Ethics Code Internal Cross-Provision Integration Applied to Section II.2.b and II.2.c
P · Principle
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/158#Ethics_Code_Internal_Cross-Provision_Integration_Applied_to_Section_II.2.b_and_II.2.c
Properties
Instance of
EthicsCodeInternalCross-ProvisionIntegrationObligation
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#EthicsCodeInternalCross-ProvisionIntegrationObligation
Applied to
Engineer A County Surveyor Appointee
Balancing with
Inescapable Ethical Violation Recognition in Structurally Impossible Compliance Scenarios
Concrete expression
The Board required that Section II.2.c. (specialist retention provision) be read in the context of the preceding competence provisions of Section II.2., rather than as a standalone escape route — finding that the specialist-retention provision cannot be invoked to circumvent the fundamental competence obligation established by the introductory language and Section II.2.a.
Confidence
0.9
Importance
high
Interpretation
The internal coherence of the Code required that its provisions be read as an integrated whole, such that a later provision permitting specialist retention could not be used to nullify the earlier provisions establishing the fundamental obligation to practice within one's competence.
Invoked by
NSPE Board of Ethical Review
Tension resolution
The cross-provision integration obligation resolved the apparent tension between Section II.2.c. (which might seem to permit Engineer A to proceed by retaining specialists) and Section II.2.a. and II.2.b. (which require competence in the specific technical fields involved) — by requiring the former to be read in light of the latter.
Source Evidence
Source text
Section II.2.c. must be read in the context of the other provisions that precede it and that relate to the ethical requirement that one should not perform services in areas where one lacks competence.
Text references
First, Section II.2.c. must be read in the context of the other provisions that precede it and that relate to the ethical requirement that one should not perform services in areas where one lacks competence.
In Section II.2., the introductory section makes the clear statement that the engineer is obligated to perform services only in his area of competence.
TTL
@prefix case158: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/158#> .
@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#> .
case158:Ethics_Code_Internal_Cross-Provision_Integration_Applied_to_Section_II.2.b_and_II.2.c a proeth:EthicsCodeInternalCross-ProvisionIntegrationObligation,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "Ethics Code Internal Cross-Provision Integration Applied to Section II.2.b and II.2.c" ;
proeth:appliedto "Engineer A County Surveyor Appointee" ;
proeth:balancingwith "Inescapable Ethical Violation Recognition in Structurally Impossible Compliance Scenarios" ;
proeth:conceptCategory "Principle" ;
proeth:concreteexpression "The Board required that Section II.2.c. (specialist retention provision) be read in the context of the preceding competence provisions of Section II.2., rather than as a standalone escape route — finding that the specialist-retention provision cannot be invoked to circumvent the fundamental competence obligation established by the introductory language and Section II.2.a." ;
proeth:confidence "0.9" ;
proeth:discoveredincase "158" ;
proeth:discoveredinpass "2" ;
proeth:discoveredinsection "discussion" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredat "2026-03-01T15:49:35.733633+00:00" ;
proeth:firstdiscoveredincase "158" ;
proeth:generatedattime "2026-03-01T15:49:35.733633+00:00" ;
proeth:importance "high" ;
proeth:interpretation "The internal coherence of the Code required that its provisions be read as an integrated whole, such that a later provision permitting specialist retention could not be used to nullify the earlier provisions establishing the fundamental obligation to practice within one's competence." ;
proeth:invokedby "NSPE Board of Ethical Review" ;
proeth:principleclass "Ethics Code Internal Cross-Provision Integration Obligation" ;
proeth:sourcetext "Section II.2.c. must be read in the context of the other provisions that precede it and that relate to the ethical requirement that one should not perform services in areas where one lacks competence." ;
proeth:tensionresolution "The cross-provision integration obligation resolved the apparent tension between Section II.2.c. (which might seem to permit Engineer A to proceed by retaining specialists) and Section II.2.a. and II.2.b. (which require competence in the specific technical fields involved) — by requiring the former to be read in light of the latter." ;
proeth:textreferences "First, Section II.2.c. must be read in the context of the other provisions that precede it and that relate to the ethical requirement that one should not perform services in areas where one lacks competence.",
"In Section II.2., the introductory section makes the clear statement that the engineer is obligated to perform services only in his area of competence." ;
proeth:wasattributedto "Case 158 Extraction" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T15:59:11.848123"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 158 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
158
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
discussion
First discovered
2026-03-01T15:49:35.733633+00:00
First case
158
Generated
2026-03-01T15:49:35.733633+00:00
Attributed to
Case 158 Extraction
Generated
2026-03-01T15:59:11.848123
Generated by
ProEthica Case 158 Extraction