Ethics and the Engineer: Professional Codes and the Rule of St. Benedict

Introduction

Engineers make an enormous contribution to promoting the wellbeing of individuals and the communities in which they live by providing benefits such as clean water, sanitation, energy generation, large-scale pharmaceutical manufacture, hygienic food processing, buildings, transport infrastructure, mechanical devices, medical diagnostic equipment, instrumentation, computing and telecommunications. However, engineering may also give rise to adverse consequences such as weapons manufacture and proliferation, damage to the natural environment and the production of systems that actively exclude certain sections of society. The work of engineers therefore demands appropriate ethical analysis.

Philosophical approaches have been applied to engineering ethics in a number of ways, including consideration of engineering as a profession, ¹ analysis of the ethical aspirations of engineering, ² discussion of ethical quandaries in engineering, ³ and in combination with insights from the social sciences. ⁴ However, theological approaches to engineering ethics have been sparse and have generally only been implied in broader considerations of the ethics of technology. ⁵ Nevertheless, recent studies have indicated how theological approaches can provide an enriched account of engineering ethics that overcomes some of the weaknesses of purely philosophical analysis. ⁶ For example, theology can provide a strengthened description of the unique importance of each person and a more profound account of the significance of community. This can establish the context for consideration of the work of engineers as a para-eucharistic activity, a creative means of promoting the communion of persons through contribution to material wellbeing. Such a theological approach can lead to suggestions for reprioritisation of the role of engineers in promoting peace, of the contribution of engineers to removing infrastructural poverty in developing countries, and of the responsibilities of engineers to promote ‘engineering with a human face’ in developed countries.

The primary goal of the present article is to explore ways of presenting the insights of theological approaches in such a way that they can have practical effects in engineering. Unfortunately, relatively few Christian engineers read theological journals. Furthermore, engineering is a profession which operates freely across national and cultural boundaries, so it is additionally beneficial if the outcomes of such theological approaches can be expressed in ways which render them admissible and comprehensible to those of other faiths or of no explicit faith. It should be noted that practising engineers are often primarily informed of the ethical requirements of their work by professional ethical codes. Thus, the present article will first present the recent and authoritative Royal Academy of Engineering’s Statement of Ethical Principles. This is a succinct statement, expressed in secular terms, which aims to give guidelines for the practice of engineering. Secondly, this Statement will be compared with a paradigmatic Christian code, the Rule of St. Benedict, which aims to give guidelines for the practice of monastic life based on the teaching of the Gospels. It has long been recognised that what the Rule proposes for monastic life can be beneficially adapted to other types of activities and other types of communities. Thirdly, based on the comparison of the Statement and the Rule, suggestions will be made for the development of an enriched professional ethical statement for engineers. Fourthly, issues arising in the communication of an enriched statement to those of other faiths or no explicit faith will be considered. Finally, some general benefits of applying theological analysis to the ethics of professions will be suggested.

The Royal Academy of Engineering’s Statement of Ethical Principles

Professional institutions associated with the various sub-disciplines of engineering (such as civil engineering, mechanical engineering and chemical engineering) have for many years published ethical codes for their members. However, these were numerous and rather diverse in character. ⁷ Therefore, the pre-eminent engineering organisation in the UK, the Royal Academy of Engineering, ⁸ has recently, in association with the Engineering Council UK, which regulates the engineering profession in the UK, developed a Statement of Ethical Principles ⁹ that applies to all engineers, whatever their sub-discipline. The professional engineering institutions have pledged their support for the Statement, accepting it as a set of guiding principles for their members. This Statement is hence both up-to-date and recognised as authoritative across the diversity of the engineering profession. The process of development of the Statement has also generated renewed interest in engineering ethics. It is the document to be considered in the present paper and is given in the Appendix.

A helpful way of considering the nature of engineering is to consider it as a practice, ‘a coherent and complex form of socially established activity’, of the type first proposed by MacIntyre. ¹⁰ The Statement opens with a cogent and challenging description of some key features of what may be considered to be the practice of engineering: ¹¹ ‘Professional engineers work to enhance the welfare, health and safety of all whilst paying due regard to the environment and the sustainability of resources. They have made personal and professional commitments to enhance the wellbeing of society through the exploitation of knowledge and the management of creative teams.’ This is notably a description of a human endeavour: it describes the activities of persons for the benefit of other persons. The technological artefacts that in the public imagination are most closely associated with engineering are contingent products of the practice; in MacIntyre’s terminology they are external goods. ¹² It should be noted that the Statement refers to the welfare, health and safety of all. This is a very demanding aspiration, which includes communities beyond our usual boundaries and the individual persons in those communities.

The Statement then presents four ‘fundamental principles’ that can serve as guidance to engineers as they seek to meet these high aspirations: accuracy and rigour; honesty and integrity; respect for life, law and the public good; responsible leadership, listening and informing. Though these principles may be applied throughout a professional engineer’s activities, they are each particularly relevant for differing aspects of his or her work. Thus, accuracy and rigour are especially relevant to the purely technological aspects of such work, in particular the application of mathematics, scientific knowledge and practical know-how. The importance of technological competence is strongly emphasised. The requirement for honesty and integrity becomes particularly relevant in the business dealings of engineers. This can be challenging for an international activity such as engineering, for acceptable business standards can vary greatly between different cultures. Respect for life, law and the public good is an essential recognition of the profound effects which engineering can have on the wellbeing of individuals and the communities in which they live. Proper expression of such respect can demand great care, for the effects of an engineer’s activities may have consequences that are very extensive in both place and time. The need for responsible leadership, listening and informing arises from the privileged and trusted position in society that results from engineers’ specific and high-level expertise. They not only have knowledge and skills which enable the solving of problems and the fulfilment of opportunities, but even more importantly the same knowledge and skills may provide them with an unique ability to identify such problems and opportunities.

It is these four principles which have been recognised as being most important for the fulfilment of the practice of engineering. The text in the Appendix provides further details of how each principle is to be understood. In common with other modern professional codes of ethics, the Statement emphasises what should be done. This is not simply a characteristic arising from the brevity of the Statement. Such an emphasis is retained even in considerably longer codes of ethics for engineers, such as that of the US National Society of Professional Engineers. ¹³

However, there are a number of reasons why it could be of considerable benefit to develop an enriched statement of ethical principles for engineers, and especially one that also considers why and how desirable actions should be accomplished. This is particularly because such a statement is a very important, or even the primary, source of ethical guidance for working engineers. An enriched statement could provide a more fertile basis for imaginative approaches to the many ethical opportunities and ethical dilemmas which a professional engineer may encounter.

Some of the most challenging of these opportunities and dilemmas arise particularly in association with the special characteristics of engineering work. First, many engineers work under substantial time and financial pressures as employees of sizeable organisations. Such pressures and the diffuse nature of ethical responsibility in large businesses can lead to reduced levels of moral reasoning. ¹⁴ An enriched statement could provide a basis for countering such a potential decline. Secondly, it is not uncommon for an engineer’s work to affect primarily people who are distant in place and/or distant in time from where the work is conceived and planned, far from the place where engineered artefacts are constructed, and even far from the place where completed engineered artefacts are located. Engineers hence often lack in their professional work the close proximity to persons that can engender compassion and ethical action. An engineer therefore needs to develop the capacity to visualise those affected by his or her activities, ¹⁵ a capacity that an enriched statement could stimulate. Thirdly, achieving a balance of continuity and coherence in personal and professional life may be especially challenging for an engineer. The difficulties of balancing ethical responsibilities to those closest to us with the multitude of needs of those further away are familiar to many in the modern world. However, such balancing may be especially challenging for engineers as they possess skills which could be particularly useful for meeting the urgent necessities of those in direst need, for example by providing such basic requirements as clean water and sanitation. Again, an enriched statement could provide a basis for approaching such a challenge. Fourthly, and very importantly, an enriched statement could help address one of the greatest present challenges to the engineering profession, the imbalanced prioritisation of technical ingenuity over helping people: ¹⁶ the technical content of engineering can be so intellectually stimulating that the real goal of engineering, enhancing human wellbeing, may be forgotten. A more profound content in a statement of ethical principles could be particularly helpful in prioritising commitment to people over fascination with ingenious artefacts.

The Rule of St. Benedict

The Rule of St Benedict was originally written to guide the life of monastic communities in the sixth century. Given this origin, consideration of the Rule in a discussion of ethical codes for engineers may initially seem anomalous. However, the Rule has long been seen as valuable in providing guidance for an active Christian life in a much wider context. For example, in the Middle Ages it was used as a textbook for the education of the sons of nobility and as a handbook for wise rule. ¹⁷ More recently, it has been proposed that the Rule can provide a foundation for the creation of a spiritually credible civilisation in Europe. ¹⁸ Among the important factors leading to this latter suggestion are that the Rule provides a rich basis for the creation of community and in particular is concerned with how attention to material and practical matters can create the conditions for spiritual flourishing.

A further indication that consideration of the Rule may help the enrichment of engineering ethics is the high evaluation that its approach has been given by some leading modern exponents of philosophical and theological ethics. For example, MacIntyre’s seminal appraisal of moral philosophy in After Virtue was much concerned with the role of communities in sustaining ethical life. This work ended with the words ‘We are waiting not for Godot, but for another—doubtless very different—St. Benedict’. ¹⁹ Again, Banner’s recent, succinct account of the development of Christian ethics begins with a chapter entitled ‘Benedict and the Practice of the Christian Life’, that describes the Rule as ‘what can plausibly be seen as Christianity’s paradigmatic framing and answering of the question of ethics’. ²⁰ It is noted that the Rule tries to ‘conceive what it might be like to live human life in the light of the story of salvation as the Bible witnesses to it’ through sensitivity to the breadth and depth of the biblical account rather than by trying to extract a set of ethical instructions.

The interest in Benedict’s approaches shown by experts in business management provides an additional pointer that study of the Rule may be beneficial in the development of engineering ethical codes, for there is a close connection between engineering and business. The Rule is much concerned with practical work, and monasteries following it have been expected to be self-sufficient. Indeed, such monasteries have operated with commercial success for over 1,300 years suggesting that they may have much to teach other businesses. For example, a detailed study of a commercially successful monastic brewery employing mostly lay people in a manner inspired by the Rule has confirmed the linkage of quality of work environment and quality of output achieved through avoidance of the instrumentalisation of either work or people. ²¹ Indeed, there is much interest in applying the outlook of the Rule to businesses with no religious connection, particularly its emphasis on prioritising the person (employee) rather than the task to be carried out. ²²

Thus, there are a number of indications that the Rule may profitably be studied in the present context: its historically widespread use outside monastic communities, its significance to philosophical ethics, its paradigmatic place in Christian ethics and its application in business management. Moreover, there are further indications that the Rule may have particular relevance for engineers and the development of their codes of ethics, including its having been written for ‘beginners’ ²³ and especially its pragmatic approach to practical work and the life of persons in a community. Both the Rule and engineers are practical rather than theoretical, realist rather than idealist, and prioritise specific, achievable actions rather than unattainable, ethereal visions. Indeed, it is no coincidence that monasteries following the Rule were pioneers of early engineering, including the construction of complex yet functional buildings, harnessing hydro-power for milling, wood cutting and metal working, drinking water management, sewage disposal, mining and iron smelting. ²⁴ The rest of this section hence considers some of the characteristics of the Rule which are most pertinent to the development of engineering ethical codes.

It was noted in the preceding section that the Statement, in common with other modern professional ethical codes, is concerned with what should be done. This is also a concern of the Rule, but the Rule additionally considers how and why desirable actions should be accomplished. ²⁵ What should be done may be summarised as ‘faith and the performance of good works’ or ‘love the Lord God with your whole heart, your whole soul and all your strength, and your neighbor as yourself’. ²⁶ Faith and love of God are to be expressed through the praise of God in the frequent celebration of the Divine Office: ‘Therefore we should praise our Creator for his just judgments at these times: Lauds, Prime, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers and Compline: and let us arise at night to give him praise.’ ²⁷ Indeed, much of the Rule is concerned with details for the patterns and the content of worship. Faith and love of God are also to be expressed through care for others, especially the most vulnerable: ‘Care of the sick must rank above and before all else’ and ‘Great care and concern are to be shown in receiving poor people and pilgrims’. ²⁸ The Rule stresses the importance of the community formed through persons living together, whilst always respecting the dignity of each person.

Worship is also central to the Rule’s concern with how desirable actions may be accomplished. At the most basic level the Rule describes the rhythm of a day structured around worship and prayer, labour and study. That is, the Rule describes an integrated way of life in which prayerful worship, labour and study are intimately connected. The Rule recognises that adopting a way of life is not only a matter of knowledge but also of will, and that a reordering of the will requires a life lived in the presence of God: ‘What is not possible to us by nature, let us ask the Lord to supply by the help of his grace.’ ²⁹ An important aspect of such reordering of the will is perseverance in living a life of humility, many aspects of which are described in detail in the longest chapter of the Rule. Even so, the Rule is realistic rather than idealistic in its expectations, for example: ‘The life of a monk ought to be a continuous Lent. Since few, however, have the strength for this…’ ³⁰

The Rule’s reasons for why life should be lived in these ways is apparent from its frequent quotations from Scripture, especially the Gospels and the Psalms. However, the Rule does not seek to establish a rigid set of instructions based on these sources, but rather aims to provide a framework for a synthesis of action and contemplation, interiority and engagement, relationship to God and standing within the world which is truly an instantiation of the Gospel narrative. ³¹ For example, the fundamental motivation expressed in the Rule for care for the sick, the poor and pilgrims arises because Christ may be particularly recognised in them. In other words, the Rule’s concern is ‘to make the reading of Scripture, and within that, the telling of the story of Christ, the formative and shaping power in Christian life’. ³²

Thus, the Rule seeks to address questions that are considerably broader in scope than does the Statement. The lack of attention to how and why questions in the Statement may be seen as a significant omission. Additionally, the Rule provides insights on several other matters that are of concern to engineering.

For instance, although practical work is of importance in the Rule it is always considered within the wider context of the life of the person and the community. Indeed, prayerful worship and work are seen as a unity, and it may even be considered that work becomes prayer when done in the presence of God. ³³ This gives a spiritual dignity to the activities of the worker: work is more than a means of production. There results a form of economics that recognises the role of material needs but only in the context of profound spiritual values. This has specific consequences, for example, regarding the sale of goods produced by artisans in the monastery: ‘The evil of avarice must have no part in establishing prices, which should, therefore, always be a little lower than people outside the monastery are able to set, so that in all things God may be glorified.’ ³⁴ The monks themselves had no personal possessions but rather received a few necessary goods according to their needs.

The Rule also gives insights into a distinctive type of obedience, or in more modern terms organisation and hierarchy. This is particularly evident in a type of authority that has been described as ‘not representative in the modern sense, but at least systematically attentive to the diversity of character and experience within the community’. ³⁵ Thus, considerable power is vested in the head of the monastery, the abbot, but this is balanced by the requirement for the abbot to consult extensively, showing care and concern for each person in the community and, above all, discernment. All take part in the consultation process, for ‘the Lord often reveals what is better to the younger’, and the ability to benefit the community is prioritised: ‘Brothers will read and sing, not according to rank, but according to their ability to benefit their hearers.’ ³⁶ The ultimate authority of the abbot brings great responsibility: ‘The abbot must always remember what he is and remember what he is called, aware that more will be expected of a man to whom more has been entrusted.’ ³⁷

A further, very pertinent insight of the Rule, implicit rather than explicit, is what may be termed ‘Benedictine Peace’. ³⁸ Importantly, Benedictine Peace does not involve a grand programme of action, but rather concerns each person seeking to create peace in his or her immediate community, a culture of peace arising from personal inner peace: ‘The Benedictine ideal of the human being is not that of one who achieves and accomplishes things, not a person with an unusual religious gift, not a great ascetic, but the wise and mature person who knows how to bring people together, who creates around herself or himself an atmosphere of peace and mutual understanding.’ ³⁹

Enrichment of a Statement of Ethical Principles

Comparison of the Statement and the Rule can lead to suggestions for ways in which an enriched statement of ethical principles for engineers might be formulated. One of the clearest needs for such an enriched statement is a recognition that human wellbeing cannot be considered in purely material terms. Engineers promote human flourishing through manipulation of the material world, but in doing so they need to be sensitive to spiritual needs and particularly to the ways in which personal relationships and interactions with the natural environment are components of the fulfilment of such needs. Such a recognition of our spiritual nature should appear in the opening paragraph of an enriched statement. Such a recognition can give a more profound basis for the four fundamental principles of good engineering practice which the Statement identifies. Furthermore, making an explicit link between work and spirituality can be very valuable in meeting the challenge of maintaining high levels of ethical reasoning in goal-oriented work environments.

Modern professional codes have little, if anything, to say as to why desirable actions should be accomplished. In this they reflect a curious feature of much modern, secular ethical discussion: that though moral values are frequently described as being a matter of personal preference, certain moral rights are taken as unquestionable. Professional codes can also appear to be unquestionable. However, the Rule clearly aims at an instantiation of biblical, and in particular Gospel, teaching. Moreover, the Gospel offers very clear reasons for engaging in the practice of engineering, for Jesus’ statements, ‘for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me’ (Mt. 25.35-37), would almost certainly involve the use of engineering in the modern world. An enriched statement should provide a description of the ethical grounding for the specified fundamental principles. More particularly, this text from Matthew’s Gospel gives a striking basis for meeting the challenge of visualising the effects of engineering actions on persons who are distant in time and place.

Adherence to ethical principles requires a level of ascesis that is not easy to attain and maintain. Thus, an enhanced statement would benefit greatly from guidance as to how high ideals of professional behaviour may be achieved. Professional activities are only one component of a person’s life, but a clear lesson of the Rule is the importance of seeking coherence in work and faith. Such coherence parallels the existing recognition that the coherence of professional and personal ethical values is an important component in the promotion of high professional standards. ⁴⁰ The Rule emphasises the importance of a rhythm of work and prayerful worship, detailing a demanding schedule of Divine Offices throughout the day and night. Such a rigour is mostly unattainable outside of monastic life, but the transforming benefits of regular worship remain valuable: ‘The regularity of the life of worship holds open a specific time and a specific space for the moral formation of believers. It does not depend on any ideal form which worship must first conform to in order to have an effect.’ ⁴¹ Indeed, simply developing a modest rhythm of work and reflection has the potential for providing time for ethical engagement: professional engineering activities can otherwise become overly intense. ⁴² An enriched statement should draw attention to such benefits. Encouraging the adoption of such a rhythm may also be especially useful in helping engineers meet the difficult challenge of achieving a balance of personal and professional ethical commitments.

An enriched statement could also supplement some of the further explanations of the fundamental principles. For instance, the economic practices described in the Rule go beyond honesty and integrity and suggest the possibility of trading practices for artisans that, while financially sound, also seek to instantiate spiritual values. Similarly, engineering businesses need not always seek solely the maximisation of profits. Again, the Rule goes beyond respect for life, law and the public good in its particular identification of the prioritisation of care for the sick and poor. For modern engineering this might be expressed by particular concern for the amelioration of infrastructural poverty wherever it occurs. Furthermore, the Rule’s emphasis on systematic attentiveness to the needs of others is very relevant to modern engineers’ responsible leadership, listening and informing. They have at their disposal a range of knowledge, skills, techniques and technologies of unique potential, the wise use of which requires discernment analogous to that required of a Benedictine abbot. Crucially, an enriched statement could commit engineers to responsible leadership in the pursuit of real peace, such as the Rule implies. Presently, most of the world’s violent conflict is carried out using engineered artefacts, but engineers have the practical skills to remove many of the root causes of conflict and hence promote sustainable peace. ⁴³ Such supplementation of the explanations of the fundamental principles could provide guidance for meeting the very important challenge to engineers of prioritising helping people over technical ingenuity.

Overall, an enriched statement could stimulate ethical aspirations by providing the foundation for a compassionate and generous ethical culture within the engineering profession. ⁴⁴ In keeping with the spirit of the Rule, such a culture would recognise the vital need for each engineer to accept responsibility for undertaking those specific actions that can contribute to enhancing the wellbeing of all.

An Enriched Code for all Engineers

To draw on the Rule as a means of enriching professional engineering ethical codes would be to use specifically Christian insights. This can be of particular benefit to Christian engineers, who may have been explicitly attracted to the profession by the opportunities it offers for enhancing human wellbeing. However, many engineers have no explicit faith or another faith, and a practically useful enriched code would need to be intelligible and acceptable to all. Furthermore, the explicit expression of Christian viewpoints is often considered to be invalid in professional ethical discourse, but this supposed invalidity is often based on inadequate reflection on both the nature of ethics and the nature of religious commitment. As previously noted, engineers typically spend little time studying philosophical or theological texts, so any development of an enriched code would need to be accompanied by sensitive explanation of the underlying motivation.

Professional codes are often presented as if they arose in some ethically neutral space that is independent of any particular faith or culture. As has been noted, this leads to problems concerning the explanation of the origin of the values that they purport to promote, which hence typically appear to arise either by fabrication or intuition. ⁴⁵ However, an alternative explanation is that the codes that have become our primary expression of modern (Western) professional ethics are fragments of much richer ethical traditions originating and developed particularly in the writings of Aristotle and Christianity. ⁴⁶ Thus, these fragments can only be properly understood in the context of the narrative traditions of the communities in which they were formed and elaborated. In this view the ‘fundamental principles’ of the Statement are an articulation of values arising from a tradition the richness of which has been ignored. From such a perspective, to develop an enriched statement would be merely to restore the Statement to the origins from which its values arose.

Such an explanation of an enriched statement in terms of restoration would need to be accompanied by a constructive description of the nature of faith. An important reason why it has become difficult to incorporate Christian insights explicitly in the consideration of professional engineering ethics is that discussion of religion has become polarised by the criticisms of strident new-atheism and the equally strident and unhelpful responses of religious ‘fundamentalists’, a conflict which approaches pantomime. This is a conflict about which engineers are very aware, as it tends to focus on the nature of scientific knowledge. The interaction of science and faith is, of course, considerably more nuanced than such debate would suggest, ⁴⁷ but this may not be appreciated by those with no explicit faith. Indeed, a view that religious ethics primarily concerns unquestioning submission to a supreme will may still persist among those of no explicit faith, and be regarded as indefensible after the writings of Nietzsche and Freud. ⁴⁸ However, consideration of the faith of the Rule, a faith expressed in the actions of a community, may provide a constructive means of moving beyond the largely intractable epistemological conflicts with new-atheism to an appreciation of faith as a way of life. Using modern language, we can then consider such faith as addressing ‘an [ethical] imagination which opens itself’ rather than a ‘will that submits’. ⁴⁹ This opening of the ethical imagination includes sensitive response to Scripture, with an awareness of the differing ways that meaning is constituted by different textual forms. ⁵⁰

Even so, it may still prove difficult in some situations to gain a hearing for an ethical viewpoint originating in a community of faith. It may then be helpful to draw attention to the analyses of those leading secular ethicists who are sympathetic to the role of faith in ethical dialogue. For example, Sandel suggests that ‘arguments originating from religious or spiritual conviction should be granted a special respect, not treated as mere preferences’. ⁵¹ In this view, to ask a person of religious conviction to put their faith aside whilst participating in professional matters would be to ask them not to participate, as themselves, at all. In other words, faith has a significance much greater than that of a ‘faintly embarrassing leisure pursuit’. ⁵² Sandel’s ethical work also makes secular use of the idea of a sense of gift or giftedness, and regards humility and solidarity as being amongst the key secular ethical terms. ⁵³ Humility and solidarity are also key aspects of the Rule, and the concept of gift is an important feature of Christian ethics, typically referring to the gift of God, gift of creation, gift of pardon or gift of hope. ⁵⁴ Such views and the commonality of vocabulary suggest that the prospects for constructive attitudes towards an enriched statement may be greater than the strident public debate at first indicates. Additionally, the very international nature of the engineering profession, with many engineers being used to working in multicultural, multifaith environments, provides a further source of optimism for productive dialogue.

Enrichment of professional engineering ethical codes would be likely to receive support from those of other faiths. For example, even though little has been written about engineering ethics from the perspective of Islam, a recent publication shows an approach that has much in common with the Rule and the discussion of the present article. This includes a prioritisation in descending order of importance of religion, life, intellect, progeny/lineage and property/wealth, and furthermore a close integration of actions and worship: ‘good intentions followed by good actions are considered acts of ‘ibadah (worship)’. ⁵⁵ Even less has been written explicitly about engineering ethics from the perspective of Buddhism, but the main characteristics of one of the most important modern developments, ‘Engaged Buddhism’, have been summarised as: awareness—mindfulness or alertness to the situation around us; identification—empathy for others; action—‘once there is seeing there must be action’. Furthermore, such action is: non-violent—avoiding harm to others; non-hierarchical—maintaining equal dignity of all persons; non-heroic—effective, collective, ‘grass-roots’. ⁵⁶ These features are consonant with those of the Rule.

In developing dialogue across cultures and faiths about an enriched statement of ethics for engineers it may be helpful to refer to ‘Christian ethics’ with Ricoeur’s preferred designation of ‘communal ethics in a religious perspective’. ⁵⁷ This has a number of benefits. First, it is an appropriate description for the ethics of a profession such as engineering, which seeks to promote the wellbeing of communities of persons. Secondly, this designation is a good description of those aspects of certain types of modern theological ethics that are most applicable to engineering, which encompass traditions as diverse as the Orthodox, European theology of Zizioulas and the Catholic, Latin American theology of Dussel. ⁵⁸ Thirdly, this recognition of the importance of the communal, of persons in communities, provides a distinction from much of modern philosophical ethics that tends to prioritise the pursuit of individual interests and sees societies as ‘collections of strangers’. ⁵⁹

Central to Ricoeur’s description of such communal ethics in a religious perspective is a logic of superabundance: ‘human logic is a logic of equality, of equivalence. But the logic of God, the logic of Jesus, the logic of Paul is quite another matter. This other logic, is one of excess, of superabundance’. ⁶⁰ He regards the New Testament as showing a great variety of expression of such logic of superabundance, including the extravagance of Jesus’ parables of growth and Paul’s interpretation of salvation history. The challenge to us is to respond by showing some signs of this new logic in a practical way: ‘I would even say that the tenacious incorporation, step by step, of a supplementary degree of compassion and generosity into all of our codes—including our penal codes and our codes of social justice—constitutes a perfectly reasonable task, however difficult and interminable it may be.’ ⁶¹ Indeed, incorporation of such expression of compassion and generosity would be entirely consistent with the spirit of the Rule and should be a prominent feature of an enriched statement of engineering ethical principles.

Professional Ethical Codes: A Challenge to Theologians

Comparison of the Statement and the Rule has shown two types of possibilities for developing an enriched statement of ethical principles for engineers. First, the scope of such a statement could be widened to address how and why issues in addition to what issues. Secondly, the specific content of the statement could be developed to reflect insights regarding matters such as economic practices, care of the vulnerable and discerning leadership. Some concerns about the admissibility of faith views in the development of an enriched professional engineering ethical code have also been considered. However, these are possibilities, and difficulties, that also apply to the ethical codes of other professions. For example, even a document as extensive as the UK General Medical Council’s Good Medical Practice ⁶² is essentially concerned with what issues framed in an ethically ‘neutral’ manner. Furthermore, medical doctors, like engineers and other professionals, look to such codes as important, if not primary, sources of ethical guidance. Such observations can lead to the formulation of a challenge to theologians with ethical expertise: if theology can make an unique contribution to ethics, if such a contribution has the potential to be of practical significance, and if the instantiation of such practical significance is desired, then attention should be directed to the development of enriched professional ethical codes. However, before describing this challenge more fully it is helpful to refer professional ethics to the context of personal and political ethics.

Theological analysis of ethics has tended to be mostly concerned either with personal actions or else with the ordering and activities of societies, that is, political ethics. In European cultures, there is generally much freedom for individuals to express their faith in their personal ethical decisions. However, the validity of using the viewpoints of faith in political ethical discourse is less widely accepted and has been the subject of much debate. The concept of ‘procedural secularism’ ⁶³ which has arisen in this debate holds promise for being very helpful in the context of professional ethics. Such procedural secularism is ‘open to be persuaded by confessional or ideological argument on particular issues, but is not committed to privileging permanently any one confessional group’. This envisages a society in which the underlying ethical commitments and visions of all may be expressed in discussion so as to meaningfully and constructively seek the good of all. However, this poses a challenge for effective communication, for all those who express their commitments and visions must seek to do so in a way that can be generally understood. ⁶⁴ One way to ease the demands of such communication is to propose a two-stage process, ‘candour in representation, restraint in decision’. ⁶⁵ In brief, this proposes that overtly faith-based reasoning may be used in the process of policy discussion but that the final official conclusions should be expressed in language that does not appeal to any one faith (or no explicit faith) perspective. Clearly, the application of such a two-stage process to political ethics has both advantages and disadvantages, benefits and problems. ⁶⁶ Nevertheless, the task here is to suggest how procedural secularism and a similar two-stage process might be applied to the development of professional ethical codes.

It may be helpful to proceed by summarising the strategic importance of developing enriched codes for professional ethics. First, the actions of professionals have an immense impact on the wellbeing of persons in communities: engineering is an important example, but only one of many. Indeed, most political decisions would be in practice ineffectual without the expert input of many different professionals. Moreover, many courses of action could not even be identified in the absence of expert professional insight. Secondly, many of the population are active in the professions and their professional activities are an essential means of providing for themselves and their families. Furthermore, these activities are dispersed in many differing types of communities and geographical locations. In contrast, rather a small part of the population is politically active, for such activity is optional, and key political activity can be limited to a few locations. Thirdly, ethical codes are in many professions an important, or even the primary, source of guidance for ethical actions. Professionals are busy people who may rarely have time for prolonged ethical reflection, so a succinct statement of their ethical responsibilities can be highly valued. Fourthly, professionals are well educated and often have a spirit of commitment to the development of their chosen profession, factors that may give the benefits of active and constructive attitudes to the development of enriched codes.

The formulation of professional ethical codes is a demanding task requiring the cooperation of experts. ⁶⁷ Here lies the specific challenge to theologians with ethical expertise: to cooperate in the task of developing enriched professional ethical codes, maybe even to lead such a task. By analogy with a two-stage approach to political ethics, it may be proposed that this takes place at two levels. The first would be the level of faith, the level of candour. This would allow a full expression of Christian values and insights. It is suggested that both the scope and the specific content would benefit from appropriate incorporation of elements of the Rule. The second would be the level of restraint, of a form of expression that could be widely understood and accepted. This could, like the Rule, consider what, why and how issues, but the specific content would not explicitly use the language of a particular faith. Codes at the first level would be directly useful for Christian professionals. Codes at the second level would need to be written in collaboration with representatives of other faiths and of no explicit faith, and the aspiration would be that these be adopted by the appropriate national professional bodies. A forum such as that provided by the Society for the Study of Christian Ethics could well provide the expert base needed for the initiation of such a task. ⁶⁸