For those of you not familiar with Ayn Rand, she wrote crappy books about the power of individual achievement while she collected social security and started some pseudo-philosophy called “objectivism,” which can be summed up in five words: I got mine, fuck you.
One of the judicial tests for fraud is intent. Intent is notoriously hard to prove, unless the company committing the fraud has put together a detailed Powerpoint presentation illustrating the purpose and function of the software—which Volkswagen had (apparently unaware of Stringer Bell’s admonition, “Is you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy? The fuck is you thinking, man?” Your annoying friend is right; everyone needs to watch The Wire.)
In 1971, American philosopher John Rawls proposed an idea for determining the ethics of a situation, he called it a veil of ignorance. He later expanded on the idea in his book A Theory of Justice. In short, a veil of ignorance is a way of determining whether what you’re designing, be it a startup, a dinner plan, or a system of government, is just. It’s very simple: when designing something, imagine that your relationship to that system gets determined after you’ve made it. For example, if you’re designing a system of government that allows slavery, you might end up being enslaved. If you’re designing a ride-sharing service, you might end up as the driver or the rider.
What all of these people had in common was a well-rounded curiosity, the good sense to know when something wasn’t working, and good social skills. Not only could they design well, they could write, think analytically; and they were curious about every job in the shop. If a job in the shop needed to be done, they’d volunteer to do it, even if (or maybe especially if) it meant having to learn a new skill.
Try this: go to your Twitter content settings and change the country to Germany. The Nazis go away! It’s the software equivalent of D-Day. Nazis gone. The next time Twitter tells you they don’t know how to find the Nazi stuff, be assured they’re lying. They’ve already had to tag it. Why don’t they turn it off worldwide? Great question. In fact, I asked Jack Dorsey that question in person. He said it’s not illegal in the United States. It may not be illegal, but giving a voice to someone who uses it to silence others is indecent, unethical, and cruel. As designers, our job is to protect the people who come in contact with the tools we build. Sometimes the law can back us up, like with the GDPR. Sometimes the law may be lagging a little bit behind.
Creative skills, on the other hand, are about empowering a group to do the hard work of building something that has never existed before. Generating purpose in these areas is like supplying an expedition: You need to provide support, fuel, and tools and to serve as a protective presence that empowers the team doing the work. Some ways to do that include: • Keenly attend to team composition and dynamics. • Define, reinforce, and relentlessly protect the team’s creative autonomy. • Make it safe to fail and to give feedback. • Celebrate hugely when the group takes initiative.
As design educators, we need to stop pulling out a syllabus that was put together while watching the Nixon impeachment hearings, and we need to stop convincing students they’re special unicorns immune to consequence.
