- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 10,132
- Reaction score
- 5,714
Machines aren't necessarily used to dumb down or simplify an operation, nor are they necessarily used to replace manual labour, sometimes, they are used because it is extremely difficult or at times impossible for a human to do it. I could give many examples, one is a simple fly press and at the opposite extreme would be silicon chip manufactureOriginally Posted by George
In the case of the silicon chip, there is no pre-industrial antecedent for comparison. Its own standards of quality are of a different order by virtue of when and where it arose than that of traditional Trades. I don't know what a fly press is...but again, I try very hard not to opine in too great a depth on subjects that I know next to nothing about. That said, and in line with my earlier remarks about machines being tools, some jobs only became possible as technology invented a tool to do it. However, if lifting a great weight or moving a huge amount of earth isn't by definition "dumbed down" I don't know what is. And in the context of a shoe factory, there is no machine that takes as much skill to operate as it takes to do the same job by hand. Period. Those who have never made shoes don't get a voice in this...neither do those who have only casually toured a workshop or factory. Somewhere in here the whole idea of human nature and economics has to enter into it. If human beings can do a job skillfully, quickly, and cheaply enough to generate not just their own upkeep but a proportionally higher income for a manager or owner...someone who doesn't do any real work...then a machine is not needed. If a human being cannot do that then he/she will be replaced. And since most jobs in pre-industrial societies were comprised of many tasks...often making a shoe, for instance, from beginning to end...the replacements for those human beings must wither have the same skill set and experience or the job must be broken down into smaller, less complicated bits--ie. it is dumbed down." More importantly, especially as it applies to the shoemaker and the whole notion of quality...there must be a human connection. The results must resonate with something inside of us to earn our respect and be termed quality. When there is little or no human involvement a machine becomes less a tool and more a stand-in for a human being. Because it is not, in fact, a human being with a brain and emotions and a sense of aesthetics...because it is mindless...what is produced is ticky-tacky, pure and simple. No highs no lows no failures, no excellence...no responsibility. And everything and everyone who comes into contact with that production loses a little bit of what makes them human trying to make it compatible with the reality of human existence.
I simply don't agree with that. I think it is a bit arid for my tastes. As Bengal Strip and others have pointed out quality is more than functionality...or symmetry or efficiency or price. It is about the jewels in the movement, the materials used, and the way they are used. And yes it is about the way the product speaks to us both functionally and metaphysically. I have watches from several centuries. The modern ones seem to run fine until they don't. The old ones aren't as reliable at this point in their lives although they do still run. I'll take the antiques over the techno-glitz any day.
