【作者】 何放勋；

【导师】 刘献君；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 高等教育学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 工程活动是现代社会存在和发展的基础,它深刻地影响着人类生活的各个方面。而工程活动最重要的技术主体是工程师,随着工程师掌握科技知识的增多和干预自然、社会能力的增强,他们对工程活动的影响会越来越大,亦即他们对社会的影响也越来越大。为此,工程师的素质也愈来愈备受社会的关注。在工程师的素质当中,伦理责任素质居于核心地位,它能促进其他素质的生成,能引导工程师在工程实践中自觉把公众(社会)安全、健康和福祉放在首位,对工程利益相关者负责。从某种意义上讲,一个国家工程师的伦理责任素质如何,直接影响着该国工程建设的成败,从而影响着该国社会的发展与进步。基于此,旨在培养工程师伦理责任素质的工程师伦理责任教育在美国、德国等西方发达国家都引起了足够的重视,这些国家在为社会培养具有高素质(含伦理责任素质)的工程师的同时,产生了一批关于工程师伦理责任教育方面有影响的研究成果。而在我国,虽然近几年与世界各国相比,培养工程师的人数最多,但是,我们对工程师的伦理责任教育由于种种原因一直未得到应有的重视,且有关研究也凤毛麟角。这种状况已经严重影响和制约我国工程师的培养和社会现代化的进程,因此工程师伦理责任教育问题已成为我国工程教育中急需研究的课题。本研究首先从工程师职业切入,对过去一直模糊不清的、凸显工程师伦理责任教育特殊性的、影响制约工程师伦理责任教育的核心概念如伦理责任、工程师伦理责任、工程师伦理责任主体等作出明晰的分析性定义。工程师伦理责任不是从来就有的,它的出现及演变与科学技术的发展和社会的期待相关联,基于“完全理性”人的假设而追求工程利益“最大”或“最优”的伦理责任目标已不能适应现代工程科技发展以及社会期待的需要。事实上,人的理性是有限的,追求工程利益相关者“满意”才是工程师伦理责任新的诉求。新的诉求需要工程师伦理责任教育作出回应,即对工程师伦理责任教育的合理性作出论证。在这方面,现实基础和理论基础提供了最有力的理据。就现实基础而言,它既是社会发展的需要,也是工程师自身发展的需要;就理论基础而言,教育哲学、技术哲学、工程哲学以及应用伦理学的相关理论都是它的理论基础。工程是要讲功效的,当今绝大部分工程师也是功利论者。因此,工程师伦理责任教育应始于利益,要视工程活动的重要主体——工程师为目的,把培养工程师的伦理责任感作为我们教育的最终目标。也就是说,利益、主体(工程师)、责任感构成了我们教育的逻辑结构。工程固有的属性如开放性、动态性以及创造性决定了工程师伦理责任教育不能闭门造车,它必须在开放中谋求发展和创新。本研究通过与美国、德国等西方发达国家的比较分析,发现了我国现行工程师伦理责任教育与这些国家之间存在着差距;在对我国有代表性的高校和专业的调查中,发现了我国现行工程师伦理责任教育所存在的问题。这些差距与问题集中体现在:在宏观层面,国家政策导向不明确、不连续;在中观层面,工科类院校认识上有偏差,实践上有缺失;在微观层面,工程师(学生)缺乏伦理责任感,伦理抉择两极分化。产生问题的原因是由几对矛盾交织所致,即培养目标的“科学”化与“工程”化之间的矛盾、狭隘的学科教育设计与综合复杂的工程实践要求的矛盾、事实与价值的“分”与“合”的矛盾、意志强迫与自由的矛盾、责任个体与集体的矛盾。解决业已存在的矛盾和问题,培养具有国际竞争力的高素质(伦理责任素质)工程师队伍,需要我们立足国情,需要国家(包括社团、企业)、学校以及工程师(学生)三方面共同努力,去建构我国工程师伦理责任教育制度体系。本研究认为,该体系的内容应该包括:在宏观层面,建立工程师伦理责任教育的制度支持系统,它由工程师伦理责任教育指导制度与评估制度、工程社团伦理章程制度和企业伦理责任制度组成;在中观层面,建立工程师伦理责任教育长效机制,它包含工程师伦理责任素质培养制度和“双师型”教师培养制度以及教育方法的创新;在微观层面,要求工程师(学生)积极创造实现伦理责任内化的主观与客观条件,在不断的学习与实践中,努力提高实践伦理智慧即道德自主的意识和能力,自觉践行工程师伦理责任。三个层面的制度彼此衔接、相辅相成。更多还原

【Abstract】 As the basis for the development of modern society, engineering activity exerts a profound effect over all aspects of human social life. As is well known, the most important part of engineering activity is the engineers themselves. With the increase of their knowledge and of their ability to dominate nature and society, engineers have greater and greater impact on the engineering activity and simultaneously on the society. For this reason, the makings of engineers have long been attracting the attention of human society. Of all the makings of engineers, the quality of their ethical responsibility forms the core. This core can not only foster the development of other elements of the makings, but also help engineers put, on their own initiative, in the first place the security, health and happiness of human beings. In addition, it can further strengthen their sense of responsibility to stakeholders. In a sense, the quality of engineers’ethical responsibility determines the outcome of the engineering construction of a nation, and hence the development of the nation. Therefore, western countries like U.S and Germany have attached great importance to the education of engineers’ethical responsibility which aims to foster the quality of engineers’ethical responsibility. Its significance is that in those countries there occur a series of influential research productivity as well as a large group of engineers with strong sense of ethical responsibility. In contrast, China, for various reasons, has not paid sufficient attention to the education of engineers’ethical responsibility and relevant research is relatively rare. What is worse is that we possess the largest number of engineers in all the countries of the world. This situation has already had an serious effect on the quality of our engineers and more seriously, on the process of our modernization. That is why the study of education of engineers’ethical responsibility has become an urgent topic for us.The present research starts with the profession of the engineers. It gives definitions to such concepts as ethical responsibility, the engineers’ethical responsibility, the major part of the engineers’ethical responsibility as they are so important as to highlight the features of, and even restrict the education of engineers’ethical responsibility, yet still vague in the previous studies. The occurrence and development of the engineers’ethical responsibility correspond with the development of science and technology and with the expectation of the society. As the previous goal of the ethical responsibility, the pursuit of maximizing the engineering benefit on the basis of the hypothesis‘completely rational’human beings, has outgrown the modern science and technology and the expectation of the society, a new pursuit occurs which aims to‘satisfy’the stakeholders. The new pursuit calls for the new response from the education of engineers ethical responsibility. In other words, supporting evidence is needed for the rationality of the education of engineers ethical responsibility. In my study evidence is provided from two aspects, the practical base and theoretical ground. In terms of practical base, the education of engineers ethical responsibility is the necessity of development of society and growth of engineers. In terms of theoretical ground, it has the relevant theories in educational philosophy, technical philosophy, engineering philosophy and applied ethics as its ground. The education of engineers ethical responsibility should take benefit as the initiative step, target at engineers who are the major part of engineering activity, and view the fostering of engineers ethical responsibility as the destination of education. That is to say, benefit, engineers and sense of responsibility are to constitute the internal structure of education.The education of engineers ethical responsibility is to be provided in an open and creative way. By comparing China’s education of engineers ethical responsibility with that of the United States and Germany, my study discovers the gap between the two. Through a questionnaire distributed to the students in some representative universities and majors, the study reveals the problems existing in the present education of engineers ethical responsibility in China. These involve three levels: at the macro level, relevant policies of our country are neither clear nor constant; at the middle level, the engineering universities have defects in both understanding and practice; at the micro level, the engineers (the students) lack the sense of responsibility and their ethical choices go to the extremes. The root beneath these problems are some contradictory factors intertwining with each other, which include the contradiction in the target of education between the‘science’model and the‘engineer’model, the contradiction between the narrow design of subject teaching and the requirements of the complex engineering practice, the contradiction between analysis and synthesis of facts and values, the contradiction between compulsion and freedom, the contradiction between the individuals and the collective.To solve the above-mentioned problems requires the cooperation of all the three parties, namely, our country (including communities and enterprises), the universities concerned and the engineers (the students). Therefore, my study proposes a regulation system, which involves the interacting of three levels. At the macro level, a supportive subsystem can be established which consists of the regulations of guidance and assessment, the regulations of engineering associations and regulations of enterprises. At the middle level, a long-term mechanism can be founded which comprises the training rules of the engineers ethical responsibility and of the two-sided teachers. It also includes the creative approaches of education. At the micro level, requirements can be made on the engineers (students), which involve creating the conditions for internalizing ethical responsibility, striving for the increase of the awareness and capacity of ethical intelligence, and fulfilling their responsibility on their own initiative.更多还原