Automation, a curse or a blessing?

Having read the previous, you may wonder whether perhaps the computer is a curse for humanity. On the contrary! There is nothing wrong with computers, and certainly not with Apples. The computer is, figuratively speaking, a gift from ‘heaven’10) and it ultimately originates from the ‘Word’. Perhaps that is why the invention (the finding)11) of the computer is not as accidental12) as we might think. We may need the computer in this day and age to start the process of increasing the conscious functioning of our mind.

Speaking in terms of Ouspensky[29], man is a machine, but a very special machine. He is a machine that can, under favourable circumstances and with the proper treatment, become aware of the fact that it is a machine. When he has become fully aware of this fact he will be able to find means to cease to be a machine, according to this Russian philosopher. Through a true confrontation between the man machine and the computer machine, man may break loose from mechanical acting.

How then does the computer work as an instrument towards Self-knowledge, you will wonder. The physical aspects of creation4) work like a mirror to reflect the inner aspects of our being. Through reflecting on the physical processes, we come to know the machine step by step. In fact, automated processes show great similarity to our own thinking processes. On the one hand this explains the pull that was discussed before, on the other hand it offers a mirror through which we can, while cleaning up the automated processes, also rid our own thinking of pollutants such as ridiculous prejudice13), compulsive ideas and clammy emotional patterns.

The computer itself can be regarded as a primitive model of our thinking processes, including the senses. Reflection on the working of the computer and its software is an extra stimulant for me, personally, to look upon the functioning of our own thinking with amazement. It seems as if the latter will only become ‘formulatable’ when we are able to create a model that can literally be ‘grasped’. Only when we are able to ‘grasp’ something and copy it, its understandability increases. Not to the extent of real understanding, of course, but by (temporarily) using a model, we are able to formulate and possibly simulate matters, which may eventually lead to understanding them.

Psychologists today try to fathom the working of the human memory by means of models derived from computer sciences. The outside world enters the world of sensory impressions, which have only a short span. Relevant information is subsequently transferred to a (multidimensional) working memory, with only very limited capacity.

After storing about seven independent items, the working memory is more or less full. The trick we then use is to cluster items, and to move the details of such a cluster backward a little. In modern PC operating systems, this technique is called ‘windowing’. We are then able to transfer the information from the working memory to an almost unlimited permanent (background) memory. Sigmund Freud calls the operator of the working memory the ‘ego’. The ego almost always acts as if it is in charge of the entire human being, rather than being merely the serving operator of the working memory. This delusion is the reason why the working memory is often full of data, because the ego will not let go. After all, knowledge is power.

Who is in charge of the human being then, you will wonder. You will find the answer to that question along the negative way, using the following questions to put matters in perspective: Am I this body, am I this mind, am I this nature? You may recognise the analogy with the question: what controls the working of an information system? Is it the hardware or the electricity, is it the software, is it the user? Or is there something else behind all of those?

The concept of software itself also provides food for introspection. On the one hand, the layered structure of software provides a useful metaphor for the layered structure of creation; on the other hand, building software provides us with an insight into the conditioning process in the mind. Within the boundaries of the system software, we are able to build a piece of software for a certain application, which we can in turn tailor to a specific user. This is fully analogous to the process of a human being learning how to drive a car, which is then optimised to a certain type of car.

The use of computers may lead to a merciless confrontation with the often limited functioning of our minds. A good example of this is a case I described as early as 1975 (see thesis 7 in endnote1)). In those days, the monitors of the terminals at S.A.R.A. reflected so strongly, that besides looking at the information from your computer you would also be looking at your own reflection. As a result, with every error that occurred you would be looking at your own disappointed reflection. Again, the machine had not done what it was asked to! That dumb computer didn’t understand again! In fact, what we were confronted with in those days time and again in a very graphic way, was our own muddled way of thinking. The discipline of a computer is much, much greater than the discipline of human thought. The computer mercilessly and straightforwardly does what is asked, without considering its ‘partner’s’ feelings or other mitigating circumstances. The same straightforwardness, by the way, is also required in the process of system development. For many users, a discipline such as information analysis, for example, is a harsh confrontation with the purpose of his working processes or working method.

In spite of all this, the great difference between Man and the computer is reason. Reason is the human instrument with which we should make our decisions and which enables us to think laterally. Unfortunately, most decisions are made by the ‘ego’, which gives them a mechanical nature. A computer cannot make decisions, it can only support them. If we consider this support to be the real decision, man will become lazy and humanity will lapse to an insignificant mechanical level.

Summarising: the computer may be a useful instrument on the road to Self-knowledge. It is only a temporary instrument, however, for know well that there were no computers in paradise, and that heaven has no need for hardware. The computer is after all only a substitute for the abilities that we seem to have lost during our Odyssey here below.

The question ‘computer a blessing?’ could be formulated differently, namely: ‘Does the computer, or does automation, help us to break loose from our habitual patterns?’ Do they help us become free Human Beings again?