Introduction
by Thorsten Wagner, Executive Director for Academics
In the course of the 15 years that FASPE has existed, we have seen our societies develop and change dramatically with significant repercussions for the ethical leadership of professionals. Not so surprisingly, our knee-jerk reaction has often been to emphasize the even larger importance of FASPE’s mission and our work, encouraging professional ethical leadership, particularly under the new circumstances. Now more than ever!
In the past, this response might have been perfectly legitimate and meaningful. In the current moment, with communities even more fractured than in the past, with a new American administration coming in, and the European continent ailing from Russia’s attack and constant threat, as well as Europe’s in many ways seeming so much less stable, this knee-jerk response may seem an obvious reaction for many of FASPE’s Fellows, alumni, and friends. Whether this is a response to a perceived threat to democratic institutions and values, or a call, especially now, for professionals to step up to the plate and embrace their leadership responsibility for broader society, it is an understandable reaction.
The historian Niall Ferguson would probably argue that things are even more complex, that the ethical fabric of our societies is increasingly strained by the self- righteous dogmatism, illiberal intolerance, racism and antisemitism thriving across the political spectrum. Leaving his more specifically political critique aside, in a recent essay1 he has picked up on the notion of a broader vibe shift, which includes a rejection of credentialist elitism. What does it mean for an organization like FASPE, with its emphasis on the ethical responsibility of professional leadership, if we are experiencing a highly consequential paradigm shift towards a fundamental rejection of (self-proclaimed or real) experts, of Ivy League student activism gone awry, and of the leadership of “progressive” elites in general?
Our selection of this year’s capstone projects—the essays, poems, and scholarly articles presented to you in this volume—span a wide spectrum of genres, perspectives, and styles. Implicitly or explicitly, many of these impressive texts grapple with the role of professionals as they are increasingly challenged under current circumstances. Below, I will try to identify some recurring themes and highlight a few of the aspects that I found particularly powerful. Perhaps not so surprisingly, quite a few of the contributions (still) emphasize the influence and responsibility of fledgling professionals; the potential of professions is seen as highly ambivalent, as the power to do good or to cause harm.
A central theme is also the significance of historical reflection for their own processes of grappling with their ethical compasses. The Nazi past constitutes a natural point of reference for the Fellows, whether it is as Cameron Davis’s discussion of products of popular culture (movies depicting the complicity—and occasional resistance—of businessmen and other leaders in Nazi mass crimes) or as a reflection on the importance of a critical history of science. Consider the impressive article by Meagan Olsen, warning not to treat cases of harm caused by technology and science as isolated instances but instead as indicators of a structural potential that needs to be taken into account. Disasters and scandals ought to be part of a particular collective memory, and the particular temptations that can lead engineers and designers astray need to be constantly remembered as well—the inherent and often unreflective strive to optimize for efficiency and the seductive “power to design and shape the world around us.” The (occasionally delusional) self-perception of such professionals as morally intact and omnipotent problem-solvers only exacerbates these issues.
But the discussion of Holocaust movies also touches on a problem with broader significance, taking us beyond the convenient slogan that prioritizing ethics over profits pays off in the long run. Taking Schindler as a drastic example, the question might be: under what circumstances is a businessperson willing to do the right thing when it’s not “good business,” when being an ethical business professional actually means putting up with smaller profits?
Another set of impressive contributions, authored by Medical Fellows, centers on the ethically complex and fraught topic of organ transplantation. While Laura Flores discusses the need for redefining eligibility in the context of restorative justice, Anjola Onadipe focuses on organ procurement itself and situates a new and controversial method (NRP) in the context of biopolitical pressure from the state and other actors. Hovering in the background of these sophisticated analyses is also the challenge of balancing the physician’s obligations with respect to both the needs of the individual patient and public health considerations. Daniel Y. Johnson adds the commercial dimension to this discussion, identifying the ethical responsibilities and strategic wiggle-room of medical professionals in light of private equity interests increasingly having a destructive impact on the healthcare system, particularly in America.
Many of the essays touch on the diverse causes for professionals’ unethical behavior such as a misunderstood, problematic professional identity (“I am just doing my job— my products are morally neutral”), surprisingly mundane motivations like ambition as well as a desire for recognition, and a lack of self-reflection. What is necessary is “to critically and continually reflect on what we are creating, how it might be applied, and the broader socio-technical consequences of our design and implementation choices.” This plea, articulated by Lindsay Sanneman, can arguably also be transferred and applied beyond a narrow tech context. Lindsay’s essay is also fascinating in its creative integration of the worlds of technology and spirituality— don’t miss her compelling presentation of a Tech Examen for engineers and designers, modelled on the Jesuit practice of self-examination. It aims to reduce abstraction by rehumanizing tech to promote a sense of accountability for decisions and motivations. It aims to rediscover the potential for collective action.
In some ways, FASPE’s Fellowship Program might become both more urgent and more difficult in a cultural climate where an increasing number of people are either unwilling or unable to embrace moral complexity and nuance, where short attention spans and TikTok-formatted rage demand clear-cut heroes and villains, and where the current vibe shift implies a fundamental rejection of what some decry as credentialism and elitism. In the words of Niall Ferguson, “Yale Law School is out. The world is going to look a lot more like Gotham City from here on.” Whether you perceive this to be a blessing, a curse, or something more ambiguous, I am confident that the experiences and the reflections of this year’s Fellows, as documented in this journal, embody an important step in the right direction: future leaders thinking hard and critically about their ethical responsibilities in a radically changing world.
Notes
1. https://www.thefp.com/p/niall-ferguson-the-vibe-shift-goes-global-assad-putin-trump