↓ Skip to main content

Aristotle and Autism: Reconsidering a Radical Shift to Virtue Ethics in Engineering

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Aristotle and Autism: Reconsidering a Radical Shift to Virtue Ethics in Engineering
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11948-016-9787-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heidi Furey

Abstract

Virtue-based approaches to engineering ethics have recently received considerable attention within the field of engineering education. Proponents of virtue ethics in engineering argue that the approach is practically and pedagogically superior to traditional approaches to engineering ethics, including the study of professional codes of ethics and normative theories of behavior. This paper argues that a virtue-based approach, as interpreted in the current literature, is neither practically or pedagogically effective for a significant subpopulation within engineering: engineers with high functioning autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Because the main argument for adopting a character-based approach is that it could be more successfully applied to engineering than traditional rule-based or algorithmic ethical approaches, this oversight is problematic for the proponents of the virtue-based view. Furthermore, without addressing these concerns, the wide adoption of a virtue-based approach to engineering ethics has the potential to isolate individuals with ASD and to devalue their contributions to moral practice. In the end, this paper gestures towards a way of incorporating important insights from virtue ethics in engineering that would be more inclusive of those with ASD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Other 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Professor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 14%
Engineering 6 14%
Arts and Humanities 4 10%
Social Sciences 4 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 13 31%