BER Case 65-12
Rs · Resource
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/157#BER_Case_65-12
Properties
Instance of
Confidence
0.97
Created by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Document title
NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 65-12
Importance
high
Used by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review in analogical reasoning
Used in context
Cited as precedent establishing that engineers are ethically justified in refusing to participate in processing or production of a product they believe to be unsafe, even at the cost of employment
Source Evidence
Source text
In Case 65-12 we dealt with a situation in which a group of engineers believed that a product was unsafe, and we determined that so long as the engineers held to that view they were ethically justified in refusing to participate in the processing or production of the product in question.
Text references
In Case 65-12 we dealt with a situation in which a group of engineers believed that a product was unsafe, and we determined that so long as the engineers held to that view they were ethically justified in refusing to participate in the processing or production of the product in question.
We recognized in that case that such action by the engineers would likely lead to loss of employment.
TTL
@prefix case157: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/157#> .
@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#> .
case157:BER_Case_65-12 a proeth:BERCasePrecedent,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "BER Case 65-12" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Resource" ;
proeth:confidence "0.97" ;
proeth:createdby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "157" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "1" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:documenttitle "NSPE Board of Ethical Review Case 65-12" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T19:19:34.118622+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "157" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T19:19:34.118622+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:resourceclass "BER Case Precedent" ;
proeth:sourcetext "In Case 65-12 we dealt with a situation in which a group of engineers believed that a product was unsafe, and we determined that so long as the engineers held to that view they were ethically justified in refusing to participate in the processing or production of the product in question." ;
proeth:textreferences "In Case 65-12 we dealt with a situation in which a group of engineers believed that a product was unsafe, and we determined that so long as the engineers held to that view they were ethically justified in refusing to participate in the processing or production of the product in question.",
"We recognized in that case that such action by the engineers would likely lead to loss of employment." ;
proeth:usedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review in analogical reasoning" ;
proeth:usedincontext "Cited as precedent establishing that engineers are ethically justified in refusing to participate in processing or production of a product they believe to be unsafe, even at the cost of employment" ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 157 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T19:40:53.882716"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 157 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
157
Discovered in pass
1
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T19:19:34.118622+00:00
First case
157
Generated
2026-03-01T19:19:34.118622+00:00
Attributed to
Case 157 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T19:40:53.882716
Generated by
ProEthica Case 157 Extraction