 00:05:59.210 --> 00:05:59.930 align:middle line:90% You see that? 00:05:59.930 --> 00:06:06.340 align:middle line:90% 00:06:06.340 --> 00:06:08.990 align:middle line:90% Oops, I did that wrong. 00:06:08.990 --> 00:06:11.700 align:middle line:90% 00:06:11.700 --> 00:06:14.745 align:middle line:90% See it better? 00:06:14.745 --> 00:06:15.723 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:06:15.723 --> 00:06:19.640 align:middle line:90% 00:06:19.640 --> 00:06:23.120 align:middle line:84% Now, here's the way the problem goes. 00:06:23.120 --> 00:06:26.000 align:middle line:84% How many people have had a course in engineering dynamics? 00:06:26.000 --> 00:06:29.430 align:middle line:90% 00:06:29.430 --> 00:06:30.952 align:middle line:90% Two. 00:06:30.952 --> 00:06:32.160 align:middle line:90% I teach engineering dynamics. 00:06:32.160 --> 00:06:37.020 align:middle line:84% So it's physics, Newtonian physics. 00:06:37.020 --> 00:06:40.570 align:middle line:84% It's just applied to a different set of problems. 00:06:40.570 --> 00:06:45.960 align:middle line:84% And here, we got a truck with a big load on the back of it. 00:06:45.960 --> 00:06:48.810 align:middle line:84% And there's a problem like that, maybe not exactly 00:06:48.810 --> 00:06:51.030 align:middle line:90% with this picture. 00:06:51.030 --> 00:06:54.840 align:middle line:84% But there's a problem like that, I dare say, in every book 00:06:54.840 --> 00:06:58.860 align:middle line:84% on engineering dynamics or they might call it "Engineering 00:06:58.860 --> 00:07:01.600 align:middle line:90% Mechanics: Dynamics." 00:07:01.600 --> 00:07:06.400 align:middle line:84% The idea is that the driver is driving the truck 00:07:06.400 --> 00:07:10.800 align:middle line:84% down the highway, slams on the brakes 00:07:10.800 --> 00:07:13.830 align:middle line:84% because a dog is running in front of the truck. 00:07:13.830 --> 00:07:16.245 align:middle line:84% And what happens if the load shifts? 00:07:16.245 --> 00:07:20.540 align:middle line:90% 00:07:20.540 --> 00:07:25.170 align:middle line:84% The students are asked, first of all, given some information, 00:07:25.170 --> 00:07:28.140 align:middle line:84% to predict whether or not the load will shift. 00:07:28.140 --> 00:07:31.290 align:middle line:84% And then if, in fact, it will shift, 00:07:31.290 --> 00:07:34.380 align:middle line:84% you want to know what's called the "relative velocity" 00:07:34.380 --> 00:07:36.990 align:middle line:84% of the load to the cab of the truck 00:07:36.990 --> 00:07:41.320 align:middle line:84% when the load hits the cab of the truck. 00:07:41.320 --> 00:07:46.690 align:middle line:84% So the truck may be going, let's say, 70 miles an hour, 00:07:46.690 --> 00:07:48.430 align:middle line:90% slams the brake. 00:07:48.430 --> 00:07:52.480 align:middle line:84% And somewhere between the time the brakes are slammed 00:07:52.480 --> 00:07:56.260 align:middle line:84% and the time the truck stops, this load 00:07:56.260 --> 00:07:59.800 align:middle line:84% hits the back of the cab at some velocity, 00:07:59.800 --> 00:08:02.080 align:middle line:84% some relative velocity, some velocity of the load 00:08:02.080 --> 00:08:04.230 align:middle line:90% relative to the truck. 00:08:04.230 --> 00:08:07.260 align:middle line:84% And depending on how high that velocity 00:08:07.260 --> 00:08:15.940 align:middle line:84% is, we put in this paper, the truck driver will be injured. 00:08:15.940 --> 00:08:20.370 align:middle line:84% Now, we're going to consider two types of injury. 00:08:20.370 --> 00:08:29.590 align:middle line:84% One is where the truck driver has his spine snapped and will 00:08:29.590 --> 00:08:34.650 align:middle line:84% be a paraplegic for the rest of his or her life. 00:08:34.650 --> 00:08:38.880 align:middle line:84% The other one is where the truck driver 00:08:38.880 --> 00:08:43.900 align:middle line:84% gets the spine snapped and dies right on the spot. 00:08:43.900 --> 00:08:47.900 align:middle line:90% Now, so you want to calculate. 00:08:47.900 --> 00:08:55.420 align:middle line:84% So your job is to buy the brakes for a fleet of trucks 00:08:55.420 --> 00:08:57.197 align:middle line:90% on your job. 00:08:57.197 --> 00:08:59.030 align:middle line:84% I don't know who you work for, but let's say 00:08:59.030 --> 00:09:02.355 align:middle line:84% you work for a company that's got a fleet of 200 trucks. 00:09:02.355 --> 00:09:04.230 align:middle line:84% And all of a sudden, the brakes are going bad 00:09:04.230 --> 00:09:08.130 align:middle line:84% or you need a whole new set for all trucks. 00:09:08.130 --> 00:09:11.255 align:middle line:84% So they get one of their brand new engineers on the job 00:09:11.255 --> 00:09:15.190 align:middle line:84% and says, OK, look, we've got a choice of two kinds of brakes. 00:09:15.190 --> 00:09:25.410 align:middle line:84% One is very strong if the truck driver puts on the brakes 00:09:25.410 --> 00:09:28.830 align:middle line:90% at 70 miles per hour. 00:09:28.830 --> 00:09:32.940 align:middle line:84% Then I want to if the load is going to break his back 00:09:32.940 --> 00:09:39.300 align:middle line:84% or kill him, or just injure or kill him or her. 00:09:39.300 --> 00:09:42.000 align:middle line:84% The other set of brakes cost the same amount. 00:09:42.000 --> 00:09:49.560 align:middle line:84% They're not as strong, but they give a nice smooth braking 00:09:49.560 --> 00:09:53.230 align:middle line:84% experience and that has some value 00:09:53.230 --> 00:09:55.300 align:middle line:90% to the kinds of loads we carry. 00:09:55.300 --> 00:09:57.730 align:middle line:84% We don't want them vibrating a lot. 00:09:57.730 --> 00:10:00.842 align:middle line:90% So you do your analysis. 00:10:00.842 --> 00:10:02.550 align:middle line:84% Now, here's the last piece, and then I'll 00:10:02.550 --> 00:10:03.750 align:middle line:90% ask you all to talk about. 00:10:03.750 --> 00:10:06.430 align:middle line:90% 00:10:06.430 --> 00:10:17.400 align:middle line:84% If you break the driver's back and kill him, 00:10:17.400 --> 00:10:24.140 align:middle line:84% the cost to your company will be $1 million, 00:10:24.140 --> 00:10:27.030 align:middle line:90% insurance, other things. 00:10:27.030 --> 00:10:36.180 align:middle line:84% If you break the driver's back and don't kill him, 00:10:36.180 --> 00:10:40.686 align:middle line:84% put him in a wheelchair, it'll cost your company $5 million, 00:10:40.686 --> 00:10:43.225 align:middle line:84% because you got to pay for that person the rest of his life. 00:10:43.225 --> 00:10:47.690 align:middle line:90% 00:10:47.690 --> 00:10:49.100 align:middle line:90% Which system do you use? 00:10:49.100 --> 00:10:52.320 align:middle line:90% 00:10:52.320 --> 00:10:55.040 align:middle line:90% And why? 00:10:55.040 --> 00:10:56.480 align:middle line:90% How do you justify your answer? 00:10:56.480 --> 00:10:59.420 align:middle line:90% 00:10:59.420 --> 00:11:00.470 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:11:00.470 --> 00:11:03.618 align:middle line:84% Now, any questions about the problem? 00:11:03.618 --> 00:11:05.160 align:middle line:84% You can be creative with the problem. 00:11:05.160 --> 00:11:08.930 align:middle line:84% You can take the problem and add or even take away a few things, 00:11:08.930 --> 00:11:11.120 align:middle line:84% but I think you've got a feel for the essentials 00:11:11.120 --> 00:11:11.910 align:middle line:90% of the problem. 00:11:11.910 --> 00:11:13.970 align:middle line:84% You've got to make a hard decision here. 00:11:13.970 --> 00:11:20.700 align:middle line:84% And I want to give you some time to think about it 00:11:20.700 --> 00:11:22.200 align:middle line:90% and talk about it. 00:11:22.200 --> 00:11:31.450 align:middle line:84% Now, what I'd like to do is to, let's say, 00:11:31.450 --> 00:11:33.672 align:middle line:90% have two discussion groups. 00:11:33.672 --> 00:11:35.880 align:middle line:84% I guess you know who the discussion leaders are going 00:11:35.880 --> 00:11:39.420 align:middle line:84% to be, and I guess you know who the spokesperson for the groups 00:11:39.420 --> 00:11:41.080 align:middle line:90% are going to be. 00:11:41.080 --> 00:11:48.030 align:middle line:84% So Ms. Ratliff, why don't you pick one of your group person 00:11:48.030 --> 00:11:49.830 align:middle line:90% and y'all talk it over? 00:11:49.830 --> 00:11:51.810 align:middle line:84% And Ms. Beth here, you pick one of yours. 00:11:51.810 --> 00:11:52.920 align:middle line:90% You talk it over. 00:11:52.920 --> 00:11:56.390 align:middle line:84% And if y'all need five minutes, that will be fine. 00:11:56.390 --> 00:11:58.050 align:middle line:90% If you need more, let me know. 00:11:58.050 --> 00:11:59.196 align:middle line:90% But enjoy the discussion. 00:11:59.196 --> 00:12:00.060 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: I have a question. 00:12:00.060 --> 00:12:00.270 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Yeah. 00:12:00.270 --> 00:12:00.770 align:middle line:90% 00:12:00.770 --> 00:12:05.400 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Do we know for sure that this one set of brakes 00:12:05.400 --> 00:12:08.550 align:middle line:84% will kill the driver and the other side of brakes 00:12:08.550 --> 00:12:10.410 align:middle line:90% will paralyze the driver? 00:12:10.410 --> 00:12:11.910 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: We have every reason 00:12:11.910 --> 00:12:14.220 align:middle line:90% to plan for that eventuality. 00:12:14.220 --> 00:12:14.818 align:middle line:90% 00:12:14.818 --> 00:12:15.360 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: OK. 00:12:15.360 --> 00:12:20.020 align:middle line:90% 00:12:20.020 --> 00:12:21.190 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Right. 00:12:21.190 --> 00:12:23.140 align:middle line:84% Consider yourself pretty much locked 00:12:23.140 --> 00:12:26.980 align:middle line:84% in on that unless the discussion leads you someplace else. 00:12:26.980 --> 00:12:33.550 align:middle line:84% But the central part of your answer depends on that. 00:12:33.550 --> 00:12:34.150 align:middle line:90% Excuse me. 00:12:34.150 --> 00:12:37.640 align:middle line:84% Actually, I didn't anticipate this and this is great. 00:12:37.640 --> 00:12:39.310 align:middle line:84% This is what ethics is all about. 00:12:39.310 --> 00:12:41.230 align:middle line:84% I don't want to stop your discussion. 00:12:41.230 --> 00:12:43.660 align:middle line:84% But can we at some point kind of merge? 00:12:43.660 --> 00:12:47.420 align:middle line:84% So everybody can get a benefit of everybody else's discussion. 00:12:47.420 --> 00:12:51.880 align:middle line:84% So rather than make a report, you can stay where you are 00:12:51.880 --> 00:12:55.360 align:middle line:84% but just each one give the other group 00:12:55.360 --> 00:12:59.190 align:middle line:84% a sense of where you are in your discussion. 00:12:59.190 --> 00:13:03.268 align:middle line:90% 00:13:03.268 --> 00:13:04.060 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Whatever. 00:13:04.060 --> 00:13:07.137 align:middle line:90% We have a [INAUDIBLE]. 00:13:07.137 --> 00:13:09.650 align:middle line:84% The first thing that [INAUDIBLE] came up with 00:13:09.650 --> 00:13:16.144 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] two options [INAUDIBLE] died. 00:13:16.144 --> 00:13:20.380 align:middle line:84% And we thought in terms of [INAUDIBLE] kind of [INAUDIBLE] 00:13:20.380 --> 00:13:24.170 align:middle line:84% death on one end, injury on the other end-- 00:13:24.170 --> 00:13:25.670 align:middle line:84% and we just kind of started to think 00:13:25.670 --> 00:13:30.017 align:middle line:84% of [INAUDIBLE] you should aim for that lower end. 00:13:30.017 --> 00:13:34.364 align:middle line:84% And if you aim, you should always aim [INAUDIBLE].. 00:13:34.364 --> 00:13:55.903 align:middle line:90% 00:13:55.903 --> 00:13:57.320 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: Switch to the brakes, 00:13:57.320 --> 00:13:59.300 align:middle line:84% but what sort of brakes you going to buy? 00:13:59.300 --> 00:14:00.485 align:middle line:90% 00:14:00.485 --> 00:14:01.860 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Yes, and we would say-- 00:14:01.860 --> 00:14:03.032 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 00:14:03.032 --> 00:14:07.190 align:middle line:90% 00:14:07.190 --> 00:14:12.250 align:middle line:84% However, we realized that this is a company and-- 00:14:12.250 --> 00:14:20.650 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] injure him. 00:14:20.650 --> 00:14:23.470 align:middle line:84% If $1 million could kill him, why don't we just kill him? 00:14:23.470 --> 00:14:28.630 align:middle line:84% So one of the things we about, though, was we 00:14:28.630 --> 00:14:30.032 align:middle line:90% think that [INAUDIBLE]. 00:14:30.032 --> 00:14:48.690 align:middle line:90% 00:14:48.690 --> 00:14:53.642 align:middle line:84% Actually [INAUDIBLE] really good idea. 00:14:53.642 --> 00:14:57.100 align:middle line:84% One of his ideas, this was an interesting twist, 00:14:57.100 --> 00:14:59.570 align:middle line:84% was inform the driver of his increased risk 00:14:59.570 --> 00:15:03.770 align:middle line:84% and choose brake one that's going to kill him 00:15:03.770 --> 00:15:07.191 align:middle line:84% and inform the driver and just pay him [INAUDIBLE].. 00:15:07.191 --> 00:15:10.053 align:middle line:84% And at least he would be compensated-- 00:15:10.053 --> 00:15:12.560 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 00:15:12.560 --> 00:15:14.815 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: So give him the choice of whether or not-- 00:15:14.815 --> 00:15:15.315 align:middle line:90% 00:15:15.315 --> 00:15:17.025 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:15:17.025 --> 00:15:17.525 align:middle line:90% 00:15:17.525 --> 00:15:19.714 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: But we also came-- 00:15:19.714 --> 00:15:27.770 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] ethical to have this [INAUDIBLE] management not tell 00:15:27.770 --> 00:15:29.878 align:middle line:90% him which way you're going-- 00:15:29.878 --> 00:15:30.619 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 00:15:30.619 --> 00:15:31.577 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] . 00:15:31.577 --> 00:15:51.790 align:middle line:90% 00:15:51.790 --> 00:15:53.444 align:middle line:90% When you're trying to get-- 00:15:53.444 --> 00:16:04.498 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] only one million-- 00:16:04.498 --> 00:16:14.380 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] So some of the [INAUDIBLE] 00:16:14.380 --> 00:16:15.624 align:middle line:90% some it [INAUDIBLE]. 00:16:15.624 --> 00:16:22.970 align:middle line:90% 00:16:22.970 --> 00:16:24.920 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: Just two information 00:16:24.920 --> 00:16:28.860 align:middle line:84% points that I think are a problem. 00:16:28.860 --> 00:16:33.280 align:middle line:84% When I was in the army, this was during the Vietnam War, 00:16:33.280 --> 00:16:37.468 align:middle line:84% I was talking to a friend of mine who was in submarine duty. 00:16:37.468 --> 00:16:40.078 align:middle line:84% And he had just come back from Vietnam. 00:16:40.078 --> 00:16:42.370 align:middle line:84% I didn't know that he was in the submarines over there, 00:16:42.370 --> 00:16:44.860 align:middle line:84% but I guess they had submarines over there. 00:16:44.860 --> 00:16:54.670 align:middle line:84% He said that, when he was in Vietnam in a war situation, 00:16:54.670 --> 00:17:01.120 align:middle line:84% he was getting both hazardous duty pay and combat pay. 00:17:01.120 --> 00:17:04.359 align:middle line:84% I mean, being in a submarine, you get hazardous duty pay 00:17:04.359 --> 00:17:07.930 align:middle line:90% over and above the combat. 00:17:07.930 --> 00:17:10.660 align:middle line:84% They suspend that part once you got into combat, 00:17:10.660 --> 00:17:14.020 align:middle line:90% but that's an interesting point. 00:17:14.020 --> 00:17:17.527 align:middle line:84% The other one to keep in mind, I think 00:17:17.527 --> 00:17:19.569 align:middle line:84% you're doing right with the use of the word "his" 00:17:19.569 --> 00:17:22.240 align:middle line:84% in talking about these male rats. 00:17:22.240 --> 00:17:25.030 align:middle line:84% But I drove a diesel for a long time. 00:17:25.030 --> 00:17:29.860 align:middle line:84% I had a little Mercedes, diesel, four cylinders. 00:17:29.860 --> 00:17:33.250 align:middle line:84% And I used to get my diesel fuel at truck stops. 00:17:33.250 --> 00:17:37.480 align:middle line:84% And occasionally, you'd see a truck driver there 00:17:37.480 --> 00:17:41.500 align:middle line:84% with his whole family, wife, maybe two little kids, 00:17:41.500 --> 00:17:44.260 align:middle line:84% because they had that little compartment in the back where 00:17:44.260 --> 00:17:45.010 align:middle line:90% you could sleep. 00:17:45.010 --> 00:17:47.290 align:middle line:84% And one of them let me look in there 00:17:47.290 --> 00:17:51.100 align:middle line:84% and they had a television in there, a little toilet. 00:17:51.100 --> 00:17:53.350 align:middle line:84% One time I went in there and the family 00:17:53.350 --> 00:17:56.127 align:middle line:84% got in the truck and the wife was the driver. 00:17:56.127 --> 00:18:03.490 align:middle line:84% [LAUGHING] And so I think sometimes it's 00:18:03.490 --> 00:18:07.120 align:middle line:84% relevant to keep in mind the facts, because sometimes they 00:18:07.120 --> 00:18:15.520 align:middle line:84% can have a relevancy on your decision. 00:18:15.520 --> 00:18:20.170 align:middle line:84% I think it's fair to say that some people would rather 00:18:20.170 --> 00:18:24.550 align:middle line:84% have an argument with a father over the disposition 00:18:24.550 --> 00:18:26.050 align:middle line:90% of the children than the mother. 00:18:26.050 --> 00:18:29.410 align:middle line:84% The mother might be a little more 00:18:29.410 --> 00:18:32.320 align:middle line:84% hard to deal with on a problem like that, 00:18:32.320 --> 00:18:36.580 align:middle line:84% so I invite you to continue the discussion using 00:18:36.580 --> 00:18:38.250 align:middle line:90% the pronouns that you've used. 00:18:38.250 --> 00:18:41.320 align:middle line:84% But keep in mind that some of these things 00:18:41.320 --> 00:18:44.420 align:middle line:84% can-- when you talk about lethal situation involving children, 00:18:44.420 --> 00:18:46.525 align:middle line:84% the mother is going to be a particular factor. 00:18:46.525 --> 00:18:49.020 align:middle line:90% 00:18:49.020 --> 00:18:49.520 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:18:49.520 --> 00:18:49.990 align:middle line:90% Keep going. 00:18:49.990 --> 00:18:51.948 align:middle line:84% I mean, keep going back and forth now this way. 00:18:51.948 --> 00:18:59.273 align:middle line:90% 00:18:59.273 --> 00:19:00.190 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:19:00.190 --> 00:19:00.940 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:19:00.940 --> 00:19:03.760 align:middle line:84% So some of the things that you realize 00:19:03.760 --> 00:19:05.521 align:middle line:84% you have to make assumptions about 00:19:05.521 --> 00:19:09.110 align:middle line:84% were places where you were stuck, too. 00:19:09.110 --> 00:19:12.280 align:middle line:84% We started by doing a consequentialist approach just 00:19:12.280 --> 00:19:13.620 align:middle line:90% as a starting place. 00:19:13.620 --> 00:19:17.730 align:middle line:84% So the two are strong brakes and the weak brakes. 00:19:17.730 --> 00:19:22.774 align:middle line:84% And we also decided we needed [INAUDIBLE] which 00:19:22.774 --> 00:19:26.260 align:middle line:90% I understand why [INAUDIBLE]. 00:19:26.260 --> 00:19:29.860 align:middle line:84% And now, our list of consequences, we're 00:19:29.860 --> 00:19:34.580 align:middle line:84% not sure how to decide which one has greater 00:19:34.580 --> 00:19:36.800 align:middle line:90% utility than the other one. 00:19:36.800 --> 00:19:41.345 align:middle line:84% So we've got, for the strong brakes, 00:19:41.345 --> 00:19:43.950 align:middle line:84% the death of the driver, the emotional damage 00:19:43.950 --> 00:19:46.920 align:middle line:90% to the family, $1 million. 00:19:46.920 --> 00:19:51.420 align:middle line:84% The weak brakes, paralyzed driver, 00:19:51.420 --> 00:19:53.834 align:middle line:84% potentially less emotional damage to the family, 00:19:53.834 --> 00:19:55.710 align:middle line:90% and the $5 million. 00:19:55.710 --> 00:19:58.530 align:middle line:84% So how do we compare that $4 million 00:19:58.530 --> 00:20:01.162 align:middle line:84% difference to the difference in emotional damage 00:20:01.162 --> 00:20:03.603 align:middle line:84% to the family or lost opportunities 00:20:03.603 --> 00:20:08.333 align:middle line:84% to the family and the difference in the death and paralysis. 00:20:08.333 --> 00:20:10.225 align:middle line:90% There's three differences. 00:20:10.225 --> 00:20:13.122 align:middle line:84% And we're not sure what the sum is. 00:20:13.122 --> 00:20:14.210 align:middle line:90% 00:20:14.210 --> 00:20:17.540 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: The question that I had that we discussed before, 00:20:17.540 --> 00:20:19.540 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] in the ethics of engineering, 00:20:19.540 --> 00:20:22.950 align:middle line:84% it is that you can draw the boundary of the problem first 00:20:22.950 --> 00:20:24.390 align:middle line:90% because you can-- 00:20:24.390 --> 00:20:25.260 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Right. 00:20:25.260 --> 00:20:27.420 align:middle line:84% Well, what happens is, particularly 00:20:27.420 --> 00:20:30.690 align:middle line:84% when you're talking about consequentialist ethics 00:20:30.690 --> 00:20:35.010 align:middle line:84% and the utilitarian method of it, you draw a boundary. 00:20:35.010 --> 00:20:39.180 align:middle line:84% But inevitably, it will extend out. 00:20:39.180 --> 00:20:43.200 align:middle line:84% Now, it may go out a little bit towards infinity at first. 00:20:43.200 --> 00:20:46.740 align:middle line:84% But the discussion, if it goes over a few days, 00:20:46.740 --> 00:20:49.560 align:middle line:84% I've experienced these with ethics committees 00:20:49.560 --> 00:20:52.390 align:middle line:84% in professional societies, it takes time. 00:20:52.390 --> 00:20:53.170 align:middle line:90% You go out. 00:20:53.170 --> 00:20:56.730 align:middle line:84% And then after a while, it'll start coming back. 00:20:56.730 --> 00:20:59.970 align:middle line:84% And you may not coming back to exactly the first boundary 00:20:59.970 --> 00:21:03.960 align:middle line:84% you came to, but it will come back to a manageable boundary. 00:21:03.960 --> 00:21:05.790 align:middle line:84% People have to air all of these views 00:21:05.790 --> 00:21:09.090 align:middle line:84% and it's like group psychology that takes an effect here. 00:21:09.090 --> 00:21:10.410 align:middle line:90% I know that to be the case. 00:21:10.410 --> 00:21:14.370 align:middle line:84% You argue it long enough, and it comes back to manageable size. 00:21:14.370 --> 00:21:16.250 align:middle line:90% 00:21:16.250 --> 00:21:19.547 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: But the decision to include the accident, the dog-- 00:21:19.547 --> 00:21:20.630 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: That's right. 00:21:20.630 --> 00:21:22.797 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: They assume that they are safety standards 00:21:22.797 --> 00:21:24.344 align:middle line:84% and they would take care of that. 00:21:24.344 --> 00:21:27.273 align:middle line:84% But both way, it has this safety distance. 00:21:27.273 --> 00:21:30.219 align:middle line:84% So you should not include [INAUDIBLE].. 00:21:30.219 --> 00:21:33.854 align:middle line:84% So you can draw the boundary around the truck, the driver, 00:21:33.854 --> 00:21:35.670 align:middle line:90% and his or her son. 00:21:35.670 --> 00:21:36.420 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Yeah. 00:21:36.420 --> 00:21:39.090 align:middle line:84% We're going to see a boundary in the next problem. 00:21:39.090 --> 00:21:41.220 align:middle line:84% In dynamics, we call it a "free body diagram." 00:21:41.220 --> 00:21:43.660 align:middle line:90% 00:21:43.660 --> 00:21:44.160 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:21:44.160 --> 00:21:45.630 align:middle line:90% You draw your free body. 00:21:45.630 --> 00:21:47.970 align:middle line:90% You solve your problem. 00:21:47.970 --> 00:21:51.330 align:middle line:84% But then you debate it with a large enough group 00:21:51.330 --> 00:21:53.520 align:middle line:90% and it goes out. 00:21:53.520 --> 00:21:56.390 align:middle line:84% And then after a while, you keep debating it. 00:21:56.390 --> 00:22:01.630 align:middle line:84% And my experience has taught me that it will come back down, 00:22:01.630 --> 00:22:03.510 align:middle line:90% and it'll be a manageable set. 00:22:03.510 --> 00:22:06.750 align:middle line:84% You will not have to deal with infinity for it. 00:22:06.750 --> 00:22:09.780 align:middle line:84% But I've got something to say on that, too. 00:22:09.780 --> 00:22:11.160 align:middle line:90% But you all have the floor now. 00:22:11.160 --> 00:22:12.452 align:middle line:90% I don't want to take the floor. 00:22:12.452 --> 00:22:13.677 align:middle line:90% 00:22:13.677 --> 00:22:15.552 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: I just want to make another comment 00:22:15.552 --> 00:22:17.490 align:middle line:90% about the [INAUDIBLE]. 00:22:17.490 --> 00:22:19.605 align:middle line:84% I mean, usually the workers, they 00:22:19.605 --> 00:22:22.440 align:middle line:84% are told about the overall risk of their careers. 00:22:22.440 --> 00:22:26.880 align:middle line:84% But now, we are discussing a component-- 00:22:26.880 --> 00:22:28.852 align:middle line:84% each component has their own bits. 00:22:28.852 --> 00:22:38.860 align:middle line:84% And usually, [INAUDIBLE] the design, 00:22:38.860 --> 00:22:40.405 align:middle line:90% I think will be complicated-- 00:22:40.405 --> 00:22:44.775 align:middle line:90% 00:22:44.775 --> 00:22:45.400 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:22:45.400 --> 00:22:49.660 align:middle line:84% But I feel like the way we're talking 00:22:49.660 --> 00:22:56.866 align:middle line:84% about it is that this situation of a need for sudden braking, 00:22:56.866 --> 00:23:00.280 align:middle line:84% if that need for sudden braking occurs, 00:23:00.280 --> 00:23:05.660 align:middle line:84% if you choose brake one, there's certainty 00:23:05.660 --> 00:23:07.060 align:middle line:90% that the driver will be killed. 00:23:07.060 --> 00:23:09.935 align:middle line:84% So that seems like a pretty straightforward risk. 00:23:09.935 --> 00:23:14.915 align:middle line:90% 00:23:14.915 --> 00:23:16.915 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: But what I mean is this one component. 00:23:16.915 --> 00:23:17.435 align:middle line:90% 00:23:17.435 --> 00:23:18.200 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Right. 00:23:18.200 --> 00:23:18.700 align:middle line:90% Right. 00:23:18.700 --> 00:23:18.958 align:middle line:90% 00:23:18.958 --> 00:23:19.816 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: You tell him about the brakes. 00:23:19.816 --> 00:23:22.233 align:middle line:84% You tell him about the other components of the car. 00:23:22.233 --> 00:23:23.038 align:middle line:90% 00:23:23.038 --> 00:23:25.330 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: And I thought of that slippery slope analogy, 00:23:25.330 --> 00:23:27.630 align:middle line:84% and that's why I think [INAUDIBLE] you've 00:23:27.630 --> 00:23:30.520 align:middle line:84% got to aim to keep a person as safe as possible, 00:23:30.520 --> 00:23:32.436 align:middle line:84% because you have all these various components 00:23:32.436 --> 00:23:35.300 align:middle line:84% and there's a small injury and a risk of death, 00:23:35.300 --> 00:23:36.800 align:middle line:84% but maybe the better principle would 00:23:36.800 --> 00:23:39.050 align:middle line:84% be to aim for a small injury in every case. 00:23:39.050 --> 00:23:41.456 align:middle line:84% Because chances are, these are complex systems 00:23:41.456 --> 00:23:45.650 align:middle line:84% we're dealing with, that as you multiply that and multiply it, 00:23:45.650 --> 00:23:48.590 align:middle line:84% if you keep aiming for death, it's 00:23:48.590 --> 00:23:51.619 align:middle line:84% guaranteed after a certain point that [INAUDIBLE].. 00:23:51.619 --> 00:23:53.040 align:middle line:90% 00:23:53.040 --> 00:23:55.500 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Now, I'm thinking about this self-defeating test 00:23:55.500 --> 00:23:59.270 align:middle line:84% for this one, this approach and I'm stuck. 00:23:59.270 --> 00:24:00.830 align:middle line:84% Because if you have the principle 00:24:00.830 --> 00:24:07.310 align:middle line:84% that the company should always aim for safety at whatever 00:24:07.310 --> 00:24:10.980 align:middle line:84% cost, then that principle maybe could 00:24:10.980 --> 00:24:14.670 align:middle line:84% be defeated because companies will out of business 00:24:14.670 --> 00:24:18.060 align:middle line:84% if they're going for safety at any cost. 00:24:18.060 --> 00:24:20.565 align:middle line:84% There's no insurance that they're making a profit. 00:24:20.565 --> 00:24:22.690 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: And we're assuming that these brakes cost 00:24:22.690 --> 00:24:23.980 align:middle line:90% the same amount of money. 00:24:23.980 --> 00:24:24.688 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Yes. 00:24:24.688 --> 00:24:24.910 align:middle line:90% 00:24:24.910 --> 00:24:25.480 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:24:25.480 --> 00:24:26.230 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Right. 00:24:26.230 --> 00:24:28.313 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: So from the standpoint of simplicity. 00:24:28.313 --> 00:24:28.871 align:middle line:90% 00:24:28.871 --> 00:24:31.410 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:24:31.410 --> 00:24:34.880 align:middle line:84% But they have the additional costs of the paralysis. 00:24:34.880 --> 00:24:37.130 align:middle line:90% 00:24:37.130 --> 00:24:37.630 align:middle line:90% I 00:24:37.630 --> 00:24:38.505 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Don't know. 00:24:38.505 --> 00:24:39.650 align:middle line:90% Just to finish my argument. 00:24:39.650 --> 00:24:52.340 align:middle line:84% But on the side of being OK with a death because it costs less, 00:24:52.340 --> 00:24:55.296 align:middle line:84% it could also be self-defeating because [INAUDIBLE].. 00:24:55.296 --> 00:25:00.150 align:middle line:90% 00:25:00.150 --> 00:25:02.400 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: But I guess they already made the assumption 00:25:02.400 --> 00:25:09.330 align:middle line:84% that [INAUDIBLE] picked the driver alive [INAUDIBLE].. 00:25:09.330 --> 00:25:13.900 align:middle line:84% If you ask the people, maybe 50% of the drivers 00:25:13.900 --> 00:25:18.408 align:middle line:84% would say that they prefer to die instantly than be paralyzed 00:25:18.408 --> 00:25:19.750 align:middle line:90% for the rest of their lives. 00:25:19.750 --> 00:25:21.250 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: So what I was trying to do 00:25:21.250 --> 00:25:23.230 align:middle line:84% was stick with the consequentialist approach 00:25:23.230 --> 00:25:28.210 align:middle line:84% and not consider the principle of the value of life 00:25:28.210 --> 00:25:31.730 align:middle line:84% versus paralysis as a principle but look at the consequences. 00:25:31.730 --> 00:25:38.760 align:middle line:84% So does the paralyzed person produce more utility 00:25:38.760 --> 00:25:41.940 align:middle line:84% for the world than the dead person? 00:25:41.940 --> 00:25:46.172 align:middle line:84% And I think we can argue that paraplegics can still be 00:25:46.172 --> 00:25:48.036 align:middle line:90% productive members of society. 00:25:48.036 --> 00:25:51.225 align:middle line:90% 00:25:51.225 --> 00:25:52.600 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: Is there anyone here 00:25:52.600 --> 00:25:55.440 align:middle line:84% who is an expert on cost-benefit analysis? 00:25:55.440 --> 00:25:58.860 align:middle line:90% 00:25:58.860 --> 00:26:00.780 align:middle line:84% When you do cost-benefit analysis, 00:26:00.780 --> 00:26:02.475 align:middle line:90% you come up with an equation. 00:26:02.475 --> 00:26:05.030 align:middle line:90% 00:26:05.030 --> 00:26:08.180 align:middle line:84% It has profit, P, on left out of the equal sign. 00:26:08.180 --> 00:26:09.930 align:middle line:84% Then all of these terms on the other side. 00:26:09.930 --> 00:26:15.930 align:middle line:84% And you optimize or maximize the profit. 00:26:15.930 --> 00:26:20.810 align:middle line:84% But in there, you makes a monetary value 00:26:20.810 --> 00:26:23.017 align:middle line:90% of the human life. 00:26:23.017 --> 00:26:24.850 align:middle line:84% And there's some standard numbers that you-- 00:26:24.850 --> 00:26:27.405 align:middle line:90% 00:26:27.405 --> 00:26:29.030 align:middle line:84% I don't know anybody who still does it, 00:26:29.030 --> 00:26:31.450 align:middle line:84% but we got the Sloan School here. 00:26:31.450 --> 00:26:34.050 align:middle line:84% And there's a lot of people who do cost-benefit analysis. 00:26:34.050 --> 00:26:36.150 align:middle line:84% Be interesting to see what one has to say 00:26:36.150 --> 00:26:38.265 align:middle line:90% about what they do these days. 00:26:38.265 --> 00:26:42.260 align:middle line:90% 00:26:42.260 --> 00:26:45.022 align:middle line:90% Any more discussion? 00:26:45.022 --> 00:26:45.980 align:middle line:90% Can I get into the act? 00:26:45.980 --> 00:26:48.780 align:middle line:90% 00:26:48.780 --> 00:26:49.280 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:26:49.280 --> 00:26:51.050 align:middle line:84% I'll get into the act with the discussion 00:26:51.050 --> 00:26:54.350 align:middle line:84% that my partner and I came up with, 00:26:54.350 --> 00:26:57.950 align:middle line:84% but that does not conclude the discussion. 00:26:57.950 --> 00:27:00.890 align:middle line:84% I have forgotten, I put the reference down there. 00:27:00.890 --> 00:27:04.190 align:middle line:90% 00:27:04.190 --> 00:27:07.340 align:middle line:84% A matter that is significant to probably 00:27:07.340 --> 00:27:11.540 align:middle line:84% what I should be able to get to today is-- 00:27:11.540 --> 00:27:13.890 align:middle line:90% can you see this? 00:27:13.890 --> 00:27:18.470 align:middle line:84% This guy's name is spelled P-E-I-R-C-E, not P-I-E. 00:27:18.470 --> 00:27:20.720 align:middle line:90% His name is not "Pierce." 00:27:20.720 --> 00:27:22.580 align:middle line:90% You know this name? 00:27:22.580 --> 00:27:24.350 align:middle line:90% "Peirce." 00:27:24.350 --> 00:27:24.850 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:27:24.850 --> 00:27:27.350 align:middle line:84% And there's a guy by the name of Charles Sanders Peirce 00:27:27.350 --> 00:27:29.270 align:middle line:90% that we'll be talking about. 00:27:29.270 --> 00:27:29.983 align:middle line:90% That's important. 00:27:29.983 --> 00:27:32.150 align:middle line:84% Because if you're going to try to Google the person, 00:27:32.150 --> 00:27:33.380 align:middle line:90% you have to spell it right. 00:27:33.380 --> 00:27:35.630 align:middle line:84% And it's E-I that makes it "Peirce" 00:27:35.630 --> 00:27:39.740 align:middle line:84% as opposed to the I-E that makes it "Pierce." 00:27:39.740 --> 00:27:42.320 align:middle line:84% And he was a faculty member there, too. 00:27:42.320 --> 00:27:46.170 align:middle line:84% And what got him involved was that he had two young daughters 00:27:46.170 --> 00:27:50.210 align:middle line:84% and he was making his analysis in terms of what he thought 00:27:50.210 --> 00:27:52.280 align:middle line:90% he should be teaching there. 00:27:52.280 --> 00:27:55.520 align:middle line:84% And when he said that, then I said now 00:27:55.520 --> 00:27:57.830 align:middle line:84% I've got an unconscious dimension to this paper. 00:27:57.830 --> 00:28:00.320 align:middle line:90% 00:28:00.320 --> 00:28:02.870 align:middle line:84% So I said, you got to write this paper 00:28:02.870 --> 00:28:05.390 align:middle line:84% and we wrote it up and sent it in. 00:28:05.390 --> 00:28:07.475 align:middle line:84% Now, here's what we came out with. 00:28:07.475 --> 00:28:10.100 align:middle line:84% We struggled with it first, and then I'll tell you what we did. 00:28:10.100 --> 00:28:14.540 align:middle line:84% We started off with the utilitarian, 00:28:14.540 --> 00:28:20.120 align:middle line:84% because the ethical impact on this problem 00:28:20.120 --> 00:28:23.270 align:middle line:84% is the dollar amount assigned to what's going 00:28:23.270 --> 00:28:25.880 align:middle line:90% to happen to these people. 00:28:25.880 --> 00:28:27.320 align:middle line:90% Right? 00:28:27.320 --> 00:28:32.960 align:middle line:84% And our first iteration came down a blind alley. 00:28:32.960 --> 00:28:39.100 align:middle line:84% We just could not decide that death as opposed to injury 00:28:39.100 --> 00:28:42.740 align:middle line:90% was better or worse. 00:28:42.740 --> 00:28:50.690 align:middle line:84% One experience that I had was a high school buddy of mine 00:28:50.690 --> 00:28:56.847 align:middle line:84% became a policeman and he was shot on duty in the back, 00:28:56.847 --> 00:29:02.350 align:middle line:84% and he spends the rest of his life in a wheelchair. 00:29:02.350 --> 00:29:13.030 align:middle line:84% And I am not too sure what he thinks about this as opposed 00:29:13.030 --> 00:29:14.830 align:middle line:90% to just dying out right. 00:29:14.830 --> 00:29:17.740 align:middle line:90% 00:29:17.740 --> 00:29:23.890 align:middle line:84% The second thing we went to was the principle that 00:29:23.890 --> 00:29:26.680 align:middle line:84% is very effective in medical ethics 00:29:26.680 --> 00:29:33.940 align:middle line:84% that you all touched upon, was the principle 00:29:33.940 --> 00:29:35.140 align:middle line:90% of informed consent. 00:29:35.140 --> 00:29:38.350 align:middle line:90% 00:29:38.350 --> 00:29:46.995 align:middle line:84% So our informed consent solution was a slight bit different 00:29:46.995 --> 00:29:50.320 align:middle line:84% than yours is, slight difference. 00:29:50.320 --> 00:29:53.650 align:middle line:84% And that was that we did not prescribe and then tell 00:29:53.650 --> 00:29:55.780 align:middle line:90% them and pay them more. 00:29:55.780 --> 00:29:57.700 align:middle line:84% What we did was we said we want them 00:29:57.700 --> 00:30:00.590 align:middle line:84% in on the decision-making from the beginning. 00:30:00.590 --> 00:30:03.650 align:middle line:84% Now, you got 200 or 300 of them, how can you do that? 00:30:03.650 --> 00:30:05.740 align:middle line:84% Well, we talked about representative government. 00:30:05.740 --> 00:30:07.225 align:middle line:90% They've got unions. 00:30:07.225 --> 00:30:09.430 align:middle line:84% They're involved in the Teamsters Union. 00:30:09.430 --> 00:30:12.070 align:middle line:84% You can have a set of two engineers 00:30:12.070 --> 00:30:18.100 align:middle line:84% and two union representative and three drivers, 00:30:18.100 --> 00:30:20.110 align:middle line:84% and we can kind of work that thing out. 00:30:20.110 --> 00:30:24.130 align:middle line:84% And whatever they decide is what we want to do. 00:30:24.130 --> 00:30:26.290 align:middle line:90% We drew a boundary. 00:30:26.290 --> 00:30:29.945 align:middle line:84% We said that, outside of the company, when 00:30:29.945 --> 00:30:31.570 align:middle line:84% it comes to the dog crossing the street 00:30:31.570 --> 00:30:34.930 align:middle line:84% part, another car that you might run into, 00:30:34.930 --> 00:30:40.480 align:middle line:84% that we were going to say that our moral obligation was 00:30:40.480 --> 00:30:43.310 align:middle line:90% to uphold the law. 00:30:43.310 --> 00:30:47.320 align:middle line:84% And so we let the law decide outside of the boundary, 00:30:47.320 --> 00:30:51.140 align:middle line:84% and we did the ethics inside of the boundary. 00:30:51.140 --> 00:30:54.910 align:middle line:84% Then we said, well, on what principle? 00:30:54.910 --> 00:30:57.160 align:middle line:84% Remember, I gave this long dissertation 00:30:57.160 --> 00:31:03.760 align:middle line:84% on Kant's theory of respect for persons, 00:31:03.760 --> 00:31:06.760 align:middle line:84% that it actually goes back to logic. 00:31:06.760 --> 00:31:11.800 align:middle line:84% Is there a logical reason why we should choose informed consent? 00:31:11.800 --> 00:31:14.570 align:middle line:84% What is so great about informed consent? 00:31:14.570 --> 00:31:16.480 align:middle line:84% So we went back and back and back, 00:31:16.480 --> 00:31:19.030 align:middle line:84% and we just could not find a logical principle 00:31:19.030 --> 00:31:23.720 align:middle line:84% to say that informed consent had the basis. 00:31:23.720 --> 00:31:26.920 align:middle line:84% So then we came back to utilitarianism. 00:31:26.920 --> 00:31:31.720 align:middle line:84% And we came back to it with rule utilitarianism, 00:31:31.720 --> 00:31:35.140 align:middle line:84% that the rule that we're going to use, informed consent, 00:31:35.140 --> 00:31:38.950 align:middle line:84% tends to produce good consequences because everybody 00:31:38.950 --> 00:31:42.160 align:middle line:90% feels like they participate. 00:31:42.160 --> 00:31:46.840 align:middle line:84% And so what we then said was that we anticipated 00:31:46.840 --> 00:31:53.400 align:middle line:84% among ourselves that the truck drivers unions just 00:31:53.400 --> 00:31:56.830 align:middle line:84% may say, well, look, kill me and get it over with. 00:31:56.830 --> 00:31:58.750 align:middle line:84% Make sure my family gets a big payoff. 00:31:58.750 --> 00:31:59.830 align:middle line:90% My wife can marry again. 00:31:59.830 --> 00:32:02.570 align:middle line:90% My kids can go to school. 00:32:02.570 --> 00:32:05.250 align:middle line:84% I don't want to sit around in a wheelchair. 00:32:05.250 --> 00:32:08.970 align:middle line:84% That still has something in it that I 00:32:08.970 --> 00:32:10.890 align:middle line:84% want to bring to consciousness now, 00:32:10.890 --> 00:32:13.860 align:middle line:84% and that is in respect for person. 00:32:13.860 --> 00:32:15.660 align:middle line:84% We respected the truck drivers to be 00:32:15.660 --> 00:32:17.430 align:middle line:84% able to make this decision better than us. 00:32:17.430 --> 00:32:20.790 align:middle line:84% I mean, we're sitting up here with all our degrees 00:32:20.790 --> 00:32:24.900 align:middle line:84% and the authority to make this decision, 00:32:24.900 --> 00:32:27.658 align:middle line:84% but we really thought that these truck drivers are the best 00:32:27.658 --> 00:32:28.950 align:middle line:90% people to make these decisions. 00:32:28.950 --> 00:32:33.990 align:middle line:84% And mainly because, not only because they were the affected 00:32:33.990 --> 00:32:37.140 align:middle line:84% parties, sometimes that puts you in a worse situation 00:32:37.140 --> 00:32:40.210 align:middle line:84% to make decisions because you can be biased and all of that. 00:32:40.210 --> 00:32:48.320 align:middle line:84% But the issue was that the picture we had in our mind 00:32:48.320 --> 00:32:52.130 align:middle line:84% was a young student who just got out of college given this job 00:32:52.130 --> 00:32:53.655 align:middle line:90% to do. 00:32:53.655 --> 00:32:55.280 align:middle line:84% And the picture we have then of a truck 00:32:55.280 --> 00:32:58.887 align:middle line:84% driver, a 45-year-old man with a family. 00:32:58.887 --> 00:33:01.220 align:middle line:84% Let's move it to a person, a guy who could make a better 00:33:01.220 --> 00:33:01.910 align:middle line:90% decision in it. 00:33:01.910 --> 00:33:04.850 align:middle line:90% 00:33:04.850 --> 00:33:06.020 align:middle line:90% So that's what we did. 00:33:06.020 --> 00:33:10.130 align:middle line:84% We also reported in there that we had given this problem 00:33:10.130 --> 00:33:14.030 align:middle line:84% to classes, various undergraduate classes in more 00:33:14.030 --> 00:33:15.620 align:middle line:90% than one university. 00:33:15.620 --> 00:33:19.460 align:middle line:84% And in none of those undergraduate classes 00:33:19.460 --> 00:33:20.810 align:middle line:90% did informed consent come up. 00:33:20.810 --> 00:33:23.480 align:middle line:90% 00:33:23.480 --> 00:33:28.490 align:middle line:84% But in all of the graduate classes, at least 00:33:28.490 --> 00:33:32.570 align:middle line:84% at the beginning of the class, the discussion 00:33:32.570 --> 00:33:38.381 align:middle line:84% was dominated by me in my career. 00:33:38.381 --> 00:33:40.620 align:middle line:84% A student got out and said, I'm going 00:33:40.620 --> 00:33:42.463 align:middle line:84% to do what's right for the company 00:33:42.463 --> 00:33:44.130 align:middle line:84% and I'm going to advance in that company 00:33:44.130 --> 00:33:46.480 align:middle line:84% and I'm going to save them the money. 00:33:46.480 --> 00:33:48.520 align:middle line:84% It's only after the ethical debate 00:33:48.520 --> 00:33:53.650 align:middle line:84% got in there that that kind of argument 00:33:53.650 --> 00:33:55.520 align:middle line:90% lost weight in the class. 00:33:55.520 --> 00:33:58.810 align:middle line:84% I don't if it lost any weight with the individual 00:33:58.810 --> 00:34:02.275 align:middle line:84% or outside of the class, but it did lose weight in the class. 00:34:02.275 --> 00:34:04.930 align:middle line:84% The students began to turn on that after a while. 00:34:04.930 --> 00:34:08.170 align:middle line:84% But the dominant view in the beginning 00:34:08.170 --> 00:34:11.260 align:middle line:84% was, what should I do for my career on this job? 00:34:11.260 --> 00:34:15.030 align:middle line:90% 00:34:15.030 --> 00:34:21.150 align:middle line:84% And that is my word, and it is not the last word. 00:34:21.150 --> 00:34:22.628 align:middle line:90% Any more discussion? 00:34:22.628 --> 00:34:25.806 align:middle line:90% 00:34:25.806 --> 00:34:27.029 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:34:27.029 --> 00:34:34.860 align:middle line:90% 00:34:34.860 --> 00:34:36.342 align:middle line:84% It's all pretty much [INAUDIBLE].. 00:34:36.342 --> 00:34:41.010 align:middle line:90% 00:34:41.010 --> 00:34:43.510 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: So you mean in this case or in general? 00:34:43.510 --> 00:34:44.667 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: In general. 00:34:44.667 --> 00:34:45.750 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: I don't know. 00:34:45.750 --> 00:34:47.920 align:middle line:90% 00:34:47.920 --> 00:34:50.808 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: It's not the choice between dying and living. 00:34:50.808 --> 00:34:54.080 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] taking the risk if the law 00:34:54.080 --> 00:34:56.268 align:middle line:90% allows you to take the risk. 00:34:56.268 --> 00:34:59.053 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE] 00:34:59.053 --> 00:35:00.470 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: The brakes were going 00:35:00.470 --> 00:35:04.990 align:middle line:90% to be within the legal limits. 00:35:04.990 --> 00:35:09.880 align:middle line:84% So as I said before, I do want to teach ethics 00:35:09.880 --> 00:35:12.280 align:middle line:84% without a whole lot of dependency on the law. 00:35:12.280 --> 00:35:16.540 align:middle line:84% But the law can be useful, because you 00:35:16.540 --> 00:35:21.680 align:middle line:84% can say that the public has a contract with all of us 00:35:21.680 --> 00:35:23.040 align:middle line:90% to obey the law. 00:35:23.040 --> 00:35:28.160 align:middle line:84% And so if a person does not want to take any kind of risk 00:35:28.160 --> 00:35:31.310 align:middle line:84% like this, then they'll go out on the street. 00:35:31.310 --> 00:35:32.810 align:middle line:84% Well, I got to go out on the street, 00:35:32.810 --> 00:35:33.980 align:middle line:90% but that's your problem. 00:35:33.980 --> 00:35:37.230 align:middle line:84% Don't take your problem and make it one of my problems. 00:35:37.230 --> 00:35:42.200 align:middle line:84% So it does have some kind of an effective use to it. 00:35:42.200 --> 00:35:43.435 align:middle line:90% 00:35:43.435 --> 00:35:44.670 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:35:44.670 --> 00:35:57.540 align:middle line:90% 00:35:57.540 --> 00:35:58.710 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Yeah. 00:35:58.710 --> 00:36:02.680 align:middle line:90% Well, see, it is complex. 00:36:02.680 --> 00:36:04.590 align:middle line:84% You can't get all 200 of them in there. 00:36:04.590 --> 00:36:08.170 align:middle line:84% What are you going to do, decide by majority? 00:36:08.170 --> 00:36:10.950 align:middle line:84% What's so magical about a majority? 00:36:10.950 --> 00:36:12.000 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:36:12.000 --> 00:36:16.290 align:middle line:84% So we just said that it's actually 00:36:16.290 --> 00:36:17.640 align:middle line:90% another imitation of the law. 00:36:17.640 --> 00:36:18.940 align:middle line:90% It's a trial by jury. 00:36:18.940 --> 00:36:26.010 align:middle line:84% You just get a few people in and make a decision 00:36:26.010 --> 00:36:27.670 align:middle line:84% and have them in from the beginning. 00:36:27.670 --> 00:36:30.510 align:middle line:84% Now, there's a lot of education that has go on in there. 00:36:30.510 --> 00:36:32.760 align:middle line:84% They haven't taken the dynamics course. 00:36:32.760 --> 00:36:42.120 align:middle line:84% But I think that in the end was our argument 00:36:42.120 --> 00:36:43.440 align:middle line:90% would produce the best results. 00:36:43.440 --> 00:36:48.730 align:middle line:84% It was utilitarian, but it was rule utilitarian. 00:36:48.730 --> 00:36:49.980 align:middle line:90% It was not based on the money. 00:36:49.980 --> 00:36:52.740 align:middle line:84% It was based on what that group had to say. 00:36:52.740 --> 00:36:55.730 align:middle line:90% 00:36:55.730 --> 00:36:56.980 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 00:36:56.980 --> 00:37:00.699 align:middle line:90% 00:37:00.699 --> 00:37:06.100 align:middle line:84% Your decision that you couldn't justify informed consent based 00:37:06.100 --> 00:37:09.200 align:middle line:84% on the content or a logical principle-- 00:37:09.200 --> 00:37:10.680 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: We couldn't find it. 00:37:10.680 --> 00:37:11.180 align:middle line:90% Can you? 00:37:11.180 --> 00:37:11.680 align:middle line:90% 00:37:11.680 --> 00:37:14.900 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Well, I wonder if I'm misunderstood, 00:37:14.900 --> 00:37:20.510 align:middle line:84% because it seems like informed consent is 00:37:20.510 --> 00:37:26.480 align:middle line:84% easy to ascribe to the respect for a person to begin with. 00:37:26.480 --> 00:37:28.880 align:middle line:84% Informed consent, you're respecting 00:37:28.880 --> 00:37:36.093 align:middle line:84% a person's moral agency to make decisions about his or her 00:37:36.093 --> 00:37:37.510 align:middle line:90% [INAUDIBLE]. 00:37:37.510 --> 00:37:39.769 align:middle line:84% So you're respecting that person's freedom. 00:37:39.769 --> 00:37:44.260 align:middle line:90% 00:37:44.260 --> 00:37:48.520 align:middle line:84% And that's based on cause categorical imperative, 00:37:48.520 --> 00:37:49.750 align:middle line:90% you treat other people-- 00:37:49.750 --> 00:37:53.848 align:middle line:84% and a free end in themselves rather than [INAUDIBLE].. 00:37:53.848 --> 00:37:54.640 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: Right. 00:37:54.640 --> 00:37:54.643 align:middle line:90% 00:37:54.643 --> 00:37:56.310 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: But I must be wrong somewhere, 00:37:56.310 --> 00:37:58.160 align:middle line:90% because you're saying-- 00:37:58.160 --> 00:37:59.060 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: No, I'm not saying you're wrong. 00:37:59.060 --> 00:38:00.352 align:middle line:90% I'm saying we couldn't find it. 00:38:00.352 --> 00:38:00.852 align:middle line:90% 00:38:00.852 --> 00:38:01.665 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:38:01.665 --> 00:38:03.290 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: We had problems with that. 00:38:03.290 --> 00:38:08.120 align:middle line:84% We cannot just reason it out that informed consent, 00:38:08.120 --> 00:38:09.710 align:middle line:84% even though it is respecting persons, 00:38:09.710 --> 00:38:11.250 align:middle line:84% other things are respecting persons, 00:38:11.250 --> 00:38:15.000 align:middle line:90% how do I get to something-- 00:38:15.000 --> 00:38:15.500 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:38:15.500 --> 00:38:18.140 align:middle line:84% Let me speak in pedestrian terms here. 00:38:18.140 --> 00:38:22.450 align:middle line:84% We are looking for an argument that we can hang our hat on. 00:38:22.450 --> 00:38:26.180 align:middle line:84% Let's say we may go before a judge. 00:38:26.180 --> 00:38:32.330 align:middle line:84% We may go before The New York Times. 00:38:32.330 --> 00:38:35.660 align:middle line:84% We may have to go to a PTA meeting 00:38:35.660 --> 00:38:38.070 align:middle line:84% and have to defend ourselves there with all 00:38:38.070 --> 00:38:39.980 align:middle line:90% of those parents in there. 00:38:39.980 --> 00:38:40.940 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:38:40.940 --> 00:38:44.960 align:middle line:84% Can I go in there with people who 00:38:44.960 --> 00:38:47.510 align:middle line:84% are opposed to what I've done and walk out 00:38:47.510 --> 00:38:50.180 align:middle line:84% of there with people supporting what I've done? 00:38:50.180 --> 00:38:51.470 align:middle line:90% Can I do that? 00:38:51.470 --> 00:38:56.300 align:middle line:84% And my best chance at doing that is 00:38:56.300 --> 00:39:00.260 align:middle line:84% to anchor what I have to say on the great books 00:39:00.260 --> 00:39:04.910 align:middle line:90% of a learned culture. 00:39:04.910 --> 00:39:05.720 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:39:05.720 --> 00:39:08.150 align:middle line:84% I've got to be able to say that what I am doing here 00:39:08.150 --> 00:39:11.660 align:middle line:90% is consistent with this book. 00:39:11.660 --> 00:39:14.270 align:middle line:84% And there's going to be somebody in there 00:39:14.270 --> 00:39:16.550 align:middle line:84% who's going to take me to task and who's 00:39:16.550 --> 00:39:18.730 align:middle line:84% going to know what they're talking about. 00:39:18.730 --> 00:39:19.230 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:39:19.230 --> 00:39:20.390 align:middle line:90% I learned that one time. 00:39:20.390 --> 00:39:21.560 align:middle line:90% You ready for this? 00:39:21.560 --> 00:39:26.340 align:middle line:84% I gave an ethics lecture at a prison once. 00:39:26.340 --> 00:39:30.840 align:middle line:84% One of the sociology faculty had a grant 00:39:30.840 --> 00:39:34.302 align:middle line:84% to introduce the prisoners to the various professions, 00:39:34.302 --> 00:39:35.760 align:middle line:84% and I had to go down there and talk 00:39:35.760 --> 00:39:38.520 align:middle line:90% about engineering and ethics. 00:39:38.520 --> 00:39:39.360 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:39:39.360 --> 00:39:41.460 align:middle line:90% And I'm sitting. 00:39:41.460 --> 00:39:43.650 align:middle line:84% I'm giving this lecture in this lecture hall. 00:39:43.650 --> 00:39:48.030 align:middle line:84% There must be a hundred inmates in there, and 30 or 40 of them 00:39:48.030 --> 00:39:49.833 align:middle line:90% had read Aristotle and Plato. 00:39:49.833 --> 00:39:51.000 align:middle line:90% They got nothing else to do. 00:39:51.000 --> 00:39:52.890 align:middle line:90% They read that stuff. 00:39:52.890 --> 00:39:54.000 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:39:54.000 --> 00:39:55.530 align:middle line:90% So you got to be ready. 00:39:55.530 --> 00:40:00.400 align:middle line:84% You can't tell who's going to be ready to take you on. 00:40:00.400 --> 00:40:02.280 align:middle line:84% So that's, I guess, the most important thing 00:40:02.280 --> 00:40:03.430 align:middle line:90% I want to do in the class. 00:40:03.430 --> 00:40:05.550 align:middle line:84% And that is to say that, if you really 00:40:05.550 --> 00:40:09.510 align:middle line:84% want to hang your hat on something that's substantial 00:40:09.510 --> 00:40:12.000 align:middle line:84% and try your best to get people to follow you, 00:40:12.000 --> 00:40:15.450 align:middle line:84% not just to defend yourself or just to find the right way, 00:40:15.450 --> 00:40:18.600 align:middle line:84% but to get somebody to support and follow you, then 00:40:18.600 --> 00:40:22.000 align:middle line:84% you're going to have to put one of the great books on the table 00:40:22.000 --> 00:40:25.810 align:middle line:84% and justify that what you're doing is consistent with that 00:40:25.810 --> 00:40:29.820 align:middle line:84% and that you've made some kind of decisions as to where 00:40:29.820 --> 00:40:33.580 align:middle line:84% the big books may not apply to your particular case, 00:40:33.580 --> 00:40:35.310 align:middle line:90% how to apply it to your case. 00:40:35.310 --> 00:40:39.780 align:middle line:84% Or the next way to do it is to come in there saying, here 00:40:39.780 --> 00:40:42.943 align:middle line:84% are the three great books on this subject and none of them 00:40:42.943 --> 00:40:44.610 align:middle line:84% apply to this case, so I have to come up 00:40:44.610 --> 00:40:47.620 align:middle line:90% with something totally new. 00:40:47.620 --> 00:40:50.710 align:middle line:90% That's fair enough, too. 00:40:50.710 --> 00:40:52.210 align:middle line:84% But don't go in there and just talk. 00:40:52.210 --> 00:41:00.760 align:middle line:90% 00:41:00.760 --> 00:41:01.260 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:41:01.260 --> 00:41:07.770 align:middle line:84% Another thing about this problem here, 00:41:07.770 --> 00:41:13.010 align:middle line:84% which has pedagogical value, is best illustrated 00:41:13.010 --> 00:41:14.965 align:middle line:84% with the next problem I'm going to put up. 00:41:14.965 --> 00:41:17.340 align:middle line:84% And I think I can go through the next problem real quick. 00:41:17.340 --> 00:41:18.590 align:middle line:90% It's another dynamics problem. 00:41:18.590 --> 00:41:23.070 align:middle line:90% 00:41:23.070 --> 00:41:23.570 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:41:23.570 --> 00:41:27.003 align:middle line:84% Don't worry about all of the stuff in it. 00:41:27.003 --> 00:41:28.670 align:middle line:84% Let me turn out this light a little bit. 00:41:28.670 --> 00:41:33.490 align:middle line:90% 00:41:33.490 --> 00:41:34.000 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:41:34.000 --> 00:41:36.333 align:middle line:90% Now, this is a problem-- 00:41:36.333 --> 00:41:38.500 align:middle line:84% and I'm going to give you the first reading and then 00:41:38.500 --> 00:41:41.240 align:middle line:90% the second reading. 00:41:41.240 --> 00:41:44.850 align:middle line:84% The only thing you really need to see in this problem 00:41:44.850 --> 00:41:46.020 align:middle line:90% is this little figure here. 00:41:46.020 --> 00:41:48.915 align:middle line:84% You got a person, a man pushing a box. 00:41:48.915 --> 00:41:51.900 align:middle line:90% 00:41:51.900 --> 00:41:52.800 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:41:52.800 --> 00:41:54.750 align:middle line:84% And there's the free body diagram. 00:41:54.750 --> 00:41:58.270 align:middle line:90% 00:41:58.270 --> 00:42:01.090 align:middle line:84% And the first formulation of the problem 00:42:01.090 --> 00:42:05.650 align:middle line:84% sounds like it comes right out of a physics book. 00:42:05.650 --> 00:42:13.750 align:middle line:84% You're given the coefficients of friction. 00:42:13.750 --> 00:42:16.390 align:middle line:84% You're given the static coefficient 00:42:16.390 --> 00:42:18.470 align:middle line:90% and the kinetic coefficient. 00:42:18.470 --> 00:42:22.690 align:middle line:84% And you say how much the box weighs and you 00:42:22.690 --> 00:42:26.230 align:middle line:84% say the person can put 125-pound force on the box 00:42:26.230 --> 00:42:30.570 align:middle line:84% and how fast will the box accelerate. 00:42:30.570 --> 00:42:31.530 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:42:31.530 --> 00:42:34.320 align:middle line:84% Now, this becomes an ethical problem when 00:42:34.320 --> 00:42:38.390 align:middle line:90% you give them this picture. 00:42:38.390 --> 00:42:40.900 align:middle line:84% So it's not a little box on the ground. 00:42:40.900 --> 00:42:44.220 align:middle line:90% The box is tall. 00:42:44.220 --> 00:42:48.390 align:middle line:84% And the question is, where does the worker put his hands 00:42:48.390 --> 00:42:51.690 align:middle line:84% on the box so that the box doesn't tip back on and fall 00:42:51.690 --> 00:42:53.970 align:middle line:90% back on top of him? 00:42:53.970 --> 00:42:57.980 align:middle line:84% So now, what happens is that the student walks into a dynamics 00:42:57.980 --> 00:43:00.680 align:middle line:84% class and is given an easy problem, 00:43:00.680 --> 00:43:05.390 align:middle line:84% but then the professor says, tell me 00:43:05.390 --> 00:43:07.430 align:middle line:84% what ethical dimensions are in the problem. 00:43:07.430 --> 00:43:11.100 align:middle line:84% And now, you wind up with a significantly harder problem. 00:43:11.100 --> 00:43:14.580 align:middle line:84% And this problem now tells you that, well, 00:43:14.580 --> 00:43:22.490 align:middle line:84% when you analyze that problem, the answer is 2.9 feet. 00:43:22.490 --> 00:43:27.470 align:middle line:84% Under 2.9 feet, pushing at 125 pounds, 00:43:27.470 --> 00:43:33.510 align:middle line:84% the box is going to tip back over and crush the worker. 00:43:33.510 --> 00:43:37.490 align:middle line:84% So what you've got to do then is, if this is a warehouse 00:43:37.490 --> 00:43:44.470 align:middle line:84% that you've got to paint part of the box, 2.9 feet below, 00:43:44.470 --> 00:43:48.290 align:middle line:90% and say, do not push here. 00:43:48.290 --> 00:43:49.040 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:43:49.040 --> 00:43:52.280 align:middle line:84% And then some smart student will come in 00:43:52.280 --> 00:43:55.600 align:middle line:90% and say, oh, wait a minute. 00:43:55.600 --> 00:43:57.980 align:middle line:84% Put another person on the other end, 00:43:57.980 --> 00:43:59.980 align:middle line:84% so you got other people walking around in there. 00:43:59.980 --> 00:44:02.147 align:middle line:84% You don't want the person who's pushing the box just 00:44:02.147 --> 00:44:02.950 align:middle line:90% to save himself. 00:44:02.950 --> 00:44:05.075 align:middle line:84% You don't want him to push it too high to the point 00:44:05.075 --> 00:44:07.310 align:middle line:84% where it falls over on somebody on the other side. 00:44:07.310 --> 00:44:10.420 align:middle line:84% So now, you have to make another calculation 00:44:10.420 --> 00:44:12.190 align:middle line:90% as to how high it will go. 00:44:12.190 --> 00:44:14.260 align:middle line:84% I'm not showing that solution here. 00:44:14.260 --> 00:44:18.760 align:middle line:84% And in the end, there's a zone in the middle 00:44:18.760 --> 00:44:22.660 align:middle line:84% where you say, push here only and you paint that one green. 00:44:22.660 --> 00:44:26.700 align:middle line:84% And below and above, you paint it red. 00:44:26.700 --> 00:44:27.400 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:44:27.400 --> 00:44:33.010 align:middle line:84% Now, I bring this problem in in addition to the other one 00:44:33.010 --> 00:44:37.910 align:middle line:84% because it has pedagogical value. 00:44:37.910 --> 00:44:43.420 align:middle line:84% The more that professors want to introduce ethical material 00:44:43.420 --> 00:44:49.940 align:middle line:84% into their classes, then all they have to do 00:44:49.940 --> 00:44:54.560 align:middle line:84% is look at the problem statement and either change the problem 00:44:54.560 --> 00:44:57.870 align:middle line:90% statement or make it personal. 00:44:57.870 --> 00:45:01.620 align:middle line:84% Or draw the picture in such a way that the student cannot 00:45:01.620 --> 00:45:04.920 align:middle line:90% avoid taking it personally. 00:45:04.920 --> 00:45:06.460 align:middle line:90% And that's what this one did. 00:45:06.460 --> 00:45:08.430 align:middle line:90% It was very subtle. 00:45:08.430 --> 00:45:11.970 align:middle line:84% It made the box tall and made the guy look like he 00:45:11.970 --> 00:45:14.690 align:middle line:90% was pushing it at the bottom. 00:45:14.690 --> 00:45:18.350 align:middle line:84% Remember, if the box was short, like that, 00:45:18.350 --> 00:45:19.850 align:middle line:84% then that question wouldn't come up. 00:45:19.850 --> 00:45:23.590 align:middle line:90% 00:45:23.590 --> 00:45:25.830 align:middle line:84% So this is one of the things that I 00:45:25.830 --> 00:45:34.020 align:middle line:84% think that, in pedagogy, that, if I had things my way, 00:45:34.020 --> 00:45:43.840 align:middle line:84% all professors would have to be formally trained in pedagogy 00:45:43.840 --> 00:45:45.160 align:middle line:90% and learn some of these things. 00:45:45.160 --> 00:45:46.960 align:middle line:84% And formally trained does not mean necessarily 00:45:46.960 --> 00:45:47.630 align:middle line:90% taking courses. 00:45:47.630 --> 00:45:49.420 align:middle line:90% I mean, you have to read a book. 00:45:49.420 --> 00:45:50.590 align:middle line:90% You train yourself. 00:45:50.590 --> 00:45:52.150 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:45:52.150 --> 00:45:54.123 align:middle line:84% That's good for college professors. 00:45:54.123 --> 00:45:55.540 align:middle line:84% You don't have to tell them, well, 00:45:55.540 --> 00:45:58.480 align:middle line:84% you've got to get three hours credit and effort. 00:45:58.480 --> 00:46:01.360 align:middle line:90% But you give a seminar on this. 00:46:01.360 --> 00:46:03.160 align:middle line:90% Then they go back and read it. 00:46:03.160 --> 00:46:05.350 align:middle line:90% And I'll give you a name. 00:46:05.350 --> 00:46:07.630 align:middle line:90% I don't have the reference. 00:46:07.630 --> 00:46:09.910 align:middle line:90% The name is Michael Davis. 00:46:09.910 --> 00:46:15.405 align:middle line:90% Now, Michael Davis wrote a book. 00:46:15.405 --> 00:46:18.030 align:middle line:90% 00:46:18.030 --> 00:46:20.790 align:middle line:84% He wrote a couple of books, several books, 00:46:20.790 --> 00:46:22.350 align:middle line:84% and he's written a lot of papers. 00:46:22.350 --> 00:46:25.230 align:middle line:84% He's at the Illinois Institute of Technology. 00:46:25.230 --> 00:46:28.270 align:middle line:84% But one of his works, which I have to get in my possession 00:46:28.270 --> 00:46:33.540 align:middle line:84% that I don't have, which is a final report from an NSF 00:46:33.540 --> 00:46:35.170 align:middle line:90% grant that he had. 00:46:35.170 --> 00:46:38.420 align:middle line:90% And I saw the final report. 00:46:38.420 --> 00:46:40.070 align:middle line:84% I think it was the final report I saw, 00:46:40.070 --> 00:46:42.230 align:middle line:84% but it had something to do with his research 00:46:42.230 --> 00:46:44.480 align:middle line:84% that he published some parts of his report. 00:46:44.480 --> 00:46:47.420 align:middle line:84% What he did was he took a lot of engineering problems 00:46:47.420 --> 00:46:51.710 align:middle line:84% from various fields in here as Xerox right out 00:46:51.710 --> 00:46:53.470 align:middle line:90% of the textbook. 00:46:53.470 --> 00:46:56.200 align:middle line:84% And then he took those problems and changed the wording 00:46:56.200 --> 00:47:02.000 align:middle line:84% very slightly to get the ethical dimension into it. 00:47:02.000 --> 00:47:05.860 align:middle line:84% And then he argued there that, if the problem is stated 00:47:05.860 --> 00:47:09.610 align:middle line:84% differently, as in the first case 00:47:09.610 --> 00:47:13.330 align:middle line:84% and this is really significant about the first case, that, 00:47:13.330 --> 00:47:15.430 align:middle line:84% depending on your ethical judgment 00:47:15.430 --> 00:47:17.530 align:middle line:84% while you are doing the problem, you 00:47:17.530 --> 00:47:20.620 align:middle line:84% may get one or another different answer. 00:47:20.620 --> 00:47:24.010 align:middle line:90% 00:47:24.010 --> 00:47:26.170 align:middle line:90% Slow brakes or heavy brakes? 00:47:26.170 --> 00:47:31.070 align:middle line:84% So it can affect your answer to a problem. 00:47:31.070 --> 00:47:35.060 align:middle line:84% So that goes back to the barbecue metaphors again. 00:47:35.060 --> 00:47:44.815 align:middle line:84% So what I would like to do as a homework problem is-- 00:47:44.815 --> 00:47:47.810 align:middle line:90% 00:47:47.810 --> 00:47:48.310 align:middle line:90% let's see. 00:47:48.310 --> 00:47:51.020 align:middle line:84% How about the first class after the break? 00:47:51.020 --> 00:47:55.731 align:middle line:84% Find a technical problem in some area of engineering. 00:47:55.731 --> 00:47:59.170 align:middle line:90% 00:47:59.170 --> 00:48:07.100 align:middle line:84% And I'm interested in your changing 00:48:07.100 --> 00:48:14.650 align:middle line:84% the wording of the problem and change it as slight as possible 00:48:14.650 --> 00:48:19.490 align:middle line:84% and see if you can't make the problem have 00:48:19.490 --> 00:48:22.370 align:middle line:90% a clear ethical dimension to it. 00:48:22.370 --> 00:48:25.280 align:middle line:84% Make a comment as to whether or not 00:48:25.280 --> 00:48:27.050 align:middle line:84% that change is the answer to the problem. 00:48:27.050 --> 00:48:30.390 align:middle line:90% 00:48:30.390 --> 00:48:33.283 align:middle line:84% So I don't have to understand the problem. 00:48:33.283 --> 00:48:34.700 align:middle line:84% If you come in here with something 00:48:34.700 --> 00:48:37.970 align:middle line:84% in environmental chemistry, that's 00:48:37.970 --> 00:48:41.900 align:middle line:84% fine as long as I can understand it 00:48:41.900 --> 00:48:44.960 align:middle line:84% as well as I've explained this one. 00:48:44.960 --> 00:48:50.030 align:middle line:84% But it's important for me to see a technical solution, 00:48:50.030 --> 00:48:53.750 align:middle line:84% and it's important for you to tell me 00:48:53.750 --> 00:48:56.090 align:middle line:84% in this technical solution that you 00:48:56.090 --> 00:48:58.370 align:middle line:84% have to make this change right there. 00:48:58.370 --> 00:49:00.170 align:middle line:84% I don't need to understand that, but I 00:49:00.170 --> 00:49:04.160 align:middle line:84% need to understand that it's in the body of the problem 00:49:04.160 --> 00:49:11.620 align:middle line:84% that your ethical decision has an effect on. 00:49:11.620 --> 00:49:12.250 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:49:12.250 --> 00:49:16.120 align:middle line:84% You can do a paper, a research paper out of a journal. 00:49:16.120 --> 00:49:18.740 align:middle line:84% You can do a paper out of a textbook. 00:49:18.740 --> 00:49:21.140 align:middle line:84% I mean, sorry, a sample problem out of a textbook. 00:49:21.140 --> 00:49:22.820 align:middle line:90% That might even be better. 00:49:22.820 --> 00:49:26.360 align:middle line:84% Just Xerox the sample problem out of a textbook, 00:49:26.360 --> 00:49:28.310 align:middle line:84% reword it, and then make a comment 00:49:28.310 --> 00:49:33.860 align:middle line:84% like an arrow in the problem of where exactly in the problem 00:49:33.860 --> 00:49:38.443 align:middle line:84% that ethical dimension is going to affect 00:49:38.443 --> 00:49:39.610 align:middle line:90% the solution of the problem. 00:49:39.610 --> 00:49:41.770 align:middle line:90% 00:49:41.770 --> 00:49:44.410 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: This case [INAUDIBLE] the solution more [INAUDIBLE].. 00:49:44.410 --> 00:49:45.667 align:middle line:90% 00:49:45.667 --> 00:49:47.125 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: You mean in this case? 00:49:47.125 --> 00:49:47.177 align:middle line:90% 00:49:47.177 --> 00:49:48.010 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: This case. 00:49:48.010 --> 00:49:52.160 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: In this case, it introduced a whole new problem. 00:49:52.160 --> 00:49:55.370 align:middle line:84% It not only gave the acceleration, 00:49:55.370 --> 00:49:56.795 align:middle line:90% which was asked for at first. 00:49:56.795 --> 00:50:00.410 align:middle line:90% 00:50:00.410 --> 00:50:01.570 align:middle line:90% It's in here someplace. 00:50:01.570 --> 00:50:01.801 align:middle line:90% 00:50:01.801 --> 00:50:03.968 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: It's still valid even though [INAUDIBLE].. 00:50:03.968 --> 00:50:05.218 align:middle line:90% TAFT BROOME: It's still valid. 00:50:05.218 --> 00:50:05.337 align:middle line:90% 00:50:05.337 --> 00:50:05.750 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Still valid. 00:50:05.750 --> 00:50:07.583 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: A sub C of them is still valid, 00:50:07.583 --> 00:50:10.510 align:middle line:84% but it gave an additional answer, 00:50:10.510 --> 00:50:14.943 align:middle line:84% which was this distance H. Before, H 00:50:14.943 --> 00:50:15.860 align:middle line:90% wasn't in the problem. 00:50:15.860 --> 00:50:19.330 align:middle line:90% 00:50:19.330 --> 00:50:22.425 align:middle line:84% But the solution is in there simply. 00:50:22.425 --> 00:50:22.925 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:50:22.925 --> 00:50:28.530 align:middle line:90% 00:50:28.530 --> 00:50:35.870 align:middle line:84% We are ready to go in to the third major approach. 00:50:35.870 --> 00:50:41.450 align:middle line:84% And I think my calculation is what, three minutes? 00:50:41.450 --> 00:50:41.970 align:middle line:90% Yeah. 00:50:41.970 --> 00:50:42.470 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:50:42.470 --> 00:50:49.090 align:middle line:90% 00:50:49.090 --> 00:50:49.590 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:50:49.590 --> 00:50:54.610 align:middle line:84% What we have done and will continue to do 00:50:54.610 --> 00:50:58.330 align:middle line:84% is to look at ethics the way Aristotle looks at ethics, 00:50:58.330 --> 00:51:01.450 align:middle line:84% and that is from the standpoint of your reason 00:51:01.450 --> 00:51:09.200 align:middle line:84% and your experience and the style of your argumentation. 00:51:09.200 --> 00:51:15.110 align:middle line:84% And we looked at two large categories of that, utilitarian 00:51:15.110 --> 00:51:22.580 align:middle line:84% and the ontological, one having more to do with the mind, one 00:51:22.580 --> 00:51:27.830 align:middle line:84% having to experiment with nature or test from nature. 00:51:27.830 --> 00:51:30.860 align:middle line:90% 00:51:30.860 --> 00:51:33.290 align:middle line:84% Plato is not talked about much anymore, 00:51:33.290 --> 00:51:36.360 align:middle line:84% and I'll tell you why in the next class. 00:51:36.360 --> 00:51:39.510 align:middle line:84% But what he wants to talk about is character. 00:51:39.510 --> 00:51:41.520 align:middle line:84% And if you have a virtuous character, 00:51:41.520 --> 00:51:45.530 align:middle line:84% you can define what virtues he's talking about, 00:51:45.530 --> 00:51:47.600 align:middle line:84% that, if you have a virtuous character, 00:51:47.600 --> 00:51:51.230 align:middle line:84% then the real issue is not so much what you do 00:51:51.230 --> 00:51:52.730 align:middle line:90% or what you recommend. 00:51:52.730 --> 00:51:55.280 align:middle line:84% The real issue is whether or not you suffer 00:51:55.280 --> 00:51:57.310 align:middle line:90% when you make the decision. 00:51:57.310 --> 00:51:59.950 align:middle line:84% If it can have an impact on somebody, 00:51:59.950 --> 00:52:02.710 align:middle line:90% you feel pain for them. 00:52:02.710 --> 00:52:05.390 align:middle line:90% That's the bottom line. 00:52:05.390 --> 00:52:10.340 align:middle line:84% So good character, we don't deal with character 00:52:10.340 --> 00:52:14.000 align:middle line:90% in the Western academic world. 00:52:14.000 --> 00:52:19.280 align:middle line:84% We leave that to religion, outside of the academy. 00:52:19.280 --> 00:52:23.990 align:middle line:84% But it used to be taught in the Western world. 00:52:23.990 --> 00:52:28.770 align:middle line:84% And now, there's some talk about it coming back. 00:52:28.770 --> 00:52:31.040 align:middle line:84% And so what I'm going to now do is 00:52:31.040 --> 00:52:35.180 align:middle line:84% to talk about a method of dealing 00:52:35.180 --> 00:52:39.390 align:middle line:84% with a problem like this in this other category. 00:52:39.390 --> 00:52:41.360 align:middle line:90% It's not exactly virtue ethics. 00:52:41.360 --> 00:52:50.730 align:middle line:84% But the central feature of the technique is to take a problem, 00:52:50.730 --> 00:52:53.610 align:middle line:84% replace one of the characters in the problem 00:52:53.610 --> 00:52:58.740 align:middle line:84% with a fictitious character, and then work the problem out 00:52:58.740 --> 00:53:02.080 align:middle line:84% as a story and get your solution that way. 00:53:02.080 --> 00:53:06.790 align:middle line:84% The key is, which character do you choose? 00:53:06.790 --> 00:53:08.972 align:middle line:84% Which fictitious character and on what basis 00:53:08.972 --> 00:53:10.180 align:middle line:90% do you choose that character? 00:53:10.180 --> 00:53:13.240 align:middle line:84% And secondly, when you work that person out, 00:53:13.240 --> 00:53:16.700 align:middle line:84% do you come up with a believable story? 00:53:16.700 --> 00:53:18.710 align:middle line:84% In a classroom, anything you come up 00:53:18.710 --> 00:53:20.960 align:middle line:84% with, you can justify as believable because I 00:53:20.960 --> 00:53:22.620 align:middle line:90% can't say it's not believable. 00:53:22.620 --> 00:53:23.150 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:53:23.150 --> 00:53:25.370 align:middle line:84% But in the real world, it's going 00:53:25.370 --> 00:53:27.320 align:middle line:84% to be believable or not believable. 00:53:27.320 --> 00:53:32.510 align:middle line:84% Because some mother with her child who's going to be exposed 00:53:32.510 --> 00:53:36.080 align:middle line:84% to your decision is either going to believe it or won't. 00:53:36.080 --> 00:53:37.760 align:middle line:84% Now, that's the real test that you're 00:53:37.760 --> 00:53:40.108 align:middle line:84% going to get it in an ethical situation 00:53:40.108 --> 00:53:41.900 align:middle line:84% and we can't forget that just because we're 00:53:41.900 --> 00:53:44.430 align:middle line:90% sitting in here in a classroom. 00:53:44.430 --> 00:53:45.630 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:53:45.630 --> 00:53:49.110 align:middle line:84% And then we've got work to do on Friday. 00:53:49.110 --> 00:53:49.610 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:53:49.610 --> 00:53:52.148 align:middle line:84% Now, I'll give you a final briefing on that on Friday. 00:53:52.148 --> 00:53:52.520 align:middle line:90% 00:53:52.520 --> 00:53:54.020 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: We have class on Thursday. 00:53:54.020 --> 00:53:55.300 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: We do have class on Thursday. 00:53:55.300 --> 00:53:56.330 align:middle line:90% Friday's make-up. 00:53:56.330 --> 00:53:56.611 align:middle line:90% 00:53:56.611 --> 00:53:57.278 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Right. 00:53:57.278 --> 00:54:02.020 align:middle line:84% Do we need to read anything for Thursday? 00:54:02.020 --> 00:54:06.200 align:middle line:84% TAFT BROOME: I'll tell you one thing that was helpful to me. 00:54:06.200 --> 00:54:15.150 align:middle line:84% I got on the web and I googled "Norway" and "plagiarism." 00:54:15.150 --> 00:54:17.130 align:middle line:84% And I came up with some news articles. 00:54:17.130 --> 00:54:21.570 align:middle line:84% And apparently, there's a lot going on 00:54:21.570 --> 00:54:26.850 align:middle line:84% in Norway in the colleges with respect to plagiarism 00:54:26.850 --> 00:54:28.770 align:middle line:84% and it seems to be a repeat of what we're 00:54:28.770 --> 00:54:31.140 align:middle line:90% getting in high schools here. 00:54:31.140 --> 00:54:35.280 align:middle line:84% Some students are downloading answers 00:54:35.280 --> 00:54:40.440 align:middle line:84% on tests from the web on their cell phones or something. 00:54:40.440 --> 00:54:41.730 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:54:41.730 --> 00:54:43.500 align:middle line:90% See you on Thursday. 00:54:43.500 --> 00:54:44.000 align:middle line:90%