PJ2
I don't think the problems of flight are that complex that such a sophisticated approach is necessary. The problems driving change and "improvement", (sometimes known as "progress"...), are all about cost, not physics.
I suspect that there is room for understandings here. Let's put aside the cost aspect as it tends to divert these kinds of discussions.
Generally the idea behind a product design function is to provide what the pilot wants (cost is a later gate that it must pass). So IMO the discussion should be arround the area of what the pilot needs.
IF "improvement and progress" are the desired output. Then the idea is to agree on what constitutes this and proceed from there. For this problem area I was tending along the thinking that the crew needed the confidence to take the time to sort out the changing situation. So I was following the thread hint (my read may have been wrong here) that a computer could not help much here. Thus my response was aimed at the example of how the computer can best be trusted vs the rapid responses of man.