Bush, V. "
As We May Think." The Atlantic Monthly. July, 1945. Available online at:
http://www.w3.org/history/1945/vbush/vbush.shtmlAlso posted at the
com546 course blogThere are a few forces at work here.
First, he has a pragmatist cry similar to that of Postman. Technology often continues to advance without addressing the reasons for which it continues. Simply, science is intended to test a hypothesis, experiment, form a theory and so on, but to better use this process we must ask what problems we wish to investigate and solve. Hence, pragmaticism [intentionally ugly, Peirce.]
Second, the instrument of the mind needs to be refined and calibrated like that of any other machine we wish to get the best use of. If we continue to advance knowledge indiscriminately (which seems to be our prerogative) then we need to simultaneously advance the mind to manage, balance, critique and use such sprawling knowledge.
To use their vernacular, I will never tire of the last century's citizens professing the wonders that were to follow their life time.
It's amazing that without understanding the concept of digital and silicon technology he was able to predict loosely the mp3 player and digital camera. He frames it all as inevitability. The bits versus atoms phrase comes to mind, but he's pretty close. However, a hard drive is a spinning digital version of the scanned microfilm he discusses.
He continually implies the point that Morse took advantage of in the telegraph; if people learned a different form of verbal communication or a different means of writing, the computer could interface with it much simpler. The computer today must work much harder to run a speech recognition algorithm or OCR function simply because it is more convenient for us. However, again we must discuss our true motives and implications on the culture before we move forward.
In a similar vein, he discusses the difference between the machine and its operator. The computer allows a person to forego the mathematics and focus on the intuitively reasoned applications, consequences, and purpose of a task or information. That's still the case currently; so lets do so! In his time he could not imagine that role being mechanized, I argue we have imagined a machine taking on some of those tasks today.
When it comes to personal computing, I'm still awaiting some of his prescribed innovations. We don't see such useful software and hardware partially because we lack the clarity to simply make things that are useful. (Apple is catching on though.) I especially like his conception of a file structure which mimics that of the human brain; here is a great way to make technology easier.
The article makes me think that sci-fi writers must really have to hit the books so that their predictions are that much better, and I think this article must has passed by the eyes of some familiar authors. But, one nagging thing still lingers... he couldn't quite get past gender roles. That a man might do the typing and a woman the dictation, would have made the article truly controversial.
Notable quotes:
"Had a Pharaoh been given detailed and explicit designs of an automobile, and had he understood them completely, it would have taxed the resources of his kingdom to have fashioned the thousands of parts for a single car, and that car would have broken down on the first trip to Giza."
"The modern great library is not generally consulted; it is nibbled by a few."
