TED Conversations

Nolan Poe

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Is an engineer morally responsible for harm caused by their creations?

I am currently on the path to become a mechanical engineer. I don't have exact numbers, but I'd estimate that about a half of all engineering work goes into weapons. This is based on anecdotal evidence I have gathered in my home town and is most certainly up for debate. If I am correct, though, I will probably end up designing instruments of death and destruction at one point in my life. If I work on a gun that kills an innocent man, woman or child, I don't know that I could sleep soundly ever again. I don't know that I could explain to the victim's mother why I made something so lethal. My worst nightmare is sitting on my deathbed thinking of nothing but those I helped kill. As Peter van Uhm explains, they can also be instruments of peace, I find that less than consoling considering the potential for misuse. I would appreciate thoughtful responses. It's easy to answer "no" but please consider the emotional aspects as well.

Related Talks:
Topics: engineering war
+2
Share:

Closing Statement from Nolan Poe

This question had a variety of answers. Most agreed that weapons and weapons development were necessary. Some urged me to stick to what I feel is best, regardless of what the world and its nations want. A few suggested that I had already decided, which isn't true per se. The default scenario is for me to go about my career with little regard as to what my work will be used for. The reason I asked the question is because I was uneasy with this and curious about how others had rationalized it, if at all. I'd like to thank everyone for responding and helping me figure out what to do with my life.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Mark Meijer 100+

    • +3
    HostAssociate
    Feb 4 2012: Your conscience is not going to remain silent just because you can reason your way out of "responsibility". Ultimately only you can decide whether you feel you should take a job knowing the consequences. My suggestion would be that you take into consideration what kind of thing you would and wouldn't want to have contributed towards in your life. There has to be plenty of worthwhile opportunity out there for engineers, you guys build stuff ;). Just because "the world" likes to build a lot of guns, doesn't mean you have to play their game (assuming that's not what you would want to have contributed).

    • Nolan Poe

      • 0
      Feb 7 2012: Thank you, very insightful. Regarding not playing the world's game, you have to understand that Engineers must follow the money. It's not greed, it's just how the supply and demand of labor works.

      • Mark Meijer 100+

        • +2
        HostAssociate
        Feb 7 2012: You say that as if it's something unique to engineers :). Let's be honest here, you're not talking about money, you're talking about easy money. You are implying there is not enough opportunity for people who build stuff, right?

        Last time I glanced over this page, someone was already offering you a job.

        In your question you suggested that you wouldn't want anyone to get hurt by stuff you create, and yet you argue for the potential merits of weapons at every opportunity here. I don't care to argue whether you're wrong or right about that, point is that apparently you are more than capable of weighing the pros and cons as you see them. But in the end you know what weapons are used for, that's why you formulated this question the way you did.

        Notice you didn't ask about harm, you asked about your responsibility for it. You're not asking whether people could get hurt by weapons you create, you already know. You're asking whether you should care, or whether you should still help to create weapons because they might get used constructively. You ask because it's safe betting on those jobs. You ask because you want to get answers that say "sure go ahead, follow the easy money, it's not your problem how people use the weapons you create, if you contributed them with noble intent."

        And if that's how you really felt, then indeed it's not your problem. But you would not have asked this question if that's really how you feel about it. You want permission, you want to get convinced that it's ok. But nobody can do that for you. Whether it's ok for you, depends only on you. This is your own deathbed you asked about. You can argue it any way you like. Others could offer arguments you might like. But since you asked this question, I'm guessing you won't be able to fool yourself in the long run.

        • Nolan Poe

          • +2
          Feb 7 2012: I'd like to believe what you're saying is false, but it's true. I don't want anyone to give me permission as much as I want them to explain how they rationalize it, but that's a technicality. I'm not the first to be faced with this dilemma and I won't be the last, so it was just an appeal to those older than me for insight into this decision.

      • Richard Nota 20+

        • 0
        Feb 7 2012: There may be reasonable compromises but there is no "must" about following the money. Drawing a line not to be crossed is part of what morality is about.
      • thumb

        Joanne Donovan 30+

        • 0
        Feb 8 2012: You are only faced with a dilemma because you make it one. On one hand you want the money, on the other, you know what you will do for a job will be wrong. If you followed what you know to be the right path, there would be no dilemma. In fact, the only dilemma you really have is 'how do I make myself feel better about this?'

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.