Download
1 / 9
110 likes | 302 Views
Case 3.5 – The Columbia Shuttle Disaster. by Margaret Battin & Gordon Mower. The central ethical issue. What should NASA have done and said about the known possibility that Columbia might not survive re-entry?. Facts about the case. Foam struck Columbia’s wing at launch.
E N D
Case 3.5 – The Columbia Shuttle Disaster by Margaret Battin & Gordon Mower
The central ethical issue. • What should NASA have done and said about the known possibility that Columbia might not survive re-entry?
Facts about the case. • Foam struck Columbia’s wing at launch. • Videos of the launch showed this, so NASA knew about it. • Past foam strikes had caused minor scratching of wing heat tiles. If the heat tiles had major damage this time (broken or missing), then Columbia would crash. • NASA had the means to examine the wing, but chose not to. • NASA also chose to not tell the crew anything.
Available options. • Don’t find out, and don’t tell (the one taken). • Find out, but don’t tell. • Don’t find out, but tell (in the form of a warning). • Find out, and tell.
Ethical analysis. • Don’t find out, don’t tell. • Probably against Utilitarian ethics – what could be the benefits to anybody from running the space program this way? • Against Kantian ethics – puts people carelessly at risk for the glory of NASA.
Ethical analysis, continued. • Find out, but don’t tell. • Maybe OK by Utilitarian analysis – depends on benefits that might follow from running the mission to conclusion. • Against Kantian ethics – denies respect to crew.
Ethical analysis, continued. • Don’t find out, but tell. • Maybe OK by Utilitarian analysis -- depends on amount of resources needed to find out and on the benefit that would follow from telling. • Probably against Kantian ethics – even though it respects the crew by telling, it writes them off without proper evidence as being unworthy of a rescue effort.
Ethical analysis, continued. • Find out, and tell. • Probably OK by Utilitarian analysis – especially when costs to NASA of simply not finding out are taken into account. • OK by Kantian ethics – respects crew in all ways.
Conclusions • The option chosen by NASA was the worst one available • The option that should have been chosen was to find out and then tell. • This would have enabled serious discussion about the possibility for rescue. • And even if rescue was not attempted for sufficient reasons, the crew would have been treated ethically.
