The article "As We May Think" was published in 1945. Yet it continues
to be mentioned in articles, especially in the area of library and
information science, today. Why do you think this is so?
In Section 1 Bush writes "Mendel's concept of the laws of genetics was
lost to the world for a generation because his publication did not reach the
few who were capable of grasping and extending it; and this sort of
catastrophe is undoubtedly being repeated all about us, as truly significant
attainments become lost in the mass of the inconsequential." Has that
problem gone away or has it intensified? What role can librarians play in
dealing with such a problem?
Throughout the essay, Bush writes of future technical possibilities.
Which of these have come to pass? What do they look like now?
In sections 4 and 5, Bush talks about turning over certain functions to
machines, reserving other functions for human beings. Do you agree with his
division of labor? If not, how would you reallocate functions between
humans and machines? How would this dichotomy apply to libraries,
especially in the era when many users of our services may never set foot in
our buildings?
In section 6 Bush talks about a new approach to indexing. How would
such a system work? Is it feasible?
In sections 6 through 8 Bush talks about the Memex. Do we have anything
comparable today? If so, what is it? How does it compare to the Memex?
If you could go back in time and talk to the author about his article,
what would you say to him?
