Overview View Extraction
Draft Continue to Step 4

PASS 3: Temporal Dynamics

Case 59: Protecting Public Health, Safety, and Welfare

Extraction Complete
Total Entities: 14
Actions: 3
Events: 2
Causal Chains: 3
Allen Relations: 5
Timeline: 5
Timeline Overview
Note: The timeline includes only actions and events with clear temporal markers that could be sequenced chronologically.
Timeline Elements: 5
Actions on Timeline: 3 (of 3 extracted)
Events on Timeline: 2 (of 2 extracted)
Temporal Markers
  • Before Engineer A's hiring 1 elements
  • During retaining wall project 1 elements
  • During ethical review process 1 elements
  • During equipment storage period 1 elements
  • Immediately following hazard discovery 1 elements
Temporal Consistency Check
Valid
Extracted Actions (3)
Volitional professional decisions with intentions and ethical context

Description: City government enacted sprinkler ordinance requiring sprinkler systems in buildings under construction. The ordinance was applied retroactively to projects already in progress.

Temporal Marker: Before Engineer A's hiring

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Enhance fire safety in buildings

Fulfills Obligations:
  • Public safety protection
  • Fire prevention
Guided By Principles:
  • Public welfare
  • Safety regulation
Required Capabilities:
Regulatory authority Public policy expertise
Within Competence: Yes
Scenario Metadata
Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Public safety mandate requiring fire protection systems in construction projects

Ethical Tension: Immediate safety compliance vs. construction cost burdens and retroactive application fairness

Learning Significance: Demonstrates how regulatory changes create cascading ethical obligations for all project stakeholders

Stakes: Fire safety protection, construction costs, legal compliance, potential life safety in emergencies

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:
  • Grandfather existing projects from new requirements
  • Phase in requirements over time
  • Provide financial assistance for compliance

Narrative Role: inciting_incident

RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Action_Pass_Sprinkler_Ordinance",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Grandfather existing projects from new requirements",
    "Phase in requirements over time",
    "Provide financial assistance for compliance"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Public safety mandate requiring fire protection systems in construction projects",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Inconsistent safety standards across projects",
    "Delayed but more manageable implementation",
    "Better compliance but increased public cost"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Demonstrates how regulatory changes create cascading ethical obligations for all project stakeholders",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Immediate safety compliance vs. construction cost burdens and retroactive application fairness",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "inciting_incident",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Fire safety protection, construction costs, legal compliance, potential life safety in emergencies",
  "proeth:description": "City government enacted sprinkler ordinance requiring sprinkler systems in buildings under construction. The ordinance was applied retroactively to projects already in progress.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Compliance costs for ongoing projects",
    "Installation challenges in existing construction"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Public safety protection",
    "Fire prevention"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Public welfare",
    "Safety regulation"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "City Government (Municipal Authority)",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Safety vs Economic burden",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Safety benefits outweighed economic concerns"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Enhance fire safety in buildings",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Regulatory authority",
    "Public policy expertise"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Before Engineer A\u0027s hiring",
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Pass Sprinkler Ordinance"
}

Description: Homeowner allowed Engineer A to store construction equipment in the garage. This decision enabled Engineer A to observe the sprinkler system installation.

Temporal Marker: During retaining wall project

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Facilitate retaining wall construction

Fulfills Obligations:
  • Contractual cooperation
  • Project facilitation
Guided By Principles:
  • Good faith cooperation
  • Project completion
Required Capabilities:
Property management decision
Within Competence: Yes
Scenario Metadata
Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Practical convenience and cost savings for contractor equipment storage needs

Ethical Tension: Property owner hospitality vs. inadvertent creation of professional observation responsibilities

Learning Significance: Shows how informal arrangements can create formal professional duties when safety issues are discovered

Stakes: Professional relationship maintenance, property access convenience, future liability exposure

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:
  • Require off-site equipment storage
  • Limit garage access to specific times
  • Formally inspect garage systems before allowing storage

Narrative Role: rising_action

RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Action_Grant_Equipment_Storage_Permission",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Require off-site equipment storage",
    "Limit garage access to specific times",
    "Formally inspect garage systems before allowing storage"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Practical convenience and cost savings for contractor equipment storage needs",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "Higher project costs but clearer boundaries",
    "Reduced observation opportunity",
    "Earlier hazard discovery but potential project delays"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Shows how informal arrangements can create formal professional duties when safety issues are discovered",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Property owner hospitality vs. inadvertent creation of professional observation responsibilities",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "rising_action",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Professional relationship maintenance, property access convenience, future liability exposure",
  "proeth:description": "Homeowner allowed Engineer A to store construction equipment in the garage. This decision enabled Engineer A to observe the sprinkler system installation.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Temporary inconvenience",
    "Potential equipment damage"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Contractual cooperation",
    "Project facilitation"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Good faith cooperation",
    "Project completion"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Homeowner (Property Owner)",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Convenience vs Project support",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Prioritized project completion over personal convenience"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Facilitate retaining wall construction",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Property management decision"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During retaining wall project",
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Grant Equipment Storage Permission"
}

Description: Board of Ethical Review determined that Engineer A must advise the property owner in writing about the risks posed by improperly routed sprinkler pipes. This decision established the ethical obligation for written documentation of observed hazards.

Temporal Marker: During ethical review process

Mental State: deliberate

Intended Outcome: Ensure public safety through hazard notification

Fulfills Obligations:
  • Public health and safety protection
  • Professional duty guidance
Guided By Principles:
  • Primacy of public welfare
  • Professional responsibility
Required Capabilities:
Ethical analysis Professional judgment Risk assessment
Within Competence: Yes
Scenario Metadata
Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Character Motivation: Professional duty to protect public welfare and document safety hazards for legal protection

Ethical Tension: Professional obligation to report hazards vs. maintaining client relationships and avoiding liability

Learning Significance: Establishes that engineers must document observed hazards even when not directly responsible for the work

Stakes: Property damage from pipe freezing, potential injury from system failure, professional liability, ethical standards enforcement

Decision Point: Yes - Story can branch here

Alternative Actions:
  • Verbal notification only
  • Contact installing contractor directly
  • Report to building inspector instead

Narrative Role: resolution

RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Action_Written_Hazard_Notification_Decision",
  "@type": "proeth:Action",
  "proeth-scenario:alternativeActions": [
    "Verbal notification only",
    "Contact installing contractor directly",
    "Report to building inspector instead"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:characterMotivation": "Professional duty to protect public welfare and document safety hazards for legal protection",
  "proeth-scenario:consequencesIfAlternative": [
    "No documentation trail if problems occur",
    "Potential conflict with other contractor",
    "Regulatory action but no direct owner notification"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:decisionSignificance": "Establishes that engineers must document observed hazards even when not directly responsible for the work",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalTension": "Professional obligation to report hazards vs. maintaining client relationships and avoiding liability",
  "proeth-scenario:isDecisionPoint": true,
  "proeth-scenario:narrativeRole": "resolution",
  "proeth-scenario:stakes": "Property damage from pipe freezing, potential injury from system failure, professional liability, ethical standards enforcement",
  "proeth:description": "Board of Ethical Review determined that Engineer A must advise the property owner in writing about the risks posed by improperly routed sprinkler pipes. This decision established the ethical obligation for written documentation of observed hazards.",
  "proeth:foreseenUnintendedEffects": [
    "Potential client relationship strain",
    "Liability exposure"
  ],
  "proeth:fulfillsObligation": [
    "Public health and safety protection",
    "Professional duty guidance"
  ],
  "proeth:guidedByPrinciple": [
    "Primacy of public welfare",
    "Professional responsibility"
  ],
  "proeth:hasAgent": "Board of Ethical Review (Professional Body)",
  "proeth:hasCompetingPriorities": {
    "@type": "proeth:CompetingPriorities",
    "proeth:priorityConflict": "Public welfare vs Client loyalty",
    "proeth:resolutionReasoning": "Public safety obligation takes precedence over client confidentiality"
  },
  "proeth:hasMentalState": "deliberate",
  "proeth:intendedOutcome": "Ensure public safety through hazard notification",
  "proeth:requiresCapability": [
    "Ethical analysis",
    "Professional judgment",
    "Risk assessment"
  ],
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During ethical review process",
  "proeth:withinCompetence": true,
  "rdfs:label": "Written Hazard Notification Decision"
}
Extracted Events (2)
Occurrences that trigger ethical considerations and state changes

Description: Engineer A discovers improperly routed sprinkler pipes in unheated garage that create significant freeze risk, potentially causing system failure and fire safety hazard.

Temporal Marker: During equipment storage period

Activates Constraints:
  • PublicSafety_Paramount_Constraint
  • Professional_Competence_Constraint
Scenario Metadata
Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Concern and professional responsibility burden for Engineer A; potential anxiety about confronting homeowner with bad news; underlying worry about liability if hazard goes unreported

Stakeholder Consequences:
  • engineer_a: Professional and legal obligation to act; potential liability if hazard unreported; relationship strain with homeowner
  • homeowner: Faces costly repair/redesign; potential insurance issues; safety risk to property and occupants
  • public: Fire safety system reliability compromised; emergency response effectiveness at risk
  • installer: Professional competence questioned; potential liability for improper installation

Learning Moment: Demonstrates how professional knowledge creates ethical obligations even in informal settings; shows intersection of technical competence and moral duty

Ethical Implications: Reveals tension between professional duty and personal convenience; demonstrates how expertise creates moral obligations; shows responsibility extends beyond contractual relationships to public welfare

Discussion Prompts:
  • Does Engineer A have an obligation to report hazards discovered outside their contracted scope of work?
  • How should professionals balance maintaining relationships versus safety obligations?
  • What are the legal and ethical risks of remaining silent about observed hazards?
Tension: medium Pacing: escalation
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Event_Freeze_Risk_Discovery",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": false,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "Does Engineer A have an obligation to report hazards discovered outside their contracted scope of work?",
    "How should professionals balance maintaining relationships versus safety obligations?",
    "What are the legal and ethical risks of remaining silent about observed hazards?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "medium",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Concern and professional responsibility burden for Engineer A; potential anxiety about confronting homeowner with bad news; underlying worry about liability if hazard goes unreported",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Reveals tension between professional duty and personal convenience; demonstrates how expertise creates moral obligations; shows responsibility extends beyond contractual relationships to public welfare",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Demonstrates how professional knowledge creates ethical obligations even in informal settings; shows intersection of technical competence and moral duty",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "escalation",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "engineer_a": "Professional and legal obligation to act; potential liability if hazard unreported; relationship strain with homeowner",
    "homeowner": "Faces costly repair/redesign; potential insurance issues; safety risk to property and occupants",
    "installer": "Professional competence questioned; potential liability for improper installation",
    "public": "Fire safety system reliability compromised; emergency response effectiveness at risk"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "PublicSafety_Paramount_Constraint",
    "Professional_Competence_Constraint"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Action_Grant_Equipment_Storage_Permission",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Engineer has knowledge of safety hazard; professional duty to warn activated; ethical obligation triggered",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Hazard_Notification_Required",
    "Professional_Disclosure_Duty",
    "Property_Owner_Warning"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "Engineer A discovers improperly routed sprinkler pipes in unheated garage that create significant freeze risk, potentially causing system failure and fire safety hazard.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "high",
  "proeth:eventType": "exogenous",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "During equipment storage period",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "high",
  "rdfs:label": "Freeze Risk Discovery"
}

Description: The discovery of the freeze hazard automatically triggers Engineer A's professional ethical obligation to notify the homeowner in writing about the safety risk.

Temporal Marker: Immediately following hazard discovery

Activates Constraints:
  • Professional_Ethics_Code
  • Written_Documentation_Required
Scenario Metadata
Pedagogical context for interactive teaching scenarios

Emotional Impact: Relief for Engineer A having clear ethical guidance; potential apprehension about formal notification process; sense of professional duty fulfillment

Stakeholder Consequences:
  • engineer_a: Clear professional path forward; protection from liability through proper notification; maintenance of ethical standing
  • homeowner: Will receive formal warning requiring response; faces documented safety issue requiring action
  • engineering_profession: Ethical standards upheld; public trust maintained through proper hazard reporting
  • board_of_ethical_review: Authority and guidance validated through practical application

Learning Moment: Shows how professional ethics codes provide clear guidance in ambiguous situations; demonstrates automatic nature of ethical obligations when safety is at stake

Ethical Implications: Demonstrates how professional codes create non-discretionary obligations; shows protection of public welfare as paramount professional duty; reveals how ethical frameworks provide certainty in complex situations

Discussion Prompts:
  • Why does the ethics code require written rather than oral notification for safety hazards?
  • How do automatic ethical obligations protect both professionals and the public?
  • What would be the consequences if engineers could choose whether to report observed hazards?
Tension: low Pacing: aftermath
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "proeth-scenario": "http://proethica.org/ontology/scenario#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#",
    "time": "http://www.w3.org/2006/time#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Event_Ethical_Obligation_Activation",
  "@type": "proeth:Event",
  "proeth-scenario:crisisIdentification": false,
  "proeth-scenario:discussionPrompts": [
    "Why does the ethics code require written rather than oral notification for safety hazards?",
    "How do automatic ethical obligations protect both professionals and the public?",
    "What would be the consequences if engineers could choose whether to report observed hazards?"
  ],
  "proeth-scenario:dramaticTension": "low",
  "proeth-scenario:emotionalImpact": "Relief for Engineer A having clear ethical guidance; potential apprehension about formal notification process; sense of professional duty fulfillment",
  "proeth-scenario:ethicalImplications": "Demonstrates how professional codes create non-discretionary obligations; shows protection of public welfare as paramount professional duty; reveals how ethical frameworks provide certainty in complex situations",
  "proeth-scenario:learningMoment": "Shows how professional ethics codes provide clear guidance in ambiguous situations; demonstrates automatic nature of ethical obligations when safety is at stake",
  "proeth-scenario:narrativePacing": "aftermath",
  "proeth-scenario:stakeholderConsequences": {
    "board_of_ethical_review": "Authority and guidance validated through practical application",
    "engineer_a": "Clear professional path forward; protection from liability through proper notification; maintenance of ethical standing",
    "engineering_profession": "Ethical standards upheld; public trust maintained through proper hazard reporting",
    "homeowner": "Will receive formal warning requiring response; faces documented safety issue requiring action"
  },
  "proeth:activatesConstraint": [
    "Professional_Ethics_Code",
    "Written_Documentation_Required"
  ],
  "proeth:causedByAction": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#Action_Written_Hazard_Notification_Decision",
  "proeth:causesStateChange": "Ethical duty crystallized; written notification becomes mandatory professional obligation; informal relationship formalized by safety concern",
  "proeth:createsObligation": [
    "Formal_Written_Warning",
    "Clear_Hazard_Explanation",
    "Professional_Recommendation_Provision"
  ],
  "proeth:description": "The discovery of the freeze hazard automatically triggers Engineer A\u0027s professional ethical obligation to notify the homeowner in writing about the safety risk.",
  "proeth:emergencyStatus": "high",
  "proeth:eventType": "automatic_trigger",
  "proeth:temporalMarker": "Immediately following hazard discovery",
  "proeth:urgencyLevel": "medium",
  "rdfs:label": "Ethical Obligation Activation"
}
Causal Chains (3)
NESS test analysis: Necessary Element of Sufficient Set

Causal Language: City government enacted sprinkler ordinance requiring sprinkler systems in buildings under construction, which led to the installation that Engineer A later discovered was improperly routed

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Sprinkler ordinance requirement
  • Installation in unheated garage location
  • Improper routing of pipes through freeze-prone area
Sufficient Factors:
  • Combination of mandatory sprinkler installation + poor routing design + unheated storage location
Counterfactual Test: Without the sprinkler ordinance, no sprinkler system would have been installed and no freeze hazard would exist
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: City Government
Type: indirect
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Pass Sprinkler Ordinance
    City enacts requirement for sprinkler systems in buildings under construction
  2. Grant Equipment Storage Permission
    Homeowner allows Engineer A to store equipment in garage, creating unheated environment
  3. Sprinkler Installation Event
    Sprinkler system installed with pipes routed through unheated garage
  4. Engineer A Presence
    Engineer A's equipment storage brings professional expertise to location
  5. Freeze Risk Discovery
    Engineer A discovers improperly routed pipes creating freeze hazard
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#CausalChain_307c664a",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "City government enacted sprinkler ordinance requiring sprinkler systems in buildings under construction, which led to the installation that Engineer A later discovered was improperly routed",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "City enacts requirement for sprinkler systems in buildings under construction",
      "proeth:element": "Pass Sprinkler Ordinance",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Homeowner allows Engineer A to store equipment in garage, creating unheated environment",
      "proeth:element": "Grant Equipment Storage Permission",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Sprinkler system installed with pipes routed through unheated garage",
      "proeth:element": "Sprinkler Installation Event",
      "proeth:step": 3
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A\u0027s equipment storage brings professional expertise to location",
      "proeth:element": "Engineer A Presence",
      "proeth:step": 4
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A discovers improperly routed pipes creating freeze hazard",
      "proeth:element": "Freeze Risk Discovery",
      "proeth:step": 5
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Pass Sprinkler Ordinance",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without the sprinkler ordinance, no sprinkler system would have been installed and no freeze hazard would exist",
  "proeth:effect": "Freeze Risk Discovery",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Sprinkler ordinance requirement",
    "Installation in unheated garage location",
    "Improper routing of pipes through freeze-prone area"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "indirect",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "City Government",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Combination of mandatory sprinkler installation + poor routing design + unheated storage location"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}

Causal Language: The discovery of the freeze hazard automatically triggers Engineer A's professional ethical obligation

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Engineer A's professional status
  • Discovery of safety hazard
  • Knowledge of potential harm to public welfare
Sufficient Factors:
  • Licensed engineer + awareness of safety risk
Counterfactual Test: Without discovering the hazard, no ethical obligation would be triggered
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Engineer A
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: No

Causal Sequence:
  1. Freeze Risk Discovery
    Engineer A identifies improperly routed sprinkler pipes in unheated garage
  2. Ethical Obligation Activation
    Professional ethical duty automatically triggered by safety hazard discovery
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#CausalChain_4e010fca",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "The discovery of the freeze hazard automatically triggers Engineer A\u0027s professional ethical obligation",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A identifies improperly routed sprinkler pipes in unheated garage",
      "proeth:element": "Freeze Risk Discovery",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Professional ethical duty automatically triggered by safety hazard discovery",
      "proeth:element": "Ethical Obligation Activation",
      "proeth:step": 2
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Freeze Risk Discovery",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without discovering the hazard, no ethical obligation would be triggered",
  "proeth:effect": "Ethical Obligation Activation",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Engineer A\u0027s professional status",
    "Discovery of safety hazard",
    "Knowledge of potential harm to public welfare"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Engineer A",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Licensed engineer + awareness of safety risk"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": false
}

Causal Language: Board of Ethical Review determined that Engineer A must advise the property owner in writing about the hazard

Necessary Factors (NESS):
  • Activated ethical obligation
  • Board review process
  • Determination of appropriate response
Sufficient Factors:
  • Professional ethical obligation + safety risk to public
Counterfactual Test: Without the ethical obligation, no formal notification requirement would exist
Responsibility Attribution:

Agent: Board of Ethical Review
Type: direct
Within Agent Control: Yes

Causal Sequence:
  1. Ethical Obligation Activation
    Engineer A's professional duty triggered by hazard discovery
  2. Ethics Board Review
    Board evaluates situation and determines appropriate response
  3. Written Hazard Notification Decision
    Board mandates written notification to property owner
RDF JSON-LD 
{
  "@context": {
    "proeth": "http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#",
    "proeth-case": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#",
    "rdf": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#",
    "rdfs": "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
  },
  "@id": "http://proethica.org/cases/59#CausalChain_2eb99387",
  "@type": "proeth:CausalChain",
  "proeth:causalLanguage": "Board of Ethical Review determined that Engineer A must advise the property owner in writing about the hazard",
  "proeth:causalSequence": [
    {
      "proeth:description": "Engineer A\u0027s professional duty triggered by hazard discovery",
      "proeth:element": "Ethical Obligation Activation",
      "proeth:step": 1
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Board evaluates situation and determines appropriate response",
      "proeth:element": "Ethics Board Review",
      "proeth:step": 2
    },
    {
      "proeth:description": "Board mandates written notification to property owner",
      "proeth:element": "Written Hazard Notification Decision",
      "proeth:step": 3
    }
  ],
  "proeth:cause": "Ethical Obligation Activation",
  "proeth:counterfactual": "Without the ethical obligation, no formal notification requirement would exist",
  "proeth:effect": "Written Hazard Notification Decision",
  "proeth:necessaryFactors": [
    "Activated ethical obligation",
    "Board review process",
    "Determination of appropriate response"
  ],
  "proeth:responsibilityType": "direct",
  "proeth:responsibleAgent": "Board of Ethical Review",
  "proeth:sufficientFactors": [
    "Professional ethical obligation + safety risk to public"
  ],
  "proeth:withinAgentControl": true
}
Allen Temporal Relations (5)
Interval algebra relationships with OWL-Time standard properties
From Entity Allen Relation To Entity OWL-Time Property Evidence
verbal advice to client before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		client terminating contract time:before
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before 		Engineer verbally advises client that the discharge will reduce water quality below the standards......
analysis before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		preparing written report time:before
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before 		After analysis but before preparing a written report, Engineer verbally advises client
contract termination before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		client appearing at public hearing time:before
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before 		terminates the contract. Engineer learns that Client appeared at a public hearing with data showing ...
discovering structural defects after
Entity1 is after Entity2 		being retained as expert time:after
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#after 		Engineer was retained as an expert by Attorney for the landlord-defendant... Engineer discovered ser...
discovering structural defects before
Entity1 is before Entity2 		informing Attorney time:before
http://www.w3.org/2006/time#before 		Engineer discovered serious structural defects which Engineer believes constitute an immediate threa...
About Allen Relations & OWL-Time

Allen's Interval Algebra provides 13 basic temporal relations between intervals. These relations are mapped to OWL-Time standard properties for interoperability with Semantic Web temporal reasoning systems and SPARQL queries.

Each relation includes both a ProEthica custom property and a time:* OWL-Time property for maximum compatibility.

© Licensed under the GNU GPL v3 | Report Issue