Engineer-Professional-Criticism-Conduct-Standard-Instance
Rs · Resource
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/114#Engineer-Professional-Criticism-Conduct-Standard-Instance
Properties
Instance of
EngineerProfessionalCriticismConductStandard
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#EngineerProfessionalCriticismConductStandard
Confidence
0.9
Created by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review (interpretive)
Document title
Standard for Public Criticism of Another Engineer's Work
Importance
high
Used by
Board of Ethical Review in determining permissible scope of public criticism at hearings
Used in context
The BER interprets Canon 24's 'due restraint' requirement to mean that public criticism of another engineer must avoid personalities and abuse, and must be grounded in engineering conclusions or alternative analyses — establishing the conduct standard for adversarial expert testimony
Version
Derived from Canon 24 interpretation
Source Evidence
Source text
Canon 24 does not prohibit such public criticism; it only requires that the engineer apply 'due restraint.' We take this language to mean that in offering public criticism of the work of another engineer, the engineering witness will avoid personalities and abuse, and will base his criticism on the engineering conclusions or application of engineering data by offering alternative conclusions or analyses.
Text references
Canon 24 does not prohibit such public criticism; it only requires that the engineer apply 'due restraint.' We take this language to mean that in offering public criticism of the work of another engineer, the engineering witness will avoid personalities and abuse, and will base his criticism on the engineering conclusions or application of engineering data by offering alternative conclusions or analyses.
TTL
@prefix case114: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/114#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case114:Engineer-Professional-Criticism-Conduct-Standard-Instance a proeth:EngineerProfessionalCriticismConductStandard,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Engineer-Professional-Criticism-Conduct-Standard-Instance" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Resource" ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:createdby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review (interpretive)" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "114" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:documenttitle "Standard for Public Criticism of Another Engineer's Work" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-02T15:16:29.880807+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "114" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-02T15:16:29.880807+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:resourceclass "Engineer Professional Criticism Conduct Standard" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Canon 24 does not prohibit such public criticism; it only requires that the engineer apply 'due restraint.' We take this language to mean that in offering public criticism of the work of another engineer, the engineering witness will avoid personalities and abuse, and will base his criticism on the engineering conclusions or application of engineering data by offering alternative conclusions or analyses." ;
proeth:textreferences "Canon 24 does not prohibit such public criticism; it only requires that the engineer apply 'due restraint.' We take this language to mean that in offering public criticism of the work of another engineer, the engineering witness will avoid personalities and abuse, and will base his criticism on the engineering conclusions or application of engineering data by offering alternative conclusions or analyses." ;
proeth:usedby "Board of Ethical Review in determining permissible scope of public criticism at hearings" ;
proeth:usedincontext "The BER interprets Canon 24's 'due restraint' requirement to mean that public criticism of another engineer must avoid personalities and abuse, and must be grounded in engineering conclusions or alternative analyses — establishing the conduct standard for adversarial expert testimony" ;
proeth:version "Derived from Canon 24 interpretation" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 114 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-02T15:38:37.732447"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 114 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
114
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-02T15:16:29.880807+00:00
First case
114
Generated
2026-03-02T15:16:29.880807+00:00
Attributed to
Case 114 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-02T15:38:37.732447
Generated by
ProEthica Case 114 Extraction