Well, I think a sense of perspective about "the art of safe go arounds" is in order here. Even in the 20 years I've been flying, things have developed in this regard. For the first few years of doing an instrument rating, I was incredibly adept at doing a single-engine go-around at ILS Cat I minima - and this was what we had legally to be able to demonstrate. The only thing that ever changed was which engine was shut down.
Over the last 20 years, it has been pointed out that life is rarely that simple. And so go-around techniques (and everything else) have been finessed to cover a wide variety of other options. A go-around from the runway. A go-around and level-off at 1000'. A safe go-around at Cat III minima. An engine failure on short final followed by a go-around. A go-around with jammed flaps. Windshear go-arounds. A go-around with an obstacle clearance procedure. Doubtless there were some good ol' boys who regardless of what you threw at them would have the skills to do the right thing intuitively. Perhaps. It was also discovered that there were about 80% of the people who might well be thrown by the unexpected. Not every pilot is as brilliant as those good ol' boys. And no airline could count on having a good ol' boy in the left hand seat on the day when it all went to pot.
So go-around techniques continued (and continue) to be a matter of debate. The appropriate level of automation continued to be discussed and developed.
There are some things which, in my opinion, are absolutely brilliant about how the Airbus is set up. Like when doing a CFIT manoeuvre, you can just firewall the throttles and pull the stick back as far as it will go and hold it there. You don't have to worry about overstressing anything or whether you could pull harder - the aeroplane will simply give you everything it is capable of. And not worrying about that, try and work out why the heck you have granite in front of you and how you can get away from it.
Except that you have predictive GPWS, so may well have avoided that in the first place.
And here's the rub. All these computers are there to improve safety. GPWS, EGPWS, Weather Radar, Windshear, Predictive windshear, TCAS, GPS, FMC, Autopilot ... all have been added because, all else being equal, they add safety margin. "Good" pilots have had a share in a significant number of the most famous air accidents - I'm not going to enumerate them, but I'm sure you won't have to think hard - and in some cases, they were not using systems that aircraft manufacturers had made available to protect them.
You can talk about this being an erosion of professionalism if you like. I don't think so. What it means is that a different skill set is required. The same happens in every job. If you go back to the 50s and 60s, there were airliner crashes most months, it seems (I had to do a quiz, and working through the headlines of those years was startling). If aviation were as dangerous now as it was then, we would be seeing hull losses daily.