randomosity

When is a tool, not a tool? Apparently when it is a quasi-tool or a proto-tool. A tool provides functionless functionality.
These were a couple of the epigramatics Barry Allen shared during a talk on technology, culture and civilization.¹
I could not possibly do justice to philosophical reflections on the nature of a tool, so I stop there on the philosophical and refer you to my footnote, but as an economist I was particularly drawn into his discussion of the progression from first to second order machines. First order being ‘devices that extend human capacities by exploiting a mechanical advantage’ and second-order featuring ‘an assembly of first-order machines, coupled to produce a multiplying effect.’ This form of organization seemed to dovetail with a similar discussion that Allen raised about our ability to effectively fix prices, but our seeming imability to determine the true cost of a tool.
Read the complete article… »

1. Quasi-tools as I understand are objects used by beings without conscious or intelligent awareness that the object provides any particular function. Innate use of a pebble by a wasp to block the entrance to a birth chamber for example. In contrast, a proto-tool, is consciously chosen for use, but has not be fashioned to perform that function, lacking deliberate design to enable that function. A ‘tool’ per se shares two descriptive aspects: that its function is manifold and not limited by purpose, instead extended by technique to form cultural technology. Secondly, the tool is an artifact that lacks definition without having a place within an economy - that is, it has been previously linked to others in an economy of socially complimentary action (design, manufacture, sale, license, etc.) when we engage with it. [↩]