3 ms·
I've certainly seen the phenomena you describe, but it doesn't seem like that belief is completely universal. "Humanists often contend that machines tend to de
by mmcdermott 3y ago
I've certainly seen the phenomena you describe, but it doesn't seem like that belief is completely universal.
"Humanists often contend that machines tend to dehumanize people by forcing them to have rigid personalities, but really, the contrary is true. Because the machines are rigid, the people who use them must–if they are to be successful–supply more than their share of flexibility."
– Gerald Weinberg, The Psychology of Computer Programming, chapter 11.
- vouaobrasil 3y agoI think the flexibility that Weinberg was talking about was the expansion and expression of flexibility within a narrow domain. And I think we have an immense proclivity in modern society to approach problems like climate change with a very specialized, algorithmic mind (optimize along one variable like reduction of CO2, design specialized batteries), all within a given system. If you look at some indigenous cultures who had a more holistic viewpoint without exposure to machinery, they are much more about relationships between all living organisms and the emotionality behind those relationships, rather than using analytic methods to solve things. So, while I understand where Weinberg is coming from, I do not think his view applies to the greater discussion. Moreover, I think he was confused about what others meant by dehumanization, especially when he talked about personalities. It is not the personalities that become rigid, but the problem-solving approaches. My 2 cents....
- organsnyder 3y agoI think both can be true. The need to conform to something rigid requires flexibility. However, you're effectively adopting the rigidity of that thing, so you are no longer able to employ your flexibility.