Premium
ON THE HUMAN USE OF HUMAN BEINGS
Author(s) -
Kissick William L.
Publication year - 1969
Publication title -
annals of the new york academy of sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.712
H-Index - 248
eISSN - 1749-6632
pISSN - 0077-8923
DOI - 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1969.tb34078.x
Subject(s) - human services , citation , surgeon general , annals , welfare , library science , service (business) , public health , political science , public relations , medicine , law , business , history , computer science , classics , marketing , nursing
After reading through the Conference program and considering the titles of the papers to be presented, I would like to add a new consideration to the discussion-the individual-which to me is the object of all our efforts. For the end we seek in medicine-the objective toward which our use of computers must be oriented-is the well-being and fulfillment of each and every individual. This statement of our end, or goal, I will leave for the moment as an assertion. It is, of course, open to debate, as is any statement, but I have heard no criticism of it to date which would persuade me of the necessity to amend it. On the other hand, I have encountered very strong defenses of its validity. Therefore, I will let it stand as an assumption. This brings me to the title I have given to my remarks. Most of this title, as you are well aware, is the title of a book by Norbert Weiner. I have used it because the several writings of Weiner, one of this century’s rare mathematical geniuses, emphasize for me the multiple dimensions and implications of the many issues we will discuss and deliberate on during this Conference. Throughout Weiner’s essays, there is focus on technology and science as a means to an end, and at the same time concern lest, in concentrating on our means, we lose sight of our ends. For Weiner, ends, purpose, objectives, and goals are dominant. Technology, the system, has validity and purpose only in terms of external points to which it is oriented, and it is in terms of these that its relevance must be assessed and the system justified. Thus, in considering the use of technology in m e d i c i n d a t a processing and mechanization, the use of computers, and so on-Weiner might say, as do I, that we must look at not just the “how,” but, more importantly, the “why.” And in responding to the question of “why,” we cannot be satisfied with the Everest dictum: “Because it is there.” Use of computers or of any other technology in medicine, only because we think we have arrived at the technological capacity to effect their use, can lead only to a Pyrrhic victory. I do not mean to imply that computers and other technological innovations should not be used or that the “how” is not important, too. Far from it. I am concerned that the “how” is related to the “why”-that we use our technological capacity to further our progress toward an identified and fully explicated goal, and that this goal is never forgotten.