The accident was pure and simple but tragically...human error
I think that you mean, human error triying to understand what a very complicated machine that resembled a plane was doing.
I will try to explain some things from my own experience:
1.- The aircraft protections, FWB philosophy working well or not, denied the crew vital inputs to know how the airframe was performing.
2.- The lack of feedback and the 2,5 G limitation denied the crew the hability to recover the plane, they were condemned from the begining of the dive. In that situation you can tell me that the structure is going to crush at 2,5G, you can tell me that this is the maximum performance of the plane for a pull out. But if I´m going in, and I need to pull more Gs to save the plane, I will always prefer to have the option to use more Gs, even if that means destroying the plane.
By "desing" the A320 probably is going to crush at "2,55G", but I think that if you are going to die anyway is better risking a pull out at 2,6G or 2,7G than a 2,5G. Al least you have a chance.
3.- Testing a B727, the STALL warning failed. It indeed Stalled, but because we knew how a stall feeled we recovered the plane without problem.
4.- From my point of viww, a plane that changes 3 times in 40 seconds it´s flight laws in a critical condition like low speed or stall is a very complicated machine. Human error is inherent to complexity. Someone had to mind about that while desining this bird.