THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF ATOMIC WEAPONS - A CASE STUDY IN ETHICAL ISSUES FOR ENGINEERING STUDENTS

Stuart R. Palmer

School of Engineering and Technology,

Deakin University,

Geelong 3217,

Australia

ABSTRACT: This paper presents a case study for consideration in the context of undergraduate engineering studies in ethics. The aim of this case study was to enhance and give focus to a program of study encompassing the theory of ethics, professional ethics and the social impact of technology. The meaning of 'ethics' is clarified with definitions of ethics, morality and professional ethics. The justifications and rationale for including ethics in undergraduate engineering programs are examined. The typical content and form of such a program is reviewed. The case study presents, in chronological form, the scientific discoveries that revealed the potential of atomic energy, the political and military imperatives that initiated the race to develop atomic weapons, the progress of the Manhattan project, and finally the circumstances surrounding the actual use of these weapons against mainland Japan. The historical events and the roles of technology professionals in them are presented as impartially and objectively as possible. Ethical questions posed to scientists, engineers and technologists by the events documented in the case study are examined. The potential benefits and limitations of the case study are discussed.

INTRODUCTION

The case study presented in this paper was developed in response to a need to bring focus, relevance and impact to engineering undergraduate studies in ethics. The 50th anniversary of the first use of atomic weapons provided an excellent opportunity to reflect on the ethical considerations involved in the development and application of technology.

Most engineering undergraduate education programs contain studies in the field of ethics. The challenge is (as with any other area of study) to make these studies engaging to students and relevant to the specific discipline of study. For engineering it is also essential to ensure that consideration is given to ethics in a context beyond the narrow focus of the application of a professional code of ethics.

The Manhattan project still represents one of the greatest achievements of mankind in terms of the application of science, engineering and technology. At the same time, it unleashed the potential for incredibly destructive weapons, under who's shadow the world has lived ever since. By reinforcing the fundamental link between the scientific investigation and engineering achievement of the project, and the consequences that followed, it is demonstrated that science and technology are not 'value free', and that those involved in such projects must continually make ethical choices regarding the development and application of technology.

DEFINITIONS

In the study of ethics it is important to define what is meant by terms such as 'ethics', 'morals', 'ethical', 'moral', 'code of ethics' and 'professional ethics', as in some circumstances these related terms are used interchangeably and in others they are used to represent wholly different concepts.

The term 'ethics' variously refers to; a) that branch of philosophy concerned with the "investigation into the fundamental principles and concepts that are or ought to be found in any given field of human thought or activity" [1]; b) more commonly, "a set of standards by which a particular group decides to regulate its behaviour - to distinguish what is legitimate or acceptable in pursuit of their aims and what is not" [1]; and c) more loosely, any code of behaviour, whether it claims moral justification or not [2].

Some authors differentiate between 'morals' and 'ethics', describing the former as 'rules of right conduct for individuals' and the latter as 'moral principles and rules of conduct for the behaviour of groups' [3], but often the terms are used interchangeably. The case study does not make a distinction between these two terms. Likewise, the terms 'ethical' and 'moral' are both used to describe actions that conform to, or are in accordance with a particular set of ethical or moral principles.

The term 'code of ethics' refers to the second definition of ethics provided above - "The purpose of these codes is twofold: (1) to emphasize the broad general principles by which all members of the profession should be guided, and (2) to indicate how these principles apply in specific circumstances" [4]. The 'Code of Ethics' published by the Institution of Engineers, Australia (IEAust) [5] conforms to this definition, as do the codes published by most professional bodies.

It is suggested that there are four basic elements in a true profession, "(1) organization, (2) education, (3) experience, and (4) exclusion" [6]. 'Exclusion' (of the unfit and unworthy) is achieved by the development and self-enforcement of 'professional ethics', commonly in the form of a code of ethics issued by the governing body of the profession. Engineering ethics is then, "concerned with the actions and decisions made by persons, individually or collectively, who belong to the profession of engineering" [7].

WHY TEACH ETHICS TO ENGINEERING STUDENTS?

The accrediting professional body for engineering undergraduate courses in Australia, the IEAust, requires that engineering undergraduate courses contain studies in ethics. Both its 'Accreditation Policies and Procedures relating to Professional Engineering Undergraduate Courses' [8] and 'National Competency Standards for Professional Engineers' [9] contain explicit references to the need for engineering students to acquire knowledge of professional ethics, as well as containing other references to 'ethics'. On joining the IEAust members must agree to abide by the code of ethics, so graduate engineers must have an understanding of the rationale for, and application of professional ethics.

It is expected that members of a profession will conduct themselves in an ethical manner. Engineering differs from many other 'service' professions in that its principal function is the design, production and operation of specific physical objects - "objects whose impact on individuals and on society as a whole is observable and assessable with little or no consideration of the role of the individual engineers who contributed to the creation of these objects" [7]. The high level of visibility of the results and consequences of engineering activity mean that it is essential that engineers gain an understanding that they will have to make moral decisions, and that society will pass judgement on their actions.

We now live in a world where our actions may have a significant impact on our environment. We also live in a world that demands high levels of social responsibility from all the professions. "Increasingly, engineers are finding themselves working on projects which are controversial; projects which are considered by some to be compromising community interest" [10]. The recently released draft report of the Review of Engineering Education includes as one of its recommendations that, "... all bachelor of engineering courses include basic science, engineering fundamentals, management and business, ethics, with attention to social, environmental, political and economic context, appropriately integrated to provide a broad base relating to engineering practice in a social context" [11].

As the nature of society and technology has changed, so has the nature of the professions. The change in engineering from collective 'trustee professionalism' to the 'expert professionalism' of the individual has been noted by many authors. "... expert professionalism emphasised theoretical knowledge, but included comparatively little concern with collegial organisations, ethical standards, or service in the public interest" [12]. "This new face of the professions is most evident amongst the independent service providers who are increasingly subject to market pressures ..." [13]. With a reduced public sector, many engineering graduates will find employment in small to medium sized enterprises, where they may have limited opportunity to find a mentor in the form of a more experienced engineer. In this environment they will have to be more self-sufficient in all forms of decision making. Commercial pressures, organisational change and an increasingly critical public will continue to pose new challenges to the professional ethics of engineers. Engineers face an environment of ever-increasing moral complexity, and they must be equipped to deal with the issues they will face.

Regardless of the approach taken to teaching engineering ethics, the central focus of such efforts should be the development of students' autonomy in dealing with moral and ethical issues in engineering. Moral autonomy involves 'moral reasonableness', that is, moral beliefs that are rational, and 'authenticity', that is, individual beliefs that are the result of critical evaluation rather than passive adoption or reflection of the beliefs of others [14]. The morally autonomous graduate engineer is well placed to deal with the ethical questions that will inevitably and continually arise throughout his or her career.

THE TYPICAL ENGINEERING ETHICS SYLLABUS

A review of the engineering undergraduate courses offered by several Australian universities reveals that all those examined include studies directed toward developing an understanding of professional ethics and 'responsibility' [15] [16] [17] [18]. This is not surprising given the focus of the IEAust on professional ethics in its guidelines for undergraduate studies [8].

Accepting that the ethics content of engineering undergraduate course at Deakin University is representative of the typical engineering ethics syllabus, such a syllabus will include the elements shown in Figure 1 below.

The first four items establish the nature of the profession of engineering and its relationship to technology and society. The second four items pursue the ethical issues that arise from the first four. In addition to the concept and application of professional codes of ethics, and in particular the IEAust code of ethics, it is essential that the general field of ethics, moral decision making and the ethics of technology be covered in detail. A truly 'morally autonomous' engineer must be equipped to make moral decisions in professional circumstances beyond the necessarily limited scope of the published code of ethics. A narrow focus on the use of codes of ethics, technical specialisation and the status of the profession, termed 'micro-ethics', should be avoided in preference for a broader focus on the responsibility of the profession and the role of technology in society, referred to as 'macro-ethics' [20].

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CASE STUDY

The challenge in presenting any 'non-technical' course content to engineering students is to make it relevant and engaging. This is especially true of a topic such as ethics, which can potentially viewed from a students' perspective as a highly theoretical exercise with limited relevance to the real world, or at the other extreme, challenging and confronting to the students' personal beliefs and ideals. It is within the context of wishing to ensure a macro-ethical approach as well as improving the engagement of undergraduate students in the learning process that the case study described in this paper was developed.

There exists no shortage of published resources and documented case studies dealing with professional ethics in the context of applying and interpreting relevant codes of ethics [4] [21], but the aim here was a macro- rather than micro-ethical approach. At the time I was searching for an actual occurrence that involved engineering, technology and moral decisions, there was a very public remembrance of the 50th anniversary of the use of the first atomic bomb. The development and use of the first atomic weapons is well documented and remains one of the greatest achievements of science and engineering in the technological sense. It is also one of the most controversial projects in terms of the moral justification of both the development phase and actual use of the weapons. Here then was the case study I was looking for.

THE CASE STUDY

Based on published accounts from a large number of sources, the case study documents, in the form of a time line, and objectively as possible, the scientific, social, political and military events spanning the discovery of the nuclear structure of atoms through to the use of atomic weapons against the Japanese in 1945. The time line format allows students to study the events leading up to the use of nuclear weapons in the correct temporal and causal sequence. Commencing the case study with the scientific discoveries that underpin nuclear power allows students to grasp the relationship between scientific research and the final application of technology. The following are selected segments of the case study time line.

1911 - Ernest Rutherford publishes a paper describing the nuclear structure of atoms.

1917-1920 - Rutherford refines the nuclear model, and identifies the proton.

1932 - James Chadwick discovers the neutron and its ability to be absorbed by some atoms.

December, 1938 - Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassman solve the mystery of neutron absorption, a uranium nucleus can absorb a neutron and split into two smaller nuclei, and in the process release energy. This phenomenon is called nuclear fission. In fact the fission also produces more neutrons, which can split further uranium atoms, which produces more neutrons in an ever increasing release of energy called a chain reaction.

December 7, 1941 - The Japanese attack Pearl Harbour, severely crippling the US Pacific fleet and killing more than 2300 people.

December 8, 1941 - The Americans declare war against Japan. Germany, Japan's ally, declares ware on America shortly thereafter. The US was now directly in the race to develop atomic weapons and devotes enormous resources to the project. Within six months they have outstripped the British effort and are motivated by the fear that the Germans are also working on atomic weapons. The US atomic weapons program is code-named the Manhattan Project.

Summer, 1944 - The two basic bomb models are developed and partially tested on a small scale.

Late 1944 - The allied forces enter Germany, and a special US military scientific unit locate the chief German nuclear scientists and establish that the Germans have not developed a nuclear bomb. Several Manhattan scientists feel uneasy about continuing the project now that there is no German nuclear threat. But only one, Dr. Joseph Rotblat is known to have left. Oppenheimer described the project as now having a momentum of its own.

December 1944 - The allied offensive in Europe slows and the possibility of using an atomic bomb against Germany is discussed. The idea is dropped as the allied effort moved forward. The atomic bomb is now seen as a weapon to be used against the Japanese in the Pacific.

8.15am, August 6, 1945 - The US B-29 bomber named the 'Enola Gay' drops a uranium little boy bomb on Hiroshima, killing approximately 130,000 people, of which only 20,000 are military personnel.

August 8, 1945 - The USSR declares war on Japan.

11.02am, August 9, 1945 - The US B-29 bomber names 'Bock's Car' drops a plutonium fat man bomb on Nagasaki, killing approximately 70,000 people, of which only 150 are military personnel.

August 10, 1945 - The Americans agree to allow the Japanese to retain their Emperor in surrender.

August 14, 1945 - The Japanese Emperor insists that Japan accept the Potsdam Declaration and the war in the Pacific comes to a close.

Following the time line of events under consideration, a series of macro-ethical questions relating to the pursuit of knowledge, the application of technology, the roles and responsibilities of engineers in general, and particular questions arising from the case study are posed for consideration by students. Finally, an initial set of further references are offered to students who wish to read more widely. The following are selected ethical questions from the case study.

Should the Manhattan project have been stopped after the defeat of the Germans?

Was it inevitable that the bombs would be used once they were successfully tested? Did those involved have to justify the money and effort expended in the development?

Would it have been better to demonstrate the destructive power of the bomb to the Japanese by allowing them to view a test explosion or dropping a bomb in an uninhabited area of Japan? Or was the 'shock value' of tens of thousands of deaths required to convince the Japanese?

Was it right to target Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were primarily non-military cities?

Some people have suggested that the devastation at Hiroshima and Nagasaki played an important part in stopping the use of nuclear weapons in wars since that time. Does this help to justify the use of atomic bombs on Japan?

What about the benefits of nuclear energy the world has derived from the work done on the Manhattan project?

Why wasn't work on atomic weapons development stopped after the defeat of the Japanese?

The case study is presented to students in print form as an integral part of the normal course material they receive. The full text of the case study can be found on the World Wide Web at:

APPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE CASE STUDY

The case study presents a context in which to introduce and discuss macro-ethical considerations for engineering students. This can be used to complement and balance a study program that examines micro-ethical issues, such as hypothetical situations involving moral choices for individual engineers, particularly those referring to the IEAust code of ethics. The case study is intended as a student resource that forms part of a complete ethics syllabus as outlined in Figure 1 above.

The case study was developed for use in engineering and technology undergraduate education, but the nature of the material lends itself to the teaching of science students as well, particularly those studying chemistry or physics. Used in the context of discussing the impacts of technology and ethical considerations in the link between research and development and the consequences of technology, the case study has wide applicability.

Even though the case study is based on events that occurred long before the birth of most of today's undergraduates, the history of the Manhattan project is still fascinating to anyone involved in science and technology, and the consequences of the development and use of nuclear power will continue to be relevant for the foreseeable future. The 50th anniversary of the use of nuclear weapons was quickly followed by French nuclear testing in the south pacific, the resumption of Chinese nuclear testing, the complications of the nuclear test ban treaty, and most recently renewed discussion about Australia's three uranium mine policy.

As a tool for provoking thought and moral debate, the case study achieved success even in the development phase, with different colleagues respectfully and variously suggesting that it presented in a bad light the Allies, the Japanese, the military, scientists and engineers.

The case study was developed to be used at first year undergraduate level, but the nature of the issues addressed in the case could be presented and discussed at any level. While no formal evaluation of the case study has yet been undertaken, students were given the opportunity to select the topic 'The ethics of the development and use of the atomic bomb in World War II', from a list of four topics relating to the course material, as the basis for their major semester essay. Of the students who elected to consider this topic, their concluding remarks ranged from unequivocal support for the use of atomic weapons by the Americans, to quoting the accounts of survivors from Hiroshima.

Even though every effort has been made to present the circumstances surrounding the development and use of nuclear weapons objectively, success in this area is necessarily limited by the availability and accuracy of the information sources used and the editing of those sources into a case study.

CONCLUSION

The members of the professions, including engineering, find themselves in a world of ever increasing ethical complexity, brought about by increasing social and commercial pressures, and by changes in the nature of the professions themselves. To enable engineering graduates to deal effectively with these challenges we must ensure that, as students, they develop moral autonomy. To achieve this they must be exposed to a wide range of ethical issues including, the nature of ethics and moral decision making, and the relationship between science, engineering, technology and society, as well as the concept of professional ethics and the application of the code of ethics. The case study presented provides a context in which to introduce and discuss macro-ethical considerations for engineering students.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to thank the many colleagues who contributed to the development of the case study by way of critical review.

REFERENCES

1. Flew, A., A Dictionary of Philosophy. London: Pan Books Ltd, 112 (1984).

2. Whitbeck, C. (Dir), Glossary of Terms. The World Wide Web Ethics Centre for Engineering and Science, http://web.mit.edu/ethics/www/glossary.html (1996).

3. Johnston, S., Gostelow, P., Jones, E. and Fourikis, R., Engineering and Society - an Australian Perspective. Pymble: Harper Educational Publishers, 437 (1995).

4. Alger, P.L., Christensen, N.A. and Olmsted, S.P., Ethical Problems in Engineering. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 5 (1966).

5. Institution of Engineers, Australia, Code of Ethics. Barton: IEAust, (1992).

6. Canfield, D.T. and Bowman, J.H., Business, Legal and Ethical Phases of Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 338 (1954).

7. Baum, R.J., Ethics and Engineering Curricula. New York: The Hastings Centre, ix-1 (1980).

8. Institution of Engineers, Australia, Accreditation Policies and Procedures relating to Professional Engineering Undergraduate Courses. Barton: IEAust, (1991).

9. Institution of Engineers, Australia National Competency Standards for Professional Engineers. Barton: IEAust, 14 (1993).

10. Beder, S., Forward. Proc. of the 1985 Conference Society for Social Responsibility in Engineering. Sydney and Wollongong, 4 (1986).

11. Johnson, P. (chair), Review of Engineering Education - Exposure Draft Report. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (1996).

12. Brint, S., In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in Politics and Public Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press, (1994).

13. Mair, R.I., Social Change and the Interface Between Corporate Values and Professional Ethics. President's Address to Annual General Meeting. Institution of Engineers, Australia (1996).

14. Martin, M.W., Why should Engineering Ethics be Taught? Engineering Education., 71, 4, 276-277 (1981).

15. Deakin University, Undergraduate Studies Handbook 1996 Vol 1. Geelong: Deakin University, 407 (1995).

16. The University of Melbourne, Handbook 1996 Vol 4. Parkville: The University of Melbourne, 57 (1995).

17. The Australian National University, Undergraduate Handbook 1996. Canberra: The Australian National University, 379 (1995).

18. The University of Queensland, The Undergraduate Studies Handbook 1996. Brisbane: The University of Queensland, 91 (1995).

19. Baker, L., Technology Perspectives - A Study Module in the Unit SEB121 Fundamentals of Technology Management. Geelong: Deakin University (1996).

20. Hudspith, R., Broadening the Scope of Engineering Ethics: From Micro-Ethics to Macro-Ethics. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 11, 4-5, 208-211 (1991).

21. National Society of Professional Engineers, Opinions of the Board of Ethical Review, 4. Washington DC: National Society of Professional Engineers (1976).