DP2
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#DP2
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP2
Decision question
Should Engineer A maintain the impartial determination adverse to the Owner and correct the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle, or acquiesce to the Owner's pressure and revise the finding in the Owner's favor?
Focus
When the Owner criticizes Engineer A's impartial finding and claims that the duty of loyalty required a partisan finding in the Owner's favor, Engineer A must decide whether to maintain the impartial determination or to acquiesce to the Owner's pressure and revise the finding — and must also decide whether to actively correct the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle.
Option1
Uphold the impartial determination, explain to the Owner that the duty of loyalty is fulfilled — not violated — by honest performance of the contractually designated impartial role, and decline to revise the finding on loyalty grounds alone.
Option2
Treat the Owner's criticism as a signal that the original finding may have overweighted the Contractor's position, and revise the determination to find in the Owner's favor on the grounds that close judgment calls in a dispute should be resolved in favor of the retaining client to preserve the professional relationship and avoid further conflict.
Option3
Acknowledge to the Owner that a genuine tension exists between the loyalty obligation and the impartial interpreter role, decline to revise the finding, but refrain from actively correcting the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle on the grounds that doing so exceeds the scope of Engineer A's advisory role in the dispute resolution context.
Role
Engineer A
TTL
@prefix case176: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/176#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@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#> .
case176:DP2 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP2" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP2" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Engineer A maintain the impartial determination adverse to the Owner and correct the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle, or acquiesce to the Owner's pressure and revise the finding in the Owner's favor?" ;
proeth:focus "When the Owner criticizes Engineer A's impartial finding and claims that the duty of loyalty required a partisan finding in the Owner's favor, Engineer A must decide whether to maintain the impartial determination or to acquiesce to the Owner's pressure and revise the finding — and must also decide whether to actively correct the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle." ;
proeth:option1 "Uphold the impartial determination, explain to the Owner that the duty of loyalty is fulfilled — not violated — by honest performance of the contractually designated impartial role, and decline to revise the finding on loyalty grounds alone." ;
proeth:option2 "Treat the Owner's criticism as a signal that the original finding may have overweighted the Contractor's position, and revise the determination to find in the Owner's favor on the grounds that close judgment calls in a dispute should be resolved in favor of the retaining client to preserve the professional relationship and avoid further conflict." ;
proeth:option3 "Acknowledge to the Owner that a genuine tension exists between the loyalty obligation and the impartial interpreter role, decline to revise the finding, but refrain from actively correcting the Owner's misapplication of the loyalty principle on the grounds that doing so exceeds the scope of Engineer A's advisory role in the dispute resolution context." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T11:26:14.466849"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 176 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-03-01T11:26:14.466849
Generated by
ProEthica Case 176 Extraction