flawed outlook
An observation, and a question:
By arguing against further Automation in Aviation you are inadvertantly making the case FOR further automation in avation.
To suggest automation is the wrong direction means that you have chosen to ignore the bigger picture - the overall safety situation - and, by doing so, have behaved in a flawed way, a flaw that wouldn't have been displayed in the behaviour of, for example, a machine.
To put it another way, by allowing prejudice to influence your opinion on automation, you are actually proving that automation is ultimately the only answer.
The only question is, therefore, will you realise this and choose to work 'with' progress, thus maintaining an input (pun intended) and helping to shape the future of aviation, or will you continue to resist progress, thus act as a catalyst for the very thing which you resist?