Arthur is a chief engineer in a components house. As such, he sits in meetings concerning bidding on contracts. At one such meeting between top company executives and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, which is interested in getting a major contract, NASA presents specifications for components that are to be several orders of magnitude more reliable than the current state of the art. The components are not part of a life-support system, yet are critical for the success of several planned experiments. Arthur does not believe such reliability can be achieved by his company or any other, and he knows the executives in his company feel the same. Nevertheless, the executives indicate an interest to bid on the contract without questioning the specifications. Arthur discusses the matter privately with the executives and recommends that they review the seemingly technical impossibility with NASA and try to amend the contract. The executives say that they intend, if they win the contract, to argue mid-stream for a change. They remind Arthur that if they don't win the contract, several engineers in Arthur's division will have to be laid off. Arthur is well-liked by his employees and fears the lay-offs wold affect some close friendships. (a) What should Arthur do? (b) What ethical approaches and principles apply in his decision making