The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge Studies in the History of Science) Reprint Edition

Heroic historiography of science and technology has dominated well past the moment when historians had despaired of kings and heroic battles as shapers of human history. The lone scientist and inventor still hogs today's narrative. These heroes have been joined lately by visionary entrepreneurs à la Steve JOBS, who "invented the future". Humbug, says the author, and I concur wholeheartedly. This splendid book, easy to read ans understand, explains why.There are a few million living species. Our material artifacts outnumber them easily. The author is correct in pointing out that diversity of artifacts is a distinguishing characteristic of human life. Necessity is not the reason for this stupendous diversity: "it is a testimony to the fertility of the contriving mind and to the multitudinous ways the peoples of the earth have chosen to live." (pg. 208)The author explains this diversity of artifacts not so much by invention as by evolution: "the prevalence of artifactual continuity has been obscured by the myth of the heroic inventive genius" (pg. 208) and postulates continuity, even if convoluted and rhyzomic (my term here), rather than directed and progressive. At each point in time the potential for technological innovation is far greater than any society can hope to exploit. Play, fantasy, and emulation all collaborate to create this potential. So do psychological and intellectual factors (Chapt. III). Socio-economic and cultural factors should not be discounted (Chapt. IV).Selection may be based on economic and military factors - we could call them "necessity" (Chap. V). In many cases, however, social and cultural factors are deeply involved (Chapt. VI). "Ultimately the selection is made in accordance with the values and perceived needs of society and in harmony with its current understanding of "the good life"." (pg. viii).It is the author's great merit to have chosen Darwinian evolution as the overarching explanatory metaphor explaining the evolution of technology. He should be commended for this. A generation later, and with deeper knowledge of Darwinian processes, new authors are picking up this metaphor is picked up and deepening it (See Alex MESOUDI Cultural Evolution: How Darwinian Theory Can Explain Human Culture and Synthesize the Social Sciences).Metaphors constrain as much as they explain. Contrary to speciation we do have discontinuities with artifacts - when they are used for a different purpose, so as when first a hammer was used as a weapon. Chance and whimsy probably play a larger role than they do in nature. Just an example: I've read somewhere that the race between the steam and petrol car was decided by foot-and-mouth disease. An outbreak of this disease among horses led to the elimination of troughs on public highways, which may have spread contagion. Such troughs were used to refuel steam cars, so their refueling stations were eliminated.The author discounts somewhat path-dependent outcomes and "autonomous technologies". I'd be more reserved. As long as the laws of scarcity are not repealed, efficiency will be a main criterion for technology choice. Once efficiency enters the realm of choice, it tends to overshadow other criteria. It is also the lowest common denominator when values conflict. In fact "efficiency" has become a very hard task-master, ruling us impartially.Individual agency remains the source of invention in the book's paradigm. Is it really so? If we are truly social animals, creativity is also social - though we may perceive is as personal, nay solitary. I would be wary of the "lone tinkerer" as much as the "lone genius". The act of creation arises from the "meeting of minds" - Newton spoke of standing on the shoulders of giants. It is in dialogue that most brilliant ideas emerge, and one is loath, as the creation unfolds, to assign its original spark to anyone. The inventor's reception of the emergent spark and the kindling and nurturing of the emergent fire assigns authorship to him. Fair enough. If one writes a history of technology, however, the social aspect should be highlighted, for it is the bed from which new ideas spring. Clustering great minds is often a winning proposition - unless the great minds drift into a tiring game of establishing a pecking order among themselves.The author is liberal in the use of examples and "stories". Some are apt, some fascinating, and the best are "paths not taken" (pg. 189 ff.). Others tend to be overlong. And one quibble: fire antedates the emergence of homo sapiens sapiens by about one million years. Cooking food was a prerequisite for our large brains. In this sense it was not a choice, but a necessity.

another good read for system engineers

Read it as part of an assignment for an Evolution of Technology PhD course. The book seemed to polarize readers. Most folks were put-off by what they perceived as "socialistic" influences in the writer's analysis. Personally, I enjoyed reading it. But I did find that the examples case studies that are used, tend to be a little on the... dusty side. Meaning this: most case studies were drawn from renaissance, middle ages, and occasionally even from pre-history. For a class filled with tech-fans, itching to hear and read about the future, this was rather... boring.

Great book

Humans are the most sophisticated toolmakers in the family of life. We've gone from stone hammers to hydrogen bombs. We've become so addicted to our technology that we can no longer survive without it. If we eliminated electricity, this way of life would disintegrate before our eyes, causing many to perish.Humans no longer sit in the pilot seat of our global civilization. The autopilot runs the show. Our complex labyrinth of technology herds us through a chute. It's no longer possible to make sharp (intelligent) turns, because the system has immense momentum and no brakes. We can't banish cars, plows, or electricity today. We're trapped on a runaway train.How and why did we get into this mess? That's the subject of George Basalla's book, The Evolution of Technology. Scholars were debating this issue, and Basalla had an urge to jump into the ring, molest the illusions of his inferiors, and set the record straight.His first task was to demonstrate that innovation did, in fact, evolve -- by synthesizing or altering existing innovations. Famous inventions were never original, unique, unprecedented acts of pure magic that fell out of the sky, like acts of God. The myth of the heroic inventor is just 300 years old. Henry Ford referred to his monster child as a quadracycle. "The first automobiles were little more than four-wheeled bicycles," said Basalla. The mother of invention was evolution, not revolution. A stick on the ground evolved into a throwing stick, then a spear, then a missile.His second task was to explain the various ways in which our dance with artifacts has evolved, and this consumed most of the book. Readers are taken on an illuminating journey to realms that our industrial society has erased from the maps and forgotten.We've all seen the graph of population growth over the last 10,000 years. Technological evolution follows a similar curve. For most of the hominid journey, our artifacts were little more than sticks and stones, and their evolution happened very slowly. A state of the art stone hammer might be no different from a hammer used 500,000 years earlier.It is important to understand that for almost the entire hominid journey, our ancestors enjoyed a relatively sustainable way of life, and that this era corresponds exactly with the long, long era when technological evolution was essentially in a coma. This is not a coincidence.Unfortunately, our system of education is writhing in a bad trip after inhaling the loony fumes of the myth of progress. This intoxicant was conjured by notorious buffoons 200 years ago, and its side effects include disorientation, anxiety, and uncontrollable self-destructive impulses. We continue to hallucinate that the zenith of the human journey is today, and that the Golden Age is yet to come. We have a remarkable ability to completely tune out what is perfectly obvious, and vitally important.The Tikopians and Sentineli are island societies that keep their numbers in check, and live very lightly, using simple artifacts. These communities stay in balance with their land, and are content. They do not suffer from a persistent itch for more and more. Technological innovation is entirely off their radar. They have no need for it, and experimenting with it could permanently destroy them.Native American potters and basket weavers created artifacts that were careful, error-free reproductions of traditional designs. Apprentices worked hard to imitate the work of their elders, and their success earned respect. Their culture had a healthy resistance to change, because their time-proven traditions kept them on a good path."In the Muslim tradition, innovation or novelty is automatically assumed to be evil until it can be proved otherwise," said Basalla. "The Arabic word bid'a has the double meaning of novelty and heresy." The Prophet warned that those who imitate infidels turn into infidels. Indeed!China invented the compass, gunpowder, and printing, and put them to practical use. When Europeans brought this knowledge home, it sparked immense innovation that led to major changes in their way of life. The vast Chinese civilization was stable and conservative. It was not nimble, fast-paced, and highly competitive, like Europe. Europe was a chaotic and unstable collection of competing nations. Society had far less resistance to new artifacts.The wheel was first used in Mesopotamia, about 5,000 years ago. In many societies, it became a popular artifact, used for commerce and warfare. "A wise king scattereth the wicked, and bringeth the wheel over them." (Proverbs 20:26)The native civilizations of North and South America were able to grow and die without using wheeled transport. Many groups in the Near East eventually abandoned the use of wagons, because camels were a faster and easier way of moving stuff. Wild tribes often just carried stuff home on their backs via footpaths, or paddled canoes -- wheels required far more effort: cleared roads, bridges, and wagons.The industrial civilizations of Europe and America have extensively used wheels in their artifacts. Our cultural myths celebrate the wheel as a super-sacred icon. Basalla concluded, "the wheel is not a unique mechanical contrivance necessary, or useful, to all people at all times." The ability to whoosh across the landscape on a bicycle is not required to meet our biological needs. No sustainable society used wheels, because they had no need for them.Basalla's book contained zero evidence that he was an eco-terrorist determined to smash civilization, or even a mild-mannered tree-hugger. The book just seemed to be unusually objective, as if it had a good cleansing soak in a potent mythocide. It felt like he was a shaman conveying vital messages from the realm of the ancestors, whilst being cleverly disguised as a history professor. To the mainstream mind, these messages constitute shocking, obscene heresies. But the messages contain the medicine we need to blow the locks off our minds, so we can escape, go home, and heal.Agriculture and architecture are new novelties, not necessities. "No technology whatsoever is required to meet animal needs." Yes, other animals use tools but, "There are no fire-using animals nor are there animals that routinely fashion new tools, improve upon old tool designs, use tools to make other tools, or pass on accumulated technical knowledge to offspring."Obviously, we could not live like hurricanes without artifacts, and we could not survive in many regions where humans are an invasive exotic species, but we could enjoy a tool-free future in tropical regions, like our ancient African motherland (or a future Siberian jungle?).There is no evidence that "a causal connection exists between advances in technology and the overall betterment of the human race. Therefore, the popular but illusory concept of technological progress should be discarded."Agriculture and cooking are "unnecessary because plants and animals are able to grow and even thrive without human intervention, and because food need not be processed by fire before it is fit for human consumption.""Artifacts are uniquely identified with humanity -- indeed they are a distinguishing characteristic of human life; nevertheless, we can survive without them.""Fire, the stone axe, or the wheel are no more items of absolute necessity than are the trivial gadgets that gain popularity for a season and quickly disappear."Basalla's insights bounce off the frozen minds of the mainstream world, automatically rejected by bulletproof denial. But these fresh notions are a sure sign that clear thinking is beginning to seep into the stagnant halls of history departments, those dusty story museums where the dying Cult of Progress will make its last stand.The path to sustainability is blocked by ideas -- toxic illusions, metabolized into highly contagious beliefs, resulting in mass insanity. At the gate of the path to healing, rubbish ideas must be left in the recycle bin. There is no shortage of better ideas. Help yourself, and share.Richard Adrian ReeseAuthor of What Is Sustainable-and-Sustainable or Bust

Bit of a dense read and skipped around a bit

All the books I've bought, are written very successful.