ABSTRACT
Technological progress is an inexorable tide – the rise of ubiquitous computing purports to make our lives safer and more efficient. From automatic protection systems in aircraft to artificial intelligence in our washing machines, the aims of such developments are very much in line with those of ergonomics – to improve safety, efficiency, and satisfaction. Nevertheless, the ergonomics literature on automation holds a much more con-
servative view, andwe have known for some time now that to simply try to automate the human out of the loop does not provide the solutions that engineers crave. In the best-selling book ‘Jurassic Park’ (Crichton, 1980), the mathematician character Ian Malcolm criticises scientists for focusing too much on whether they can do something without stopping to consider whether they should. The same criticism has been levelled at designers of automation by some of the most influential ergonomists working in this field (e.g., Parasuraman, 1987; Wiener and Curry, 1980). Whilst the principle of avoiding technology merely for its own sake remains
valid, it is fair to say that the current view in ergonomics is somewhat more mature in trying to understand how humans and automation can work together safely and effectively. It would be foolish to think we could stem technological progress – nor would we want to, lest Ian Malcolm accuse us of the kind of narrow-minded thinking he refers to as ‘thintelligence’. Humans and technology can and indeed should work together, and technological progress should be exploited – but in the
right way. This paper considers the future for the ‘ghost in the machine’, arguing for a philosophical approach to the design of automated systems which allows humans and technology to coexist in a truly dualist system.
