FRANKENSTEIN, INCORPORATED OR THE GHOST IN THE MACHINE

[callady]

FRANKENSTEIN, INCORPORATED
OR
THE GHOST IN THE MACHINE
by William Hecht
October 4, 2005


Any anthropologist will tell you that the fashioning of tools was a critical phase in our emergence as the dominant life form on the planet: first stone, then bronze, then iron if I have it right. Tools made us more efficient and freed up time to develop systems for agriculture, communication, and so on throughout the ages until today where many of us depend on machines to dramatically reduce our workload, leaving us with more time to do, well, other things.  But incorporated into popular myth (and thus embedded into our subconscious if you believe Joseph Campbell) is the idea that man occasionally creates, invents, or brings to life the instruments of his own destruction.

I won’t try to track down all the literary references, but for me the most poignant example is the story of Frankenstein’s monster. The eccentric doctor “built” a man and infused him with the spark of life but failed to control him and was undone by his own creation (that the monster was mistakenly given the brain of a criminal is not insignificant for the purposes of this expose’). More recently upon the scene, with their roots in Golden Age Science Fiction, are the stories of the robot run amok.  Through faulty programming or malevolent manipulation or a sudden self-awareness and assertiveness, the efficient, powerful and purposeful machine becomes the ultimate threat to its mere flesh and bone creators. The stuff that movies are made of, this theme has been central to such blockbusters as “Terminator,” “Robo Cop,” “The Matrix,” and “I Robot”. That we continue to nourish this collective conscious “myth” in our popular culture is either a warning or a premonition. All of which brings us to the focus question of this piece:  Are corporations man-made entities that have grown beyond their functionality to represent powerful, efficient and purposeful “machines” that could do us harm?

The first US corporations were created for special projects and were given charters under which to operate. They were never intended to have the longevity, the citizenship, the influence, or the raw power that they wield today.  Certainly the founding fathers of this nation never foresaw their evolution into the dominant economic and political forces that they today represent. But corporations are very efficient; they raise our standard of living through tremendous economies of scale. They facilitate imports and exports and exploit the laws of comparative advantage. They spend billions on research and constantly search to find new and better methods, products and services to offer us. Corporations do wonderful things--as long as it means profit. So what’s the problem?

Unlike the “good” robots of science fiction that are programmed to serve, protect, and obey human beings, corporations are created by humans to merely serve us economically. That we build them, staff them and “govern” them, does not mean that they necessarily obey us or that they cannot harm us. What seems to be a semantic distinction is not. A corporation has as its primary motivation the creation of profit. As a corporation grows in size, the corporate “will” becomes so imposing that individuals who impede or threaten its primary motivation are often crushed or at the very least brushed aside like insects.  The theory that an organism the size and complexity of a Fortune 100 firm could develop a “mind” or “soul” of its own is enticing. The concept has been all but worn out with the robots of popular sci-fi sitcoms like Star Trek and others. But does a corporation have a conscience? Are fines for broken laws merely profit-and-loss propositions? In situations where corporate products or activities result in health risks to individuals or to the environment, are these merely assessed for potential damage to brand or goodwill? Though there can be no doubt that most large-company employees are people of moral and ethical integrity, the conflicts of interest that occur in the course of “the job” are enough to tempt even the most incorruptible moralist to say or think “but that’s business and I can’t afford to lose my job right now.” Or “it’s really a very common practice.”

<snip>

Remember, after the damage was done, the villagers burned Dr. Frankenstein’s castle.

http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/2005/1004b.html