Full Disclosure of Engineer C Circumstances as Conditional Defense
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/134#Full_Disclosure_of_Engineer_C_Circumstances_as_Conditional_Defense
Properties
Instance of
FullDisclosureasConditionalEthicalDefensePrinciple
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#FullDisclosureasConditionalEthicalDefensePrinciple
Applied to
Engineer A's statements about Engineer C's interest during negotiations with Engineer B
Balancing with
Honesty
Technically True But Misleading Statement Prohibition
Concrete expression
The Board explicitly states that if Engineer A had fully disclosed all circumstances relating to Engineer C — including that her interest had been definitively withdrawn — the Board's ethical conclusion would have been different; the failure to make this available disclosure is what transforms the statement from a potentially ambiguous one into an ethical violation
Confidence
0.92
Importance
high
Interpretation
Full disclosure of Engineer C's withdrawn status would have enabled Engineer B to form an accurate understanding of the competitive landscape; its omission created the materially false impression that constituted the ethical violation; the principle establishes that the cure for a potentially misleading statement is completeness, not silence
Invoked by
Engineer A Firm Sale Negotiator
Tension resolution
The Board uses the availability of full disclosure as the counterfactual test for the ethical violation: had Engineer A disclosed fully, no violation; having withheld, the violation is confirmed
Source Evidence
Source text
the Board would note that if Engineer A had fully disclosed the full circumstances relating to Engineer C, the Board's conclusion would have been different.
Text references
the Board would note that if Engineer A had fully disclosed the full circumstances relating to Engineer C, the Board's conclusion would have been different.
TTL
@prefix case134: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/134#> .
@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#> .
case134:Full_Disclosure_of_Engineer_C_Circumstances_as_Conditional_Defense a proeth:FullDisclosureasConditionalEthicalDefensePrinciple,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Full Disclosure of Engineer C Circumstances as Conditional Defense" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A's statements about Engineer C's interest during negotiations with Engineer B" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Honesty",
"Technically True But Misleading Statement Prohibition" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The Board explicitly states that if Engineer A had fully disclosed all circumstances relating to Engineer C — including that her interest had been definitively withdrawn — the Board's ethical conclusion would have been different; the failure to make this available disclosure is what transforms the statement from a potentially ambiguous one into an ethical violation" ;
proeth:confidence "0.92" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "134" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-02-28T21:20:49.236900+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "134" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-02-28T21:20:49.236900+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "Full disclosure of Engineer C's withdrawn status would have enabled Engineer B to form an accurate understanding of the competitive landscape; its omission created the materially false impression that constituted the ethical violation; the principle establishes that the cure for a potentially misleading statement is completeness, not silence" ;
proeth:invokedby "Engineer A Firm Sale Negotiator" ;
proeth:principleclass "Full Disclosure as Conditional Ethical Defense Principle" ;
proeth:sourcetext "the Board would note that if Engineer A had fully disclosed the full circumstances relating to Engineer C, the Board's conclusion would have been different." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The Board uses the availability of full disclosure as the counterfactual test for the ethical violation: had Engineer A disclosed fully, no violation; having withheld, the violation is confirmed" ;
proeth:textreferences "the Board would note that if Engineer A had fully disclosed the full circumstances relating to Engineer C, the Board's conclusion would have been different." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 134 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-02-28T21:30:32.618076"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 134 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
134
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-02-28T21:20:49.236900+00:00
First case
134
Generated
2026-02-28T21:20:49.236900+00:00
Attributed to
Case 134 Extraction
Generated
2026-02-28T21:30:32.618076
Generated by
ProEthica Case 134 Extraction