工程决策的伦理规约研究
|
摘要
工程活动的蓬勃发展在促进社会经济快速增长的同时也带来了巨大的负面影响。从伦理角度对工程决策活动进行引导和规范,不仅可以有效防范和减弱工程活动的负面影响,也有利于工程活动正向功能的扩展和加强。因此,探讨工程决策的伦理规约的理论问题,分析工程决策的伦理规约面临的困境,探寻工程决策的伦理规约的实现途径既可以丰富工程伦理学的理论体系,也可以更好地指导现实的工程决策活动。
通过绘制有关工程伦理和工程决策中伦理研究的知识图谱,揭示了工程伦理相关的代表人物和研究领域,形象地显示了工程伦理的前沿状况,展现了工程伦理研究的发展态势：工程决策中的伦理问题即将成为工程伦理领域新的学科生长点,目前对该问题的研究还停留在提出和概述层面,因而,有其研究的必然性和必要性。
分析工程决策及伦理规约的内涵,阐释和探寻工程决策的伦理规约的概念、特征、依据、可能与结构,进而实现工程决策的伦理规约的理论建构是进行现实分析的理论前提和基础。工程决策的伦理价值负荷为工程决策的伦理规约提供了内在依据,工程决策所具有的社会性,则形成了其外部保障。工程伦理及工程决策中的伦理前沿及热点演进的分析为该研究指明了方向,工程决策实践对伦理规约的呼唤为工程决策的伦理规约提供了现实基础,相关学科的发展和已有规约思想的积淀使该研究有了理论可能。依据工程及工程决策活动内在的伦理诉求,可以从六个维度出发,制定相应的科学性、人本性、责任性、功利性、公正性、生态性原则来指导和规约现实的工程决策活动。
对工程决策进行伦理规约既有必要性,也有可能性,但同时也面临着种种困境。其困境主要源于三个方面：工程技术自身风险给伦理规约带来的困境——“科林格里奇困境”；因工程决策主体道德素质、伦理意识的缺乏以及主体多元化所导致的主体伦理困境；因制度、程序伦理的缺失及其社会大环境的道德滑坡导致的外部伦理境域缺失困境。工程技术本身无法确定的风险性导致了“科林格里奇困境”的出现,而工程决策中自律以及他律机制的缺失是导致伦理规约陷入其他困境的最根本原因。
尽管在工程决策的伦理规约中存在着种种困境,但并不意味着人在这些困境面前无能为力。在工程决策的伦理规约基本原则的指导下,对于来自工程自身不确定的风险性所导致的“科林格里奇困境”,在决策中可以通过预防原则的确立来消解；针对自律缺失所导致的主体伦理困境,可以通过构建旨在提高工程决策主体自律能力的道德调控机制来消解；工程决策制度伦理、程序伦理的实现以及相关调控机制的构建则可以有效地改善工程决策的外部伦理境域,从而实现对工程决策的伦理规约。
The modern engineering activity greatly promoted the development of human society and economy, and at the same time, brought about a remarkable negative impact. A research on the process of engineering decision-making from the ethical perspective may not only efficiently prevent or weaken the negative impact, but also enlarge or strengthen the positive aspect. This research will examine the ethical theory on the engineering decision-making, analyze its ethical dilemma, and explore a feasible way for realizing the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making. Its outcome may enrich the theoretical system of engineering ethics and provide a better guidance to the actual engineering decision-making.
Through picturing the map concerning the investigation in the engineering ethics and engineering decision-making, this research shows the representative academic figures, as well as the research area, related to engineering ethics, exhibits the cutting-edge achievement in the study of engineering ethics, and indicates the current development in this field. The ethical issue in the engineering decision-making is going to be a key topic to stimulate the engineering ethics as whole for its further development. The study has its inevitability and necessity.
It is the theoretical condition for the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making to analyze the content of the engineering decision-making and its ethical stipulation, explore and elucidate the relevant conception, trait, ground, possibility and structure, and thereby complete the theoretical construction of the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making. The ethical value in the engineering decision-making itself provides the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making with an internal reason, while the social dimension of the engineering decision-making forms its external assurance. The request for the ethical stipulation from the practice of engineering decision-making itself is the foundation for the ethical stipulation. The analysis on the cutting-edge issues in the engineering ethics and in the engineering decision-making indicates the correct direction for the research on the stipulation. The development in the related fields and the accumulation of the given thoughts on the stipulation make it possible to start the present research.
The ethical stipulation for the engineering decision-making is necessary, possible, and difficult. This difficulty mainly comes from the following three sources. The first, the "Collingridge dilemma" caused by the uncertainty of the project risk; the second, the difficulty to control the engineering agent caused by the short of the ethical consciousness of the subject and by the diversification and ambiguity of the ethical responsibilities; and the third, the difficulty from the external ethical context caused by the decline and degeneration of morality in the social environment.
It is not impossible to deal with these difficulties. The difficulty from the uncertain risks can be reduced by establishing the precautionary principles in the engineering decision-making. The difficulty regarding the engineering agent can be reduced by constructing a moral mechanism aiming to improve the self-disciple of the agent. Finally, the difficulty regarding the external context can be reduced by promoting the institutional ethics of engineering decision-making and the ethics of procedures and constructing related control mechanism. All of the above measures will help to regulate engineering decision-making from ethical perspective.
通过绘制有关工程伦理和工程决策中伦理研究的知识图谱,揭示了工程伦理相关的代表人物和研究领域,形象地显示了工程伦理的前沿状况,展现了工程伦理研究的发展态势：工程决策中的伦理问题即将成为工程伦理领域新的学科生长点,目前对该问题的研究还停留在提出和概述层面,因而,有其研究的必然性和必要性。
分析工程决策及伦理规约的内涵,阐释和探寻工程决策的伦理规约的概念、特征、依据、可能与结构,进而实现工程决策的伦理规约的理论建构是进行现实分析的理论前提和基础。工程决策的伦理价值负荷为工程决策的伦理规约提供了内在依据,工程决策所具有的社会性,则形成了其外部保障。工程伦理及工程决策中的伦理前沿及热点演进的分析为该研究指明了方向,工程决策实践对伦理规约的呼唤为工程决策的伦理规约提供了现实基础,相关学科的发展和已有规约思想的积淀使该研究有了理论可能。依据工程及工程决策活动内在的伦理诉求,可以从六个维度出发,制定相应的科学性、人本性、责任性、功利性、公正性、生态性原则来指导和规约现实的工程决策活动。
对工程决策进行伦理规约既有必要性,也有可能性,但同时也面临着种种困境。其困境主要源于三个方面：工程技术自身风险给伦理规约带来的困境——“科林格里奇困境”；因工程决策主体道德素质、伦理意识的缺乏以及主体多元化所导致的主体伦理困境；因制度、程序伦理的缺失及其社会大环境的道德滑坡导致的外部伦理境域缺失困境。工程技术本身无法确定的风险性导致了“科林格里奇困境”的出现,而工程决策中自律以及他律机制的缺失是导致伦理规约陷入其他困境的最根本原因。
尽管在工程决策的伦理规约中存在着种种困境,但并不意味着人在这些困境面前无能为力。在工程决策的伦理规约基本原则的指导下,对于来自工程自身不确定的风险性所导致的“科林格里奇困境”,在决策中可以通过预防原则的确立来消解；针对自律缺失所导致的主体伦理困境,可以通过构建旨在提高工程决策主体自律能力的道德调控机制来消解；工程决策制度伦理、程序伦理的实现以及相关调控机制的构建则可以有效地改善工程决策的外部伦理境域,从而实现对工程决策的伦理规约。
The modern engineering activity greatly promoted the development of human society and economy, and at the same time, brought about a remarkable negative impact. A research on the process of engineering decision-making from the ethical perspective may not only efficiently prevent or weaken the negative impact, but also enlarge or strengthen the positive aspect. This research will examine the ethical theory on the engineering decision-making, analyze its ethical dilemma, and explore a feasible way for realizing the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making. Its outcome may enrich the theoretical system of engineering ethics and provide a better guidance to the actual engineering decision-making.
Through picturing the map concerning the investigation in the engineering ethics and engineering decision-making, this research shows the representative academic figures, as well as the research area, related to engineering ethics, exhibits the cutting-edge achievement in the study of engineering ethics, and indicates the current development in this field. The ethical issue in the engineering decision-making is going to be a key topic to stimulate the engineering ethics as whole for its further development. The study has its inevitability and necessity.
It is the theoretical condition for the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making to analyze the content of the engineering decision-making and its ethical stipulation, explore and elucidate the relevant conception, trait, ground, possibility and structure, and thereby complete the theoretical construction of the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making. The ethical value in the engineering decision-making itself provides the ethical stipulation on the engineering decision-making with an internal reason, while the social dimension of the engineering decision-making forms its external assurance. The request for the ethical stipulation from the practice of engineering decision-making itself is the foundation for the ethical stipulation. The analysis on the cutting-edge issues in the engineering ethics and in the engineering decision-making indicates the correct direction for the research on the stipulation. The development in the related fields and the accumulation of the given thoughts on the stipulation make it possible to start the present research.
The ethical stipulation for the engineering decision-making is necessary, possible, and difficult. This difficulty mainly comes from the following three sources. The first, the "Collingridge dilemma" caused by the uncertainty of the project risk; the second, the difficulty to control the engineering agent caused by the short of the ethical consciousness of the subject and by the diversification and ambiguity of the ethical responsibilities; and the third, the difficulty from the external ethical context caused by the decline and degeneration of morality in the social environment.
It is not impossible to deal with these difficulties. The difficulty from the uncertain risks can be reduced by establishing the precautionary principles in the engineering decision-making. The difficulty regarding the engineering agent can be reduced by constructing a moral mechanism aiming to improve the self-disciple of the agent. Finally, the difficulty regarding the external context can be reduced by promoting the institutional ethics of engineering decision-making and the ethics of procedures and constructing related control mechanism. All of the above measures will help to regulate engineering decision-making from ethical perspective.
引文
[1]顾秉林.中国高等工程教育的改革与发展[J].高等工程教育研究,2004,(5)：5.
[2]郭文.工程伦理建设与和谐社会的构建[J].中国石油大学学报(社会科学版),2007,23(4)：26-29.
[3]刘洪.工程举报问题研究[D].杭州：浙江大学,2007.
[4](美)维西林,冈恩著,吴晓东译.工程、伦理与环境[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2003.
[5]李伯聪.工程伦理学的若干理论问题——兼论为“实践伦理学”正名[J].哲学研究,2006,(4)：95-100.
[6]程新宇.工程决策中的伦理问题及其对策[J].道德与文明,2007：80-84.
[7]李伯聪.关于工程伦理学的对象和范围的几个问题——三谈关于工程伦理学的若干问题[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：24-30.
[8](美)卡尔·米切姆著,殷登祥等译.技术哲学概论[M].天津：天津科学技术出版社,1999.
[9]曲格平指出：三门峡工程是决策上的重大失误[EB/OL]. http://www. people.com.cn/GB/ huanbao/1072/2298088.html.
[10]李世新.工程伦理学研究的两个进路[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：31-35.
[11]朱葆伟.工程活动的伦理问题[J].哲学动态,2006,(9)：37-45.
[12]李伯聪.工程伦理的学科性质和特征.第二届全国科学技术与工程伦理学术研讨会[C].昆明：昆明理工大学,2009.
[13]Herkert JR. Ways of thinking about and teaching ethical problem solving:Microethics and macroethics in engineering[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,2005,11(3):373-385.
[14]丛杭青.工程伦理学的现状和展望[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4)：76-81.
[15]李伯聪.工程活动不能缺失伦理维度[EB/OL].http://news.sciencenet.cn/html/showsb newsl.aspx?id=183142.
[16]陈凡.工程设计的伦理意蕴[J].伦理学研究,2005,(6)：84-86.
[17]王一多.工程质量问题的道德思考[J].西南民族学院学报(哲学社科版),2000,(1)：53-56.
[18]程光旭,刘飞清.现代工程与工程伦理观[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(6)：78-85.
[19]王国豫,胡比希,刘则渊.社会-技术系统框架下的技术伦理学[J].哲学研究,2007,(6)：78-85.
[20]刘则渊,王国豫.技术伦理与工程师的职业伦理[J].哲学研究,2007,(11)：75-78.
[21]张恒力,胡新和.问题与建制——中国工程伦理学述评[EB/OL].http://hps.phil.pku. edu.cn/ viewarticle.php?sid=2417.
[22]肖峰.从元伦理看技术的责任与代价[J].哲学动态,2006,(9)：45-51.
[23]曹南燕.科学家和工程师的伦理责任[J].哲学研究,2000,(1)：45-51.
[24]龙翔.工程师伦理责任的历史演进[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(12)：64-68.
[25]张恒力,胡新和.工程师伦理问题研究[D].北京：中国科学院研究生院,2008.
[26]朱法贞.工程伦理视野中的政府角色——中国工程伦理建构的一个重要维度.中国第一届工程伦理会议论文集[C],2007.
[27]李伯聪.工程与伦理的互渗与对话——再谈关于工程伦理学的若干问题[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4)：71-75.
[28]安维复.工程决策：一个值得关注的哲学问题[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,23(8)：51-55.
[29]唐丽.工程伦理决策策略分析[J].中国科技论坛,2006,(6)：95-98.
[30]李伯聪.绝对命令伦理学和协调伦理学——四谈工程伦理学[J].伦理学研究,2008,(5)：42-48.
[31]许淑萍.决策伦理学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005.
[32]汤剑波,杨通进.崛起与建构——国内工程伦理学研究现状述[J].道德与文明,2007,(5)：76-78.
[33]张端明,何敏华.迎接我国工程伦理学的春天——《工程伦理：概念和案例》读后感[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(3)：124.
[34]Martin M, Schinzinger R. Ethics in Engineering[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill,2005.
[35]张恒力,胡新和.福祉与责任——美国工程伦理学述评[J].哲学动态,2007,(8)：58-62.
[36]杨建科,王宏波.从工程社会学的视角看工程决策的双重逻辑[J].自然辩证法研究,2009,25(1)：76-80.
[37]陈昌曙.陈昌曙技术哲学文集[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2002.
[38]李世新.工程伦理学与技术伦理学辨析[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,23(3)：49-53.
[39]李伯聪.略谈工程和工程实践[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(7)：1-2.
[40]马丁著,张恒力译.美国工程伦理学[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,(3)：106-109.
[41]Ethics in engineering[EB/OL].http://www.google.cn/search?sourceid=navc lient&hl =zh-CN&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4CULB_zh-CNCN354CN355&q=Ethics+in+engineering.
[42]Martin MW. Personal meaning and ethics in engineering[J]. Science And Engineering Ethics, 2002,8(4):545-560.
[43]Martin MW. Moral creativity in science and engineering[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2006,12(3):421-433.
[44]Engineering Ethics Cases & concepts[EB/OL]. http://scholar.google.cn/scho lar?hl=zh-CN&q =+engineering+ethics+case++concepts+&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0.
[45]Harris CE, Rabins MJ. The good engineer:Giving virtue its due in engineering ethics[J]. Science And Engineering Ethics,2008,14(2):153-164.
[46]Biography of Michael Davis[EB/OL]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Davis_(philo sopher).
[47]Thinking like an engineer [EB/OL]. http://scholar.google.cn/scholar?hl=zh-CN&q=thinking++ like+an+engineer+&btnG=%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0.
[48]Biography of C whitbeck[EB/OL]. http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/15917.aspx.
[49]Ethics in engineering Practice and Research [EB/OL]. http://www.google.cn/search?sourceid =navclient&hl=zh-CN&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4CULB_zh-CNCN354CN355&q=Ethics+in+ Engineering+Practice+and+Research.
[50]Sadler T, Zeidler D. Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making[J], Journal of Research in Science Teaching,2005,42(1):112-138.
[51]Means M, Voss J. Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels[J]. Cognition and Instruction,1996,14(2): 139-178.
[52]Gelder TV. Learning to Reason:a Reasonable Approach. The Fifth Australasian Cognitive Science Society Conference[C]. Adelaide,2000.
[53]Perkins D. Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology,1985,77(5):562-571.
[54]Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic inquiry[M]. Beverly Hills:Sage Publications,1985.
[55]自然式探究评价模式[J].中学生物学,2005,(4)：31.
[56]Self D, Ellison E. Teaching engineering ethics:assessment of its influence on moral reasoning skills [J]. Jorual of Engineering Education,1998, (87):29-34.
[57]Murphy W. The Ethics of Engineering Supplies[J]. Industrial And Engineering Chemistry, 1955,47(10):65.
[58]刘则渊,王贤文.生态经济学研究前沿及其演进的可视化分析[J].西南林学院学报,2008,28(4)：3-11.
[59]Martin M, Schinzinger R. Ethics in engineering[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill 1996.
[60]Driver R, Newtone P. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms[J]. Science Education,2000, (84):287-312.
[61]Singer M, Mitchell S. Consideration of moral intensity in ethicality judgements:Its relationship with whistle-blowing and need-for-cognition[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 1998,17(5):527-541.
[62]Horngren C, Foster G, Datar S. Cost Accounting:A Managerial Perspective[M]. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,1991.
[63]Harrison P, Harrell A. Impact of"adverse selection"on managers'project evaluation decisions[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1993:635-643.
[64]Mccabe DL. Classroom cheating among natural science and engineering majors[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,1997, (3):433-445.
[65]Jones T. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations:An issue-contingent model[J]. The Academy of Management Review,1991,16(2):366-395.
[66]Frey B. The impact of moral intensity on decision making in a business context [J]. Journal of Business Ethics,2000,26(3):181-195.
[67]Science & Technology:engineering[EB/OL]. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9105842/ engineering.
[68]于光远等.自然辩证法百科全书[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1994.
[69]刘则渊.论科学技术与发展[M].大连：大连理工大学出版社,1997.
[70]李伯聪.工程哲学引论[M].郑州：大象出版社,2002.
[71]殷瑞钰,汪应洛,李伯聪.工程哲学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2007.
[72]董雪林,王健.工程活动中的伦理责任划分.In：陈凡,陈红兵,田鹏颖(eds).技术与哲学研究(第四卷)沈阳：东北大学出版社,2007：55-60.
[73]赫伯特·西蒙.管理决策新科学[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1985.
[74]梁军.刍论工程运行伦理[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(10)：36-40.
[75]朱葆伟.工程活动的伦理责任[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：40-41.
[76]王健.现代技术伦理规约[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2007.
[77]陈翔.伦理决策理论的时空背景及哲学底蕴[J].求实,2008,(7)：25-28.
[78]邹成效.论善对技术之真的前置性规约[J].哲学研究,2006,(6)：90-93.
[79]王健.现代技术伦理规约的特性[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,22(11)：54-57.
[80]M.克兰兹贝格.技术与历史：“克兰兹贝格定律”.In：中国社会科学哲学研究所自然辩证法研究室编(ed).国外自然科学哲学问题.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1991：191-200.
[81]张秀华.工程价值及其评价[J].哲学动态,2006,(12)：42-47.
[82]成中英.面对文明社会：伦理、管理和治理[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2007,27(4)：1-5.
[83]王前.技术现代化的文化制约[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2002.
[84]谢放.中国铁路之父—詹天佑[M].广州：广东人民出版社,2008.[85]王前.中国科技伦理史纲[M].北京：人民出版社,2006.
[86]杨马林.三峡工程：决策科学化民主化的典范[J].决策与信息2005,(2)：72-75.
[87]刘荣魁.落实科学发展观 提高决策科学性[EB/OL].http://theory.people.com.cn /GB/40537/9163592.html.
[88]崔克亮.何以破解山西矿难“死结”[N].中国经济时报,2009-02-24.
[89]陈朝氽.论生物技术伦理原则[J].科技进步与对策,2006,(8)：133-135.
[90]Fromm E. The Revolution of Hope:Toard aHumanized Technology[M]. New York:Harper &Row, 1968.
[91]高亮华.希望的革命——弗洛姆论技术的人道化[J].自然辩证法研究,1997,13(2)：12-15.
[92]孙君恒,许玲.责任的伦理意蕴[J].哲学动态,2004,(9)：18-21.
[93]Friedrich HA. Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics [M]. New York:Simon and Schuster,1967.
[94]特里·库伯著,张秀琴译.行政伦理学：实现行政责任的途径[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[95]张华夏.现代科学与伦理世界：道德哲学的探索和反思[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,1999.
[96]任者春.公正：当代伦理的精神指向[J].山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2004,49(4)：61-64.
[97]周辅成.西方伦理学名著选辑：上卷[M].北京：商务印书馆,1996.
[98]何怀宏.良心与正义的探求[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版,2004.
[99]Layton ET. A Historical Definition of Engineering. In:Durbin P (ed). Critical Perspectives on nonacademic Science and Engineering..Bethlehm:Lehigh University Press,1991:60-79.
[100](美)巴里·康芒纳.封闭的循环[M].长春：吉林出版社,1997.
[101]余谋昌.高科技挑战道德[M].天津：天津科学技术出版社,2001.
[102]王健,王秋菊.现代技术伦理原则间的冲突与整合[J].社会科学辑刊,2007,(6)：48-52.
[103]毋以小利忘大义——四论工程质量安全问题[EB/OL].http://www.chinajsb.cn/gb/content /2009-10/16/content_289220. htm.
[104]Rawls J. A Theory on Justice[M]. Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1971.
[105]陈国阶.三峡工程对生态与环境的影响及对策研究[M].北京：科学出版社,1995.
[106](美)杰里米·里夫金.生物技术世纪[M].上海：上海科学教育出社,2000.
[107]戴艳军.科技管理伦理导论[M].北京：人民出版社,2005.
[108]包尔生.伦理学体系[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1988.
[109]肖峰.论工程善及其实现方式的选择[J].哲学研究,2007,(4)：89-96.
[110]丛杭青,潘磊.工程中利益冲突问题研究[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：42-46.
[111]李伯聪.工程决策的伦理研究.中国哲学年鉴,2007.
[112]Collinggridge D. Critical Decision Making[M]. New York:St. Martin Press,1980.
[113]专家称转基因大米最迟5年上老百姓餐桌[EB/OL].http://mnc.people.com.cn/GB/11202334. html.2010.
[114]Augustine N. Ethics and the Second Law of Thermo dynamics [EB/OL]. http://www.nae.edu/nae/ bridgecom.nsf/weblinks/MKEZ-5F7RAU?OpenDocument.
[115]Harris CE. Engineering Ethics:Concepts and Cases[M]. Belmont:Thomson/Wadsworth,2005.
[116]Janis I. Groupthink[M]. Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1982.
[117]肖峰.略论科技元伦理学[J].科学技术与辩证法,2006,(5)：9-13.
[118]杨龙.西方新政治经济学的政治观[M].天津：天津人民出版社,2004.
[119]唐为中,郁琳琳. “单一”到“多元”——关于公共决策主体变迁的逻辑分析[J].理论界,2007,(12)：118-119.
[120]Davis M. Engineering Ethics, Individuals, and Organizations [J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,2006, (12):223-231.
[121]Whitbeck C. Investigating Professional Responsibility[J]. Techne,2004,8(1):89.
[122]倪愫襄.制度伦理研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2008.
[123]韩跃红.程序重于实体——工程决策伦理的伦理思考.第二届全国科学技术与工程伦理学术研讨会[C].昆明：昆明理工大学,2009.
[124]石亚军.实现政府科学决策机制的根本转变[J].中国行政管理,2006,256(10)：10-13.
[125]张恒力,胡新和.工程伦理学的路径选择[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(9)：46-50.
[126]张晓刚.工程建设成权钱浸染高发点,中国重拳治理工程腐败[EB/OL]. http://news.china.com/ zh_cn/domestic/945/20090824/15611837.html.
[127]王前,刘文宇.现代技术伦理的“知行合一”问题[J].东北大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(1)：5-9.
[128]Fan L. Decision-making models for handling ethical dilemmas[J]. Municipal Engineer, 2003,156(4):229-234.
[129]Carolyn R, Joel TA. Introduction:To Foresee And To Forestall. In:Carolyn R (ed). Protecting Public Health and the Environment. Washington:Island Press,1999.
[130]杨通进.预防原则：制定转基因技术政策的伦理原则[J].南京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,(1)：8-14.
[131]安东尼·吉登斯.失控的世界[M].南昌：江西人民出版社,2001.
[132]徐魁峰.道德调控的弱化与自律能力的培养[J].社科纵横,2007,22(7)：45-46.
[133]Bird F, Gandz J. Good management:Business ethics in action[M]. Scarborough:Prentice-Hall Canada,1991.
[134](苏)雅科布松.情感心理学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1988.
[135]陈万求.试论工程良心[J].科学技术与辩证法,2005,22(6)：74-76.
[136]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集：第6卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1961.
[137]龚天平.走向卓越——论现代管理伦理及实现[D].长沙：湖南师范大学,2003.
[138]唐凯麟.伦理学[M].北京：高等教育出版杜,2001.
[139](德)黑格尔.小逻辑[M].北京：商务印书馆,1980.
[140]聂全高.论道德意志的自我培养[J].合肥师范学院学报,2009,27(5)：52-54.
[141]张峰.政府决策失误与责任追究[J].理论导刊,2007,(5)：51-53.
[142]弗里德利希·哈耶克著,邓正来译.自由秩序原理[M].北京：三联书店2003.
[143]王前. “道”“技”之间——中国文化背景的技术哲学[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[144]郭金鸿.道德责任论[M].北京：人民出版社,2008.
[145](美)道格拉斯·诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].上海：上海三联书店,2008.
[146](美)道格拉斯·诺思.经济史上的结构和变革[M].北京：商务印书馆,1999.
[147]何颖.论制度伦理的功能与局限[J].中国行政管理,2007,(8)：66-70.
[148]安东尼·吉登斯.社会的构成[M].北京：三联书店,1998.
[149]鲁鹏.制度与发展关系研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2002.
[150]彭定光.论制度设计伦理[J].道德与文明,2007,(2)：19-22.
[151]约翰·罗尔斯著,何怀宏译.正义论[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[152]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集：第3卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1960.
[153]曹刚.关于企业伦理委员会的伦理学思考[J].湖南社会科学,2008,(6)：43-46.
[2]郭文.工程伦理建设与和谐社会的构建[J].中国石油大学学报(社会科学版),2007,23(4)：26-29.
[3]刘洪.工程举报问题研究[D].杭州：浙江大学,2007.
[4](美)维西林,冈恩著,吴晓东译.工程、伦理与环境[M].北京：清华大学出版社,2003.
[5]李伯聪.工程伦理学的若干理论问题——兼论为“实践伦理学”正名[J].哲学研究,2006,(4)：95-100.
[6]程新宇.工程决策中的伦理问题及其对策[J].道德与文明,2007：80-84.
[7]李伯聪.关于工程伦理学的对象和范围的几个问题——三谈关于工程伦理学的若干问题[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：24-30.
[8](美)卡尔·米切姆著,殷登祥等译.技术哲学概论[M].天津：天津科学技术出版社,1999.
[9]曲格平指出：三门峡工程是决策上的重大失误[EB/OL]. http://www. people.com.cn/GB/ huanbao/1072/2298088.html.
[10]李世新.工程伦理学研究的两个进路[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：31-35.
[11]朱葆伟.工程活动的伦理问题[J].哲学动态,2006,(9)：37-45.
[12]李伯聪.工程伦理的学科性质和特征.第二届全国科学技术与工程伦理学术研讨会[C].昆明：昆明理工大学,2009.
[13]Herkert JR. Ways of thinking about and teaching ethical problem solving:Microethics and macroethics in engineering[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,2005,11(3):373-385.
[14]丛杭青.工程伦理学的现状和展望[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4)：76-81.
[15]李伯聪.工程活动不能缺失伦理维度[EB/OL].http://news.sciencenet.cn/html/showsb newsl.aspx?id=183142.
[16]陈凡.工程设计的伦理意蕴[J].伦理学研究,2005,(6)：84-86.
[17]王一多.工程质量问题的道德思考[J].西南民族学院学报(哲学社科版),2000,(1)：53-56.
[18]程光旭,刘飞清.现代工程与工程伦理观[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(6)：78-85.
[19]王国豫,胡比希,刘则渊.社会-技术系统框架下的技术伦理学[J].哲学研究,2007,(6)：78-85.
[20]刘则渊,王国豫.技术伦理与工程师的职业伦理[J].哲学研究,2007,(11)：75-78.
[21]张恒力,胡新和.问题与建制——中国工程伦理学述评[EB/OL].http://hps.phil.pku. edu.cn/ viewarticle.php?sid=2417.
[22]肖峰.从元伦理看技术的责任与代价[J].哲学动态,2006,(9)：45-51.
[23]曹南燕.科学家和工程师的伦理责任[J].哲学研究,2000,(1)：45-51.
[24]龙翔.工程师伦理责任的历史演进[J].自然辩证法研究,2006,(12)：64-68.
[25]张恒力,胡新和.工程师伦理问题研究[D].北京：中国科学院研究生院,2008.
[26]朱法贞.工程伦理视野中的政府角色——中国工程伦理建构的一个重要维度.中国第一届工程伦理会议论文集[C],2007.
[27]李伯聪.工程与伦理的互渗与对话——再谈关于工程伦理学的若干问题[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(4)：71-75.
[28]安维复.工程决策：一个值得关注的哲学问题[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,23(8)：51-55.
[29]唐丽.工程伦理决策策略分析[J].中国科技论坛,2006,(6)：95-98.
[30]李伯聪.绝对命令伦理学和协调伦理学——四谈工程伦理学[J].伦理学研究,2008,(5)：42-48.
[31]许淑萍.决策伦理学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,2005.
[32]汤剑波,杨通进.崛起与建构——国内工程伦理学研究现状述[J].道德与文明,2007,(5)：76-78.
[33]张端明,何敏华.迎接我国工程伦理学的春天——《工程伦理：概念和案例》读后感[J].华中科技大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(3)：124.
[34]Martin M, Schinzinger R. Ethics in Engineering[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill,2005.
[35]张恒力,胡新和.福祉与责任——美国工程伦理学述评[J].哲学动态,2007,(8)：58-62.
[36]杨建科,王宏波.从工程社会学的视角看工程决策的双重逻辑[J].自然辩证法研究,2009,25(1)：76-80.
[37]陈昌曙.陈昌曙技术哲学文集[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2002.
[38]李世新.工程伦理学与技术伦理学辨析[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,23(3)：49-53.
[39]李伯聪.略谈工程和工程实践[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(7)：1-2.
[40]马丁著,张恒力译.美国工程伦理学[J].自然辩证法通讯,2007,(3)：106-109.
[41]Ethics in engineering[EB/OL].http://www.google.cn/search?sourceid=navc lient&hl =zh-CN&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4CULB_zh-CNCN354CN355&q=Ethics+in+engineering.
[42]Martin MW. Personal meaning and ethics in engineering[J]. Science And Engineering Ethics, 2002,8(4):545-560.
[43]Martin MW. Moral creativity in science and engineering[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2006,12(3):421-433.
[44]Engineering Ethics Cases & concepts[EB/OL]. http://scholar.google.cn/scho lar?hl=zh-CN&q =+engineering+ethics+case++concepts+&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0.
[45]Harris CE, Rabins MJ. The good engineer:Giving virtue its due in engineering ethics[J]. Science And Engineering Ethics,2008,14(2):153-164.
[46]Biography of Michael Davis[EB/OL]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Davis_(philo sopher).
[47]Thinking like an engineer [EB/OL]. http://scholar.google.cn/scholar?hl=zh-CN&q=thinking++ like+an+engineer+&btnG=%E6%90%9C%E7%B4%A2&lr=&as_ylo=&as_vis=0.
[48]Biography of C whitbeck[EB/OL]. http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/15917.aspx.
[49]Ethics in engineering Practice and Research [EB/OL]. http://www.google.cn/search?sourceid =navclient&hl=zh-CN&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4CULB_zh-CNCN354CN355&q=Ethics+in+ Engineering+Practice+and+Research.
[50]Sadler T, Zeidler D. Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making[J], Journal of Research in Science Teaching,2005,42(1):112-138.
[51]Means M, Voss J. Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels[J]. Cognition and Instruction,1996,14(2): 139-178.
[52]Gelder TV. Learning to Reason:a Reasonable Approach. The Fifth Australasian Cognitive Science Society Conference[C]. Adelaide,2000.
[53]Perkins D. Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning[J]. Journal of Educational Psychology,1985,77(5):562-571.
[54]Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic inquiry[M]. Beverly Hills:Sage Publications,1985.
[55]自然式探究评价模式[J].中学生物学,2005,(4)：31.
[56]Self D, Ellison E. Teaching engineering ethics:assessment of its influence on moral reasoning skills [J]. Jorual of Engineering Education,1998, (87):29-34.
[57]Murphy W. The Ethics of Engineering Supplies[J]. Industrial And Engineering Chemistry, 1955,47(10):65.
[58]刘则渊,王贤文.生态经济学研究前沿及其演进的可视化分析[J].西南林学院学报,2008,28(4)：3-11.
[59]Martin M, Schinzinger R. Ethics in engineering[M]. New York:McGraw-Hill 1996.
[60]Driver R, Newtone P. Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms[J]. Science Education,2000, (84):287-312.
[61]Singer M, Mitchell S. Consideration of moral intensity in ethicality judgements:Its relationship with whistle-blowing and need-for-cognition[J]. Journal of Business Ethics, 1998,17(5):527-541.
[62]Horngren C, Foster G, Datar S. Cost Accounting:A Managerial Perspective[M]. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,1991.
[63]Harrison P, Harrell A. Impact of"adverse selection"on managers'project evaluation decisions[J]. Academy of Management Journal,1993:635-643.
[64]Mccabe DL. Classroom cheating among natural science and engineering majors[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,1997, (3):433-445.
[65]Jones T. Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations:An issue-contingent model[J]. The Academy of Management Review,1991,16(2):366-395.
[66]Frey B. The impact of moral intensity on decision making in a business context [J]. Journal of Business Ethics,2000,26(3):181-195.
[67]Science & Technology:engineering[EB/OL]. http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9105842/ engineering.
[68]于光远等.自然辩证法百科全书[M].北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1994.
[69]刘则渊.论科学技术与发展[M].大连：大连理工大学出版社,1997.
[70]李伯聪.工程哲学引论[M].郑州：大象出版社,2002.
[71]殷瑞钰,汪应洛,李伯聪.工程哲学[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2007.
[72]董雪林,王健.工程活动中的伦理责任划分.In：陈凡,陈红兵,田鹏颖(eds).技术与哲学研究(第四卷)沈阳：东北大学出版社,2007：55-60.
[73]赫伯特·西蒙.管理决策新科学[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1985.
[74]梁军.刍论工程运行伦理[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(10)：36-40.
[75]朱葆伟.工程活动的伦理责任[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：40-41.
[76]王健.现代技术伦理规约[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2007.
[77]陈翔.伦理决策理论的时空背景及哲学底蕴[J].求实,2008,(7)：25-28.
[78]邹成效.论善对技术之真的前置性规约[J].哲学研究,2006,(6)：90-93.
[79]王健.现代技术伦理规约的特性[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,22(11)：54-57.
[80]M.克兰兹贝格.技术与历史：“克兰兹贝格定律”.In：中国社会科学哲学研究所自然辩证法研究室编(ed).国外自然科学哲学问题.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1991：191-200.
[81]张秀华.工程价值及其评价[J].哲学动态,2006,(12)：42-47.
[82]成中英.面对文明社会：伦理、管理和治理[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2007,27(4)：1-5.
[83]王前.技术现代化的文化制约[M].沈阳：东北大学出版社,2002.
[84]谢放.中国铁路之父—詹天佑[M].广州：广东人民出版社,2008.[85]王前.中国科技伦理史纲[M].北京：人民出版社,2006.
[86]杨马林.三峡工程：决策科学化民主化的典范[J].决策与信息2005,(2)：72-75.
[87]刘荣魁.落实科学发展观 提高决策科学性[EB/OL].http://theory.people.com.cn /GB/40537/9163592.html.
[88]崔克亮.何以破解山西矿难“死结”[N].中国经济时报,2009-02-24.
[89]陈朝氽.论生物技术伦理原则[J].科技进步与对策,2006,(8)：133-135.
[90]Fromm E. The Revolution of Hope:Toard aHumanized Technology[M]. New York:Harper &Row, 1968.
[91]高亮华.希望的革命——弗洛姆论技术的人道化[J].自然辩证法研究,1997,13(2)：12-15.
[92]孙君恒,许玲.责任的伦理意蕴[J].哲学动态,2004,(9)：18-21.
[93]Friedrich HA. Studies in Philosophy, Politics and Economics [M]. New York:Simon and Schuster,1967.
[94]特里·库伯著,张秀琴译.行政伦理学：实现行政责任的途径[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2001.
[95]张华夏.现代科学与伦理世界：道德哲学的探索和反思[M].长沙：湖南教育出版社,1999.
[96]任者春.公正：当代伦理的精神指向[J].山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2004,49(4)：61-64.
[97]周辅成.西方伦理学名著选辑：上卷[M].北京：商务印书馆,1996.
[98]何怀宏.良心与正义的探求[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版,2004.
[99]Layton ET. A Historical Definition of Engineering. In:Durbin P (ed). Critical Perspectives on nonacademic Science and Engineering..Bethlehm:Lehigh University Press,1991:60-79.
[100](美)巴里·康芒纳.封闭的循环[M].长春：吉林出版社,1997.
[101]余谋昌.高科技挑战道德[M].天津：天津科学技术出版社,2001.
[102]王健,王秋菊.现代技术伦理原则间的冲突与整合[J].社会科学辑刊,2007,(6)：48-52.
[103]毋以小利忘大义——四论工程质量安全问题[EB/OL].http://www.chinajsb.cn/gb/content /2009-10/16/content_289220. htm.
[104]Rawls J. A Theory on Justice[M]. Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1971.
[105]陈国阶.三峡工程对生态与环境的影响及对策研究[M].北京：科学出版社,1995.
[106](美)杰里米·里夫金.生物技术世纪[M].上海：上海科学教育出社,2000.
[107]戴艳军.科技管理伦理导论[M].北京：人民出版社,2005.
[108]包尔生.伦理学体系[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1988.
[109]肖峰.论工程善及其实现方式的选择[J].哲学研究,2007,(4)：89-96.
[110]丛杭青,潘磊.工程中利益冲突问题研究[J].伦理学研究,2006,(6)：42-46.
[111]李伯聪.工程决策的伦理研究.中国哲学年鉴,2007.
[112]Collinggridge D. Critical Decision Making[M]. New York:St. Martin Press,1980.
[113]专家称转基因大米最迟5年上老百姓餐桌[EB/OL].http://mnc.people.com.cn/GB/11202334. html.2010.
[114]Augustine N. Ethics and the Second Law of Thermo dynamics [EB/OL]. http://www.nae.edu/nae/ bridgecom.nsf/weblinks/MKEZ-5F7RAU?OpenDocument.
[115]Harris CE. Engineering Ethics:Concepts and Cases[M]. Belmont:Thomson/Wadsworth,2005.
[116]Janis I. Groupthink[M]. Boston:Houghton Mifflin,1982.
[117]肖峰.略论科技元伦理学[J].科学技术与辩证法,2006,(5)：9-13.
[118]杨龙.西方新政治经济学的政治观[M].天津：天津人民出版社,2004.
[119]唐为中,郁琳琳. “单一”到“多元”——关于公共决策主体变迁的逻辑分析[J].理论界,2007,(12)：118-119.
[120]Davis M. Engineering Ethics, Individuals, and Organizations [J]. Science and Engineering Ethics,2006, (12):223-231.
[121]Whitbeck C. Investigating Professional Responsibility[J]. Techne,2004,8(1):89.
[122]倪愫襄.制度伦理研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2008.
[123]韩跃红.程序重于实体——工程决策伦理的伦理思考.第二届全国科学技术与工程伦理学术研讨会[C].昆明：昆明理工大学,2009.
[124]石亚军.实现政府科学决策机制的根本转变[J].中国行政管理,2006,256(10)：10-13.
[125]张恒力,胡新和.工程伦理学的路径选择[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(9)：46-50.
[126]张晓刚.工程建设成权钱浸染高发点,中国重拳治理工程腐败[EB/OL]. http://news.china.com/ zh_cn/domestic/945/20090824/15611837.html.
[127]王前,刘文宇.现代技术伦理的“知行合一”问题[J].东北大学学报(社会科学版),2006,(1)：5-9.
[128]Fan L. Decision-making models for handling ethical dilemmas[J]. Municipal Engineer, 2003,156(4):229-234.
[129]Carolyn R, Joel TA. Introduction:To Foresee And To Forestall. In:Carolyn R (ed). Protecting Public Health and the Environment. Washington:Island Press,1999.
[130]杨通进.预防原则：制定转基因技术政策的伦理原则[J].南京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,(1)：8-14.
[131]安东尼·吉登斯.失控的世界[M].南昌：江西人民出版社,2001.
[132]徐魁峰.道德调控的弱化与自律能力的培养[J].社科纵横,2007,22(7)：45-46.
[133]Bird F, Gandz J. Good management:Business ethics in action[M]. Scarborough:Prentice-Hall Canada,1991.
[134](苏)雅科布松.情感心理学[M].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1988.
[135]陈万求.试论工程良心[J].科学技术与辩证法,2005,22(6)：74-76.
[136]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集：第6卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1961.
[137]龚天平.走向卓越——论现代管理伦理及实现[D].长沙：湖南师范大学,2003.
[138]唐凯麟.伦理学[M].北京：高等教育出版杜,2001.
[139](德)黑格尔.小逻辑[M].北京：商务印书馆,1980.
[140]聂全高.论道德意志的自我培养[J].合肥师范学院学报,2009,27(5)：52-54.
[141]张峰.政府决策失误与责任追究[J].理论导刊,2007,(5)：51-53.
[142]弗里德利希·哈耶克著,邓正来译.自由秩序原理[M].北京：三联书店2003.
[143]王前. “道”“技”之间——中国文化背景的技术哲学[M].北京：人民出版社,2009.
[144]郭金鸿.道德责任论[M].北京：人民出版社,2008.
[145](美)道格拉斯·诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效[M].上海：上海三联书店,2008.
[146](美)道格拉斯·诺思.经济史上的结构和变革[M].北京：商务印书馆,1999.
[147]何颖.论制度伦理的功能与局限[J].中国行政管理,2007,(8)：66-70.
[148]安东尼·吉登斯.社会的构成[M].北京：三联书店,1998.
[149]鲁鹏.制度与发展关系研究[M].北京：人民出版社,2002.
[150]彭定光.论制度设计伦理[J].道德与文明,2007,(2)：19-22.
[151]约翰·罗尔斯著,何怀宏译.正义论[M].北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998.
[152]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集：第3卷[M].北京：人民出版社,1960.
[153]曹刚.关于企业伦理委员会的伦理学思考[J].湖南社会科学,2008,(6)：43-46.