Thursday, February 12, 2009

The Many Faces of The Human Factor

If you would have told someone in the 1800's where we would be today, they would have put you in a looney bin. We have advanced so far in such a short time. Things that were once unfathomable have become reality. With our advances in technology has come a debate, if you will, of our control on it. Do we have control or does technology have the control over us? Some people think we have a good hold on technology, others would say that these people are in denial. Are we too dim to realize that technology has the control over us? Or do we in fact hold the control comfortably. I personally think that the more advanced technology becomes, the more it becomes in control. Sure the scientists who invented the newest high-tech object will know how to run it, but everyone else may not. So where does this leave us? In control or too unintelligent to realize that the technology controls us?
This leads me to think of the “Human Factor,” a term coined by Kim Vicente. In “The Human Factor” Vicente gives the example of Chernobyl. Toptunov was a senior reactor control engineer in charge of Chernobyl. His job was too simple and he knew what to do. What followed was a disaster because of certain events that Toptunov was not equipped with the knowledge to handle, which lead to an explosion. “The problem was that the plant designers hadn’t paid enough attention to the human factor – the operators were trained but the complexity of the reactor and the control panels nevertheless outstripped their ability to grasp what they were seeing” (The Human Factor, 11). The Human Factor plays a leading role in technology, and sometimes people forget this. The technology was developed and was flawless, but when it was left to Toptunov and his crew to run it, it malfunctioned and turned deadly. No one prepared them for what was to happen; they had no control over it. Many average humans do not have vast knowledge of technology, so when one thing goes wrong they do not know how to fix it. When the technology is smarter than the human using it, it is in control.
Now whose fault is it that these events at Chernobyl took place? I think that the humans involved with it is to blame, they lost the control. When we lose the control over technology, terrible things can happen. First it started with the designers, “The designers had done everything they were supposed to do from a technical perspective: all the hardware and software worked flawlessly” (The Human Factor, 11). The designers made the hardware work, good. But what they didn’t take into consideration was the humans who would run it. They pretty much gave the control to the technology instead of the human. Control is based a lot on knowledge, if one is smarter than the other it can take over. Then it was the workers fault also. Yes they were doing their job and doing it to their best ability, no one can fault them that. But what is there fault is simply their lack of knowledge of the equipment they are using, which could in turn be the fault of the company for not fully training their employees. But if you think about it, I’m sure the company doesn’t even know how equipment works; which brings me back to humans being unintelligent. Why use these machines if you don’t know how to use them? We are just using them for an easier route but we don’t understand them, which gives them the control. For example, let’s say I get the new Blackberry. It does all sorts of things, like email, pictures, instant messaging, phone calls, text message, etc. I just bought it and have no clue how to work it. I can’t even figure out how to call my boss to tell him I am going to be late. I can’t check my email for my classes. I can’t go on facebook to see that my boyfriend wants to go to this concert tonight. So who has the control in this situation? Not me; I have no knowledge of how to use this device which makes me in trouble with my boss, not knowing what to bring to class, and why I can’t get a hold of my boyfriend tonight. The new Blackberry seemed like a good idea at the time, all those applications in one small phone but it turned into a nightmare. Whoever holds the knowledge holds the control. But remember that knowledge can mean many different things.
The Human Factor and knowledge plays a different role in “Cat’s Cradle” by Kurt Vonnegut. For instance Dr. Felix Hoenikker is the father of the atom bomb. He was just interested in everything and anything. “And then Father spoke up. You know what he said? He said, ‘I wonder about turtles.’ ‘What do you wander about turtles?’ Angela asked him. ‘When they pull in their head,’ he said, ‘do their spines buckle or contract?’…After the turtle incident, Father got so interested in turtles that he stopped working on the atom bomb” (Cat’s Cradle, 16). Angela then told the other scientists to take away all the turtles and replace it with things about the bomb so that all he had to play with and think about would have to do with the bomb. Dr. Hoenikker was brilliant and would put his all into anything from the turtles to the atom bomb. He may have been easily distracted but once he had a thought or a question, he wanted to figure it out. I see an aspect of the human factor in him. This time Dr. Hoenikker has the intelligence and knowledge of technology but he does not think of the consequences of it. He is just interested in being able to figure things out or invent things. He seems the kind of person who wants to find a way to create everything possible that comes to mind, no matter how ridiculous the idea may seem. This goes along with the ice-nine he created which could freeze the entire earth. After he had created it he left no paperwork of it and just carried it in a bottle without anyone’s knowledge of it. “...the old man played puddly games in the kitchen with water and pots and pans and ice-nine” (Cat’s Cradle, 247). He played with it like it was a game, just converting it back and forth from water to ice-nine. Here again we see this unintelligence in such a smart man who received the Nobel Prize. Ice-nine was dangerous, not some game. He didn’t think of it as an end to the world, he let it control him.
Also the Human Factor comes in to play with Dr. Hoenikker’s children, Angela, Newt and Frank. When Dr. Hoenikker died each of his children took a piece of ice-nine. They did not have much knowledge of it but took it anyways, which ended up controlling their lives. Papa has just taken ice-nine and died when it all comes out that each of them has given away part of their share of ice-nine. Angela was an awkwardly tall and no so pretty girl; she had no friends and never had a date. “The United States had obtained it [ice-nine] through Angela’s husband” (Cat’s Cradle, 244). Harrison C. Connors came to Angela after her father had died and they were married two weeks later. He had never even talked to her before that but she used ice-nine to buy herself a husband in him. Connors could care less about her; Newt mentions that he would come home late at night with lipstick on him. Angela refuses to see anything wrong with that; she refuses her stupidity of buying her husband with ice-nine. Ice-nine is a technology that has controlled her life, lead her into a marriage that is worthless and she ends up dying because ice-nine freezes the world. Little Newt was controlled by his share of ice-nine too. He met Zinka, a Russian dancing midget and fell in love. They had a weekend on Cape Cod together that Newt says was the best time of his life. Angela tells Jonah, “Newt didn’t give it to her. She stole it” (Cat’s Cradle, 245). He was intoxicated by her sexiness and in the end was too stupid to realize that she was just after ice-nine and did not really care for him. Then we have Frank, he got mixed up in problems and fled the country with his ice-nine. He says, “I bought myself a job, just the way you bought yourself a tomcat husband, just the way Newt bought himself a week on Cape Cod with a Russian midget!” (Cat’s Cradle, 243). Frank was found by Papa in San Lorenzo and bought himself a job as General. Here again the ice-nine has controlled Franks life. It is the reason he got the job, was supposed to marry Mona and become the next president even though he didn’t want to. And because of these three children of Dr. Hoenikker the United States, Russia and Papa had ice-nine. Papa had cancer so he took ice-nine, which in turn ended the world. Each of these characters lives were controlled by ice-nine and were in denial of it. Angela just pretended her marriage was a good one, Newt pretended that Zinka really loved him and Frank pretended that it was okay to buy a job. Each one of them symbolizes mankind as a whole. We are in constant denial of our stupidity which allows technology to control us.
Both in Vicente and Vonnegut’s writings we see the web of technology, the human factor, control and stupidity; which is just like our lives. The human factor can be a problem in many ways, from lack of knowledge, too much knowledge, not taking into consideration certain things, and even what you choose to do with certain technology. I think that as technology gets more advance, our lack of knowledge will give it the control. And because of this, our great advanced technology could be our downfall someday.

1 comment:

  1. Unleished,

    I think your essay is fantastic, and it will really serve you well when you go to work on your own individual project later in the semester. I really like how you draw strong connections between "the human factor" in Vicente's essay and "the human factor" amongst Hoenikker's children. I also like how you explore Dr. Hoenikker's "playfulness" of character (i.e. "the turtles" and "ice-nine" examples). I would, however, like to see you expand upon your ideas a little bit here. You write, "He played with it like it was a game, just converting it back and forth from water to ice-nine. Here again we see this unintelligence in such a smart man who received the Nobel Prize." Can you explain what yo mean by "unintelligence" there? What sort of "intelligence" do you think Dr. Hoenikker and scientists like him need to possess? Emotional intelligence? Traditional wisdom? What role might the public and the state play in regulating "the games" played by these scientists? Think back to the video on the elevator to the moon that we watched in class. At the end of the video, the scientist said, "If we can build it, then we should." Do you think just because something can be done, we should do it? Do you think the field of contemporary science is dominated by this philosophy? Are there problems in this world-view? Should we give scientists total free-rein?

    ReplyDelete