What do you think?
Rate this book
Technics and Human Development
Mumford explains the forces that have shaped technology since prehistoric times and shaped the modern world. He shows how tools developed because of significant parallel inventions in ritual, language, and social organization. “It is a stimulating volume, informed both with an enormous range of knowledge and empathetic spirit” (Eliot Fremont-Smith, New York Times). Index; photographs.
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1967
About the author
Lewis Mumford
126 books279 followersLewis Mumford (October 19, 1895 – January 26, 1990) was an American historian and philosopher of technology and science. Particularly noted for his study of cities and urban architecture, he had a tremendously broad career as a writer that also included a period as an influential literary critic. Mumford was influenced by the work of Scottish theorist Sir Patrick Geddes.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
April 17, 2013
This book makes more sense in the context of the intellectual environment to which Mumford was responding in the early to mid 20th century. Many prominent thinkers (including Mumford himself in the 1930s) were primarily concerned with explaining the development of humanity ("the rise of man", as they said in the pre-feminist era) principally in terms of tool use. Humanity's distinguishing feature, that which separated humans from the "lower" animals, was this adaptability in tool use.
Against this, Mumford poses and develops the claim that human development had (and still has) a very different basis. Imagination, the unconscious, myth and aesthetic appreciation are all implicated by Mumford in his suggestive description of how he believes humanity grew from being unusually imaginative apes, through farming, hunting, the creation of kingship and religion, all the way up to the 15th century (the period following that is taken up by Mumford in The Pentagon of Power, a follow-on volume of this book). He doesn't neglect the use and development of tools in the history he traces, but he views that part of human history as having a quite different relationship to human growth than thinkers of him time tended to believe.
Mumford readily acknowledges that the evidence for many of his claims is tentative at best, but he insists that relying solely on the archaeological record is misleading, as the archaeological evidence is only indicative of material artifacts that can be preserved. Mumford claims that it is the non-material historical practice - that which hasn't left a buried record - that needs to be considered. He tries to assess the material record where he can for evidence of non-material practice, but he also tries to draw conclusions based on analogy to the present day. By looking at practices of contemporary societies, both modern and more "primitive", Mumford hopes to draw analogies to how life might have been lived, above and beyond that available solely from material evidence.
The resulting historical narrative in the first half of the book is tantalisingly plausible in many cases, although it would be unwise to uncritically accept them as documented truth. Some periods are also less plausible than others. His description as war coming into being as a result of different groups hunting for human sacrifices outside of their tribe in order to appease unseen forces doesn't exactly correspond to any contemporary historical theory that I know.
Mumford's principle focus in the later half of the book is in consideration of the rise and fall of what he calls the "megamachine". Constituted for the first time under the reign of the self-styled God-Kings of what Mumford calls the "Pyramid Age", the megamachine comes into being when masses of people are efficiently controlled and directed to do work. The resulting organisation - people forced to put all their effort towards the allotted task, different members of the group each assigned specialised tasks from which they must not deviate, all directable by the God-King and all oriented to the same goal - is described by Mumford as, quite literally, a machine: one composed of living beings. Mumford suggests that it is this megamachine which actually formed the template and the motivation for the development of automated machinery at a later date.
The megamachine depended on the God-King being able to exercise absolute power over the machine. This was in part why such rulers claimed the mantle of godhood. These claims were buttressed by the works that the God-Kings could achieve through the power of the megamachine. Mumford's archetypal example of such a monument to Godhood is the pyramids: artefacts of such size, durability and precision that their like has never been equalled by any construction that doesn't rely on some form of automation.
Mumford is well aware of the human cost on the components of this megamachine. The rulers themselves availed themselves of power, and the scribes and bureaucrats, who were required in order to efficiently communicate the God-Kings' wishes to the various compoments of the megamachine, enjoyed a certain amount of privilege. But the great mass of people were subject to extraordinary pressure, and it was only a matter of time before revolt and rebellion broke the megamachine down.
This is not to say that megamachines no longer exist, and Mumford's follow-on book is explicitly devoted the claim that the megamachine has been resurrected in the contemporary era. But Mumford, contrary to much scholarship about the Dark Ages, views this age as, if not exactly pleasant, actually better for the majority of people living than the ages just before or after it. The "technics" of the era were decentralised rather than centralised, aesthetically aware and integrated into daily life rather than dominated by it. In particular, so-called "axial" religions had come into being across the world: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism. These religions were in a sense a reaction to the complications engendered by the growth of civilisation. They taught that divinity, far from being incarnated in the powerful and bloodthirsty rulers of civilisation, existed in opposition to pride and power.
This book is absolutely fascinating to read. I suspect it might be even more fascinating to read it conjunction with Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, and see which of them has a better handle on the trajectory of human development.
Against this, Mumford poses and develops the claim that human development had (and still has) a very different basis. Imagination, the unconscious, myth and aesthetic appreciation are all implicated by Mumford in his suggestive description of how he believes humanity grew from being unusually imaginative apes, through farming, hunting, the creation of kingship and religion, all the way up to the 15th century (the period following that is taken up by Mumford in The Pentagon of Power, a follow-on volume of this book). He doesn't neglect the use and development of tools in the history he traces, but he views that part of human history as having a quite different relationship to human growth than thinkers of him time tended to believe.
Mumford readily acknowledges that the evidence for many of his claims is tentative at best, but he insists that relying solely on the archaeological record is misleading, as the archaeological evidence is only indicative of material artifacts that can be preserved. Mumford claims that it is the non-material historical practice - that which hasn't left a buried record - that needs to be considered. He tries to assess the material record where he can for evidence of non-material practice, but he also tries to draw conclusions based on analogy to the present day. By looking at practices of contemporary societies, both modern and more "primitive", Mumford hopes to draw analogies to how life might have been lived, above and beyond that available solely from material evidence.
The resulting historical narrative in the first half of the book is tantalisingly plausible in many cases, although it would be unwise to uncritically accept them as documented truth. Some periods are also less plausible than others. His description as war coming into being as a result of different groups hunting for human sacrifices outside of their tribe in order to appease unseen forces doesn't exactly correspond to any contemporary historical theory that I know.
Mumford's principle focus in the later half of the book is in consideration of the rise and fall of what he calls the "megamachine". Constituted for the first time under the reign of the self-styled God-Kings of what Mumford calls the "Pyramid Age", the megamachine comes into being when masses of people are efficiently controlled and directed to do work. The resulting organisation - people forced to put all their effort towards the allotted task, different members of the group each assigned specialised tasks from which they must not deviate, all directable by the God-King and all oriented to the same goal - is described by Mumford as, quite literally, a machine: one composed of living beings. Mumford suggests that it is this megamachine which actually formed the template and the motivation for the development of automated machinery at a later date.
The megamachine depended on the God-King being able to exercise absolute power over the machine. This was in part why such rulers claimed the mantle of godhood. These claims were buttressed by the works that the God-Kings could achieve through the power of the megamachine. Mumford's archetypal example of such a monument to Godhood is the pyramids: artefacts of such size, durability and precision that their like has never been equalled by any construction that doesn't rely on some form of automation.
Mumford is well aware of the human cost on the components of this megamachine. The rulers themselves availed themselves of power, and the scribes and bureaucrats, who were required in order to efficiently communicate the God-Kings' wishes to the various compoments of the megamachine, enjoyed a certain amount of privilege. But the great mass of people were subject to extraordinary pressure, and it was only a matter of time before revolt and rebellion broke the megamachine down.
This is not to say that megamachines no longer exist, and Mumford's follow-on book is explicitly devoted the claim that the megamachine has been resurrected in the contemporary era. But Mumford, contrary to much scholarship about the Dark Ages, views this age as, if not exactly pleasant, actually better for the majority of people living than the ages just before or after it. The "technics" of the era were decentralised rather than centralised, aesthetically aware and integrated into daily life rather than dominated by it. In particular, so-called "axial" religions had come into being across the world: Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism. These religions were in a sense a reaction to the complications engendered by the growth of civilisation. They taught that divinity, far from being incarnated in the powerful and bloodthirsty rulers of civilisation, existed in opposition to pride and power.
This book is absolutely fascinating to read. I suspect it might be even more fascinating to read it conjunction with Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, and see which of them has a better handle on the trajectory of human development.
October 4, 2015
Rarely do I add a book to the Uber Favorites shelf prior to finishing it. The amount of erudition, depth, focus, and writing ability that the author employs is astounding. Every paragraph is like a box of encrypted thought that holds magnificent images once deciphered. The bird's eye view of the history of mankind that is enabled in the mind, translated faithfully from the author to the mind of the reader gives an exhilarating view of the development of man and (through man) the emergence of the mega-machine.
What is the mega-machine? Do you want to take the red pill? If so.....Keep reading
The Mega-Machine is the structure of society that has throughout time arisen from the organization and development of mankind. In it's exalted form it is represented by the Pyramid age and has been established over and over again wherever absolute control and force has been assumed by kings, pharaohs, or other powerful leaders. The mega-machine is a hierarchical societal structure which is used by the above mentioned leaders to establish dominance and control over the forces of nature and man himself. It is represented by large groups of men serving under one rule and under various guises of the mega machine.
The manner by which Lewis Mumford dissects the mega-machine, and the way that he criticizes it's debilitating grip on mankind is awe inspiring. My only qualm with the book is that Lewis Mumford in this ambitious project resorts to holding to the pervasive view of evolution. The book was published in 1971 and so he can not be blamed too much for going with the flow of science's most pervasive tenet. It is interesting to note here that even though Lewis Mumford holds to this view, his criticism of the "elite" acting like apes is deserving of mention and of quoting verbatim:
“The ruling classes constantly were enervated by the surfeit of goods and pleasures they had so ruthlessly monopolized for themselves. They had lapsed, too many of these insolent rulers and their agents, from a human to a distinctly simian level: like the apes, they snatched food for themselves, instead of sharing it with the group: like them, the more powerful claimed more than their share of women: like them, again, they were in a constant state of nettled aggression towards possible rivals. In short, they had alienated themselves from their distinctly human potentialities and in that sense, the real gains in power and wealth had led to a dead end: they produced no equivalent wealth of mind.”
The degeneration of the elite into simian like creatures as evidenced by the above quote denotes a deep understanding that perhaps the evolutionary dogma which has held science in it's materialistic grasp might actually be a justification for the evil propensities of man (in man's most satiated and debauched form).
Nonetheless, despite the evolutionary chapters of the emergence of man from the caves, it still garnered a 5 star rating which in my opinion is saying a lot about this brilliant book.
The book also ends in a great way. It leaves us with the promise of the coming explanation of the "Sun God".
The next volume in this astounding 2 volume work is called "The Pentagon of Power" and needless to say, I can not wait to begin reading it.
What is the mega-machine? Do you want to take the red pill? If so.....Keep reading
The Mega-Machine is the structure of society that has throughout time arisen from the organization and development of mankind. In it's exalted form it is represented by the Pyramid age and has been established over and over again wherever absolute control and force has been assumed by kings, pharaohs, or other powerful leaders. The mega-machine is a hierarchical societal structure which is used by the above mentioned leaders to establish dominance and control over the forces of nature and man himself. It is represented by large groups of men serving under one rule and under various guises of the mega machine.
The manner by which Lewis Mumford dissects the mega-machine, and the way that he criticizes it's debilitating grip on mankind is awe inspiring. My only qualm with the book is that Lewis Mumford in this ambitious project resorts to holding to the pervasive view of evolution. The book was published in 1971 and so he can not be blamed too much for going with the flow of science's most pervasive tenet. It is interesting to note here that even though Lewis Mumford holds to this view, his criticism of the "elite" acting like apes is deserving of mention and of quoting verbatim:
“The ruling classes constantly were enervated by the surfeit of goods and pleasures they had so ruthlessly monopolized for themselves. They had lapsed, too many of these insolent rulers and their agents, from a human to a distinctly simian level: like the apes, they snatched food for themselves, instead of sharing it with the group: like them, the more powerful claimed more than their share of women: like them, again, they were in a constant state of nettled aggression towards possible rivals. In short, they had alienated themselves from their distinctly human potentialities and in that sense, the real gains in power and wealth had led to a dead end: they produced no equivalent wealth of mind.”
The degeneration of the elite into simian like creatures as evidenced by the above quote denotes a deep understanding that perhaps the evolutionary dogma which has held science in it's materialistic grasp might actually be a justification for the evil propensities of man (in man's most satiated and debauched form).
Nonetheless, despite the evolutionary chapters of the emergence of man from the caves, it still garnered a 5 star rating which in my opinion is saying a lot about this brilliant book.
The book also ends in a great way. It leaves us with the promise of the coming explanation of the "Sun God".
The next volume in this astounding 2 volume work is called "The Pentagon of Power" and needless to say, I can not wait to begin reading it.
February 15, 2021
In Technics and Human Development, Lewis Mumford traces the development of humans through pre-history and historic times to advance his thesis that organizational innovation ought to be understood as a form of technological innovation. This leads him to treat the hyper-socialization that accompanied the rise of civilization as the mechanization of humanity and the creation of what he calls the “megamachine”. For Mumford, the megamachine is both the hallmark and the poison pill of civilization, responsible for both the cultural, artistic, and civic benefits as well as the dreaded reckoning of “mutually assured destruction” that was felt to be coming due at the time of writing. Despite the technological underpinning of his thesis, Mumford’s review of human development is surprisingly prescient in relentlessly focussing on social development rather than technological. Thanks to recent work by primatologists and anthropologists, we now understand that much of early human development, and especially that of language and our large brains, was likely driven by social pressures rather than technological or economic circumstances. In light of this new understanding, Mumford’s exposition is surprisingly modern in many ways and well worth revisiting.
Because chipped stone tools are what archaeologists find with ancient human remains, those tools are used to define their nature. However, since there was almost no improvement at all in these primitive tools for half a million years, perhaps we shouldn’t focus so strictly on man as a “tool making animal”. When we study societies from the present who have no more than stone tools, we find incredibly elaborate cultural and religious structures, completely modern languages, and complicated kinship organizations. Mumford suggests that tool development came well behind the development of symbols, along with the development of expressive and communicative abilities. Although these leave no trace in the fossil record, we can still infer that social development must have taken place during that long period where tools remained utterly static.
Perhaps overly influenced by the psychotherapy of his time, Mumford speculates rather prolifically on the influence of dreaming on early man; especially dreaming prior to the development of language. He speculates that these dreams were so significant that they made a necessity of finding ways to communicate their import to other humans. Thus are rituals, symbols, words, images, and behavioural norms put forward as the “tools” that early man made, and continually improved, while making do with the perfectly adequate chipped stone knives. Mumford’s speculation on the evolution of language from pantomime, through synchronous ritual movement, to ceremonial chanting is fascinating, though far removed from the modern view of language as a means for building and maintaining social coalitions to allow large groups to live together harmoniously. His line of reasoning leads him to language forming due to social pressures, but they are the pressures of taboo and the sacred, rather than the stress of living in large groups. He begins to assert the thesis of organizational innovation as technological innovation, describing the stages of language development as a “technology of the body”.
Mumford builds on the social aspects that might have driven language development by noting that hunting large game would have been quite rare in early man, compared to gathering and trapping, and that the necessity of taxonomy to foragers would be far more important than coordination of hunters. He also notes that once started, the simple pleasure that humans take in conversation would become the overwhelming driver of language evolution. With the ecological changes of the ice age, however, hunting probably did become important, and this is where we finally see some innovation in tool making. Organizationally, a “hunting boss” as a separate personality would have emerged as a first step toward the separation of labour into managers and workers. Technologically, paleolithic man developed the control of fire, the second most important innovation of all time, next to language, as well cordage, traps, nets, containers, and artistic tools. These innovations accompanied cultural inventions in ritual, custom, tradition, religion, art, and language.
The transition from a hunting to an agricultural economy in the Mesolithic period is emphasized by Mumford, as he recounts the long period of plant and animal domestication that had to occur before the “agricultural revolution” of alluvial cereal crops in the Near East could occur. In addition to the series of significant innovations in domestication, he also looks at the social changes that must have occurred during that period. The ritualization of daily drudge work necessary for grinding cereals and the necessity of abandoning a nomadic lifestyle in order to be able to carry out the extended experimentation necessary to develop hybrid plants are two such that preceded the formation of cities with a specialized work force. Alongside these movements toward civilization, Mumford also speculates on the dark side of culture, with ritual sacrifice taking on a predominant role in religion that would later be used by despots for nefarious purposes
With the rise of civilization, we finally get to the formation of Mumford’s “megamachine”. Mumford is scornful of those who would seek to explain civilization as a result of new tools being used for growing crops (e.g. the plow, and irrigation canals). He is emphatic that civilization was the result of organizational innovation; the large cooperative ventures run by a hierarchical command structure are the cause of the immense economic surpluses that supported civilization. It is this invention of bureaucratic organization and control that he calls the megamachine, a mechanism for Kings to use specialized human labour in the service of hero projects. Mumford is highly critical of the megaprojects of the “pyramid age”, taking the conventional view of the time that the citizens of Egypt and Mesopotamia were treated like the South American natives who were worked to death mining gold for the conquistadors. It is somewhat ironic that he revels in the craftsmanship of the people who built medieval cathedrals, a pursuit of excellence in the highest traditions of human achievement, but cannot bring himself to apply the same analysis to the wonders of the ancient world. The megamachine is an unredeemable menace, despite the advances in law, order, justice, urbanity, civility, and rationality that accompany civilization.
The initial rise of civilization brought forth the separation of labour into management and worker as well as the division of labour in the service of efficiency, the economic surplus then drove a process of specialization of labour where some people were materially supported so that they could devote their lives to particular crafts, and finally a separation of class divided society into an elite, who indulged themselves in the pursuit of leisure, and a working class who kept the whole thing going. Since an economy of abundance can never be in equilibrium, Mumford speculates that the elite required a praetorian guard to protect themselves in hard times, thereby turning the megamachine toward the development of a permanent military (permanent also because this is how the megamachine has survived to the present day).
Although Mumford is primarily concerned with a critique of this “machine” composed of human parts, he is also searching for an alternative, a balanced form of civilization where people can pursue the business of becoming a “complete human being” (it is assumed we share his definition, whatever it might be). He is not against technological innovation, as long as it is only used to alleviate drudge work and not replace skilful and artistic work. His two near-utopias are the Benedictine monastery and the medieval village (189 holidays per year! Joy!). Ultimately, the organizational modes of civilization are responsible for creating, encoding, and disseminating knowledge and Mumford is unable to envision any other organizational mechanism that could do the same without also having the same failings of allowing an elite to control the lives of so many in the service of aggrandizing the egos of an unimaginative, lazy, and ignorant few. Thus would he surrender the quest for knowledge and settle for a static life where nothing much happens. Not that anyone believes this for a second, but that does seem to be his only option. The book is well worth reading for its vivid recounting and re-imagining of human evolution; a story that is captivating and well told. The critique of the megamachine is also worthwhile, though Mumford’s solutions will not mollify many readers.
Because chipped stone tools are what archaeologists find with ancient human remains, those tools are used to define their nature. However, since there was almost no improvement at all in these primitive tools for half a million years, perhaps we shouldn’t focus so strictly on man as a “tool making animal”. When we study societies from the present who have no more than stone tools, we find incredibly elaborate cultural and religious structures, completely modern languages, and complicated kinship organizations. Mumford suggests that tool development came well behind the development of symbols, along with the development of expressive and communicative abilities. Although these leave no trace in the fossil record, we can still infer that social development must have taken place during that long period where tools remained utterly static.
Perhaps overly influenced by the psychotherapy of his time, Mumford speculates rather prolifically on the influence of dreaming on early man; especially dreaming prior to the development of language. He speculates that these dreams were so significant that they made a necessity of finding ways to communicate their import to other humans. Thus are rituals, symbols, words, images, and behavioural norms put forward as the “tools” that early man made, and continually improved, while making do with the perfectly adequate chipped stone knives. Mumford’s speculation on the evolution of language from pantomime, through synchronous ritual movement, to ceremonial chanting is fascinating, though far removed from the modern view of language as a means for building and maintaining social coalitions to allow large groups to live together harmoniously. His line of reasoning leads him to language forming due to social pressures, but they are the pressures of taboo and the sacred, rather than the stress of living in large groups. He begins to assert the thesis of organizational innovation as technological innovation, describing the stages of language development as a “technology of the body”.
Mumford builds on the social aspects that might have driven language development by noting that hunting large game would have been quite rare in early man, compared to gathering and trapping, and that the necessity of taxonomy to foragers would be far more important than coordination of hunters. He also notes that once started, the simple pleasure that humans take in conversation would become the overwhelming driver of language evolution. With the ecological changes of the ice age, however, hunting probably did become important, and this is where we finally see some innovation in tool making. Organizationally, a “hunting boss” as a separate personality would have emerged as a first step toward the separation of labour into managers and workers. Technologically, paleolithic man developed the control of fire, the second most important innovation of all time, next to language, as well cordage, traps, nets, containers, and artistic tools. These innovations accompanied cultural inventions in ritual, custom, tradition, religion, art, and language.
The transition from a hunting to an agricultural economy in the Mesolithic period is emphasized by Mumford, as he recounts the long period of plant and animal domestication that had to occur before the “agricultural revolution” of alluvial cereal crops in the Near East could occur. In addition to the series of significant innovations in domestication, he also looks at the social changes that must have occurred during that period. The ritualization of daily drudge work necessary for grinding cereals and the necessity of abandoning a nomadic lifestyle in order to be able to carry out the extended experimentation necessary to develop hybrid plants are two such that preceded the formation of cities with a specialized work force. Alongside these movements toward civilization, Mumford also speculates on the dark side of culture, with ritual sacrifice taking on a predominant role in religion that would later be used by despots for nefarious purposes
With the rise of civilization, we finally get to the formation of Mumford’s “megamachine”. Mumford is scornful of those who would seek to explain civilization as a result of new tools being used for growing crops (e.g. the plow, and irrigation canals). He is emphatic that civilization was the result of organizational innovation; the large cooperative ventures run by a hierarchical command structure are the cause of the immense economic surpluses that supported civilization. It is this invention of bureaucratic organization and control that he calls the megamachine, a mechanism for Kings to use specialized human labour in the service of hero projects. Mumford is highly critical of the megaprojects of the “pyramid age”, taking the conventional view of the time that the citizens of Egypt and Mesopotamia were treated like the South American natives who were worked to death mining gold for the conquistadors. It is somewhat ironic that he revels in the craftsmanship of the people who built medieval cathedrals, a pursuit of excellence in the highest traditions of human achievement, but cannot bring himself to apply the same analysis to the wonders of the ancient world. The megamachine is an unredeemable menace, despite the advances in law, order, justice, urbanity, civility, and rationality that accompany civilization.
The initial rise of civilization brought forth the separation of labour into management and worker as well as the division of labour in the service of efficiency, the economic surplus then drove a process of specialization of labour where some people were materially supported so that they could devote their lives to particular crafts, and finally a separation of class divided society into an elite, who indulged themselves in the pursuit of leisure, and a working class who kept the whole thing going. Since an economy of abundance can never be in equilibrium, Mumford speculates that the elite required a praetorian guard to protect themselves in hard times, thereby turning the megamachine toward the development of a permanent military (permanent also because this is how the megamachine has survived to the present day).
Although Mumford is primarily concerned with a critique of this “machine” composed of human parts, he is also searching for an alternative, a balanced form of civilization where people can pursue the business of becoming a “complete human being” (it is assumed we share his definition, whatever it might be). He is not against technological innovation, as long as it is only used to alleviate drudge work and not replace skilful and artistic work. His two near-utopias are the Benedictine monastery and the medieval village (189 holidays per year! Joy!). Ultimately, the organizational modes of civilization are responsible for creating, encoding, and disseminating knowledge and Mumford is unable to envision any other organizational mechanism that could do the same without also having the same failings of allowing an elite to control the lives of so many in the service of aggrandizing the egos of an unimaginative, lazy, and ignorant few. Thus would he surrender the quest for knowledge and settle for a static life where nothing much happens. Not that anyone believes this for a second, but that does seem to be his only option. The book is well worth reading for its vivid recounting and re-imagining of human evolution; a story that is captivating and well told. The critique of the megamachine is also worthwhile, though Mumford’s solutions will not mollify many readers.
January 27, 2023
Ένα μάλλον άγνωστο στην Ελλάδα διαμαντάκι, που σε κερδίζει από τον σχεδόν θυμωμένο του πρόλογο ακόμα. Ο συγγραφέας είναι πολυμαθέστατος (τέρας γνώσεων) και ικανότατος στο να «βάζει τη σκέψη του στο χαρτί», κάτι στο οποίο πολλοί στοχαστές αποτυγχάνουν, παραδίδοντας δυσκοίλια και δυσανάγνωστα κείμενα που αδικούν το ίδιο τους το έργο.
Μπορεί κάποια συμπεράσματά του να έχουν ξεπεραστεί (όχι πολύ) σήμερα, αλλά συνολικά η διεισδυτική και διορατική του ματιά 50 χρόνια μετά την αρχική έκδοση εκπλήσσει ευχάριστα.
Το βιβλίο δεν είναι εγχειρίδιο μηχανικής, μη σας μπερδεύει ο τίτλος, αλλά μια καλειδοσκοπική άποψη της ιστορίας της ανθρωπότητας με την εμφάνιση της μεγα-μηχανής. Πιείτε νερό, έχουμε δρόμο ακόμα.
Η Μεγα-Μηχανή, είναι κοινωνική δομή, διαχρονικώς προκύπτουσα από την ανάπτυξη και την κοινωνική οργάνωση του ανθρώπινου είδους. Θυμάστε τις πυραμίδες στην Αίγυπτο; Είναι προϊόν της μεγα-μηχανής. Όχι, ο συγγραφέας δεν έχει παροξυσμικές μηχανιστικές ονειρώξεις. Αυτό που εννοεί είναι ότι ένα τόσο ασύλληπτα κολοσσιαίο, άχρηστο (και 100% ματαιόδοξο) έργο ήταν αδύνατον χωρίς την δημιουργία εξουσιαστικών δομών (βλέπε ιεροβασιλεία στην Αίγυπτο), την απόλυτη κυριαρχία ενός (ή ομάδας) πάνω στη μάζα, την αποανθρωποποίηση του εξαναγκασμένου εργάτη/δούλου (που γίνεται ακριβώς ένα άβουλο τμήμα μιας τεράστιας μηχανής). Δομή και οργάνωση που έρχεται σε αντίθεση με τον ελεύθερο (ίσως ελευθεριακό, αλλά σίγουρα πολύ λιγότερο επίμοχθο και πολύ περισσότερο ευτυχισμένο για το 99% του πληθυσμού) τρόπο ζωής που επικράτησε πριν το πλεόνασμα τροφής που παρείχε η γεωργία επιτρέψει την μόνιμη κατοίκηση περιοχών και τη δημιουργία «αρχής», αρχής εξουσιαστικής, όχι απλώς ελέω θεού, αλλά προφασιζόμενη θεϊκή καταγωγή που επέβαλλε πλήρη και απόλυτη υποταγή στις επιθυμίες της.
Σύμφωνα με τον Μάμφορντ, πάντα (όχι ότι αφήνει στον αναγνώστη περιθώρια αμφιβολίας η αναλυτική του σκέψη), η μεγα-μηχανή είναι συντριπτική για την ανθρωπότητα, ολετήρας σχεδόν κάθε έννοιας με θετικό πρόσημο στην κοινωνική ζωή και παρά το γεγονός ότι κάνει την εμφάνισή της στην προϊστορία, μετεξελίσσεται, καρπώνεται την εξέλιξη της τεχνολογίας, ακόμη και της ίδιας της θεολογίας π��υ αρχικά τον αντιστρατεύεται. Όχι ότι δεν υπάρχουν "μικρά γαλατικά χωριά" που αντιστέκονται στην ισοπεδωτική ψυχρή παραφροσύνη της μεγα-μηχανής (βλ. π.χ. Εβραϊκή Θρησκεία, συναγωγές, μικρές κοινότητες με ευχέρεια στην αυτοοργάνωση, ή Αθηναϊκή Δημοκρατία χωρίς ισόβιους κρατικούς λειτουργούς με διαρκή αναδιανομή θεσμικών αξιωμάτων, χριστιανική θρησκεία με δίδαγμα ταπεινότητας, Βενεδικτίνοι Μοναχοί με χρήση «μηχανής» για απελευθέρωση εργάσιμου χρόνου κ.α.).
Μικρή σημείωση: διάχυτη και έκδηλη μέσα στο έργο είναι και η αποστροφή του για εκδηλώσεις της μεγα-μηχανής (κάποιες εξ αυτών σύγχρονές του), όπως στον πόλεμο του Βιετνάμ, ο οποίος βρισκόταν περίπου στο μέσο του όταν εκδόθηκε το βιβλίο, ενισχύοντας την εικόνα του ανθρωπιστικού ορθολογισμού που πρεσβεύει.
Συνεχίζεται σε δεύτερο τόμο, για τον οποίο θα πούμε προσεχώς.
Μπορεί κάποια συμπεράσματά του να έχουν ξεπεραστεί (όχι πολύ) σήμερα, αλλά συνολικά η διεισδυτική και διορατική του ματιά 50 χρόνια μετά την αρχική έκδοση εκπλήσσει ευχάριστα.
Το βιβλίο δεν είναι εγχειρίδιο μηχανικής, μη σας μπερδεύει ο τίτλος, αλλά μια καλειδοσκοπική άποψη της ιστορίας της ανθρωπότητας με την εμφάνιση της μεγα-μηχανής. Πιείτε νερό, έχουμε δρόμο ακόμα.
Η Μεγα-Μηχανή, είναι κοινωνική δομή, διαχρονικώς προκύπτουσα από την ανάπτυξη και την κοινωνική οργάνωση του ανθρώπινου είδους. Θυμάστε τις πυραμίδες στην Αίγυπτο; Είναι προϊόν της μεγα-μηχανής. Όχι, ο συγγραφέας δεν έχει παροξυσμικές μηχανιστικές ονειρώξεις. Αυτό που εννοεί είναι ότι ένα τόσο ασύλληπτα κολοσσιαίο, άχρηστο (και 100% ματαιόδοξο) έργο ήταν αδύνατον χωρίς την δημιουργία εξουσιαστικών δομών (βλέπε ιεροβασιλεία στην Αίγυπτο), την απόλυτη κυριαρχία ενός (ή ομάδας) πάνω στη μάζα, την αποανθρωποποίηση του εξαναγκασμένου εργάτη/δούλου (που γίνεται ακριβώς ένα άβουλο τμήμα μιας τεράστιας μηχανής). Δομή και οργάνωση που έρχεται σε αντίθεση με τον ελεύθερο (ίσως ελευθεριακό, αλλά σίγουρα πολύ λιγότερο επίμοχθο και πολύ περισσότερο ευτυχισμένο για το 99% του πληθυσμού) τρόπο ζωής που επικράτησε πριν το πλεόνασμα τροφής που παρείχε η γεωργία επιτρέψει την μόνιμη κατοίκηση περιοχών και τη δημιουργία «αρχής», αρχής εξουσιαστικής, όχι απλώς ελέω θεού, αλλά προφασιζόμενη θεϊκή καταγωγή που επέβαλλε πλήρη και απόλυτη υποταγή στις επιθυμίες της.
Σύμφωνα με τον Μάμφορντ, πάντα (όχι ότι αφήνει στον αναγνώστη περιθώρια αμφιβολίας η αναλυτική του σκέψη), η μεγα-μηχανή είναι συντριπτική για την ανθρωπότητα, ολετήρας σχεδόν κάθε έννοιας με θετικό πρόσημο στην κοινωνική ζωή και παρά το γεγονός ότι κάνει την εμφάνισή της στην προϊστορία, μετεξελίσσεται, καρπώνεται την εξέλιξη της τεχνολογίας, ακόμη και της ίδιας της θεολογίας π��υ αρχικά τον αντιστρατεύεται. Όχι ότι δεν υπάρχουν "μικρά γαλατικά χωριά" που αντιστέκονται στην ισοπεδωτική ψυχρή παραφροσύνη της μεγα-μηχανής (βλ. π.χ. Εβραϊκή Θρησκεία, συναγωγές, μικρές κοινότητες με ευχέρεια στην αυτοοργάνωση, ή Αθηναϊκή Δημοκρατία χωρίς ισόβιους κρατικούς λειτουργούς με διαρκή αναδιανομή θεσμικών αξιωμάτων, χριστιανική θρησκεία με δίδαγμα ταπεινότητας, Βενεδικτίνοι Μοναχοί με χρήση «μηχανής» για απελευθέρωση εργάσιμου χρόνου κ.α.).
Μικρή σημείωση: διάχυτη και έκδηλη μέσα στο έργο είναι και η αποστροφή του για εκδηλώσεις της μεγα-μηχανής (κάποιες εξ αυτών σύγχρονές του), όπως στον πόλεμο του Βιετνάμ, ο οποίος βρισκόταν περίπου στο μέσο του όταν εκδόθηκε το βιβλίο, ενισχύοντας την εικόνα του ανθρωπιστικού ορθολογισμού που πρεσβεύει.
Συνεχίζεται σε δεύτερο τόμο, για τον οποίο θα πούμε προσεχώς.
February 11, 2023
The driving idea for this book can be summed up this way: “we have overlooked the fact that a life without stable containers would fall to pieces” (p. 250). That’s right: containers.
Mumford’s founding premise is that we have collectively developed a mistaken understanding of human development due to an oversight about the archaeological record: things like stone arrowheads, plows, and grindstones are materially durable and have lasted through time. Things like reed baskets, art, stories, traditions, and rituals are either materially fragile or immaterial and do not last over time. Hence, we over value the importance of tools because they persist in the archaeological record.
The questions, then, is how do you extrapolate modern human civilization, with our obsessions about organization, efficiency, duty, and industriousness from a chipped stone axe? You can’t, unless you trace a parallel history of containers, by which Mumford means containers like clay pots, wine skins, baskets, etc., but also containers like stories, images, rituals, art, and written language.
Material containers hold things, allowing them to be transported over space. They also preserve things (think about fermentation, curing, preserving) which allows transport over time. The more metaphoric containers like ritual, art, and language are containers of experience, values, and beliefs, which also develop over time. When we add this piece to the historical development of tools, we start to get a better overall picture of the development of civilization.
Importantly, our development of the “technics” of civilization (i.e., technologies, practices, know how) is possible and only sensible when seen as a parallel development of both the technology and tools and an appropriate sociological mindset (e.g., one that values work and efficiency). Containers are vitally important to the development of the sociological mindset. Consider, alone, the connection between religious belief and work ethic. And how does religion persist over time without containers to transport it (e.g., icons, books, rituals, concepts). If we ignore the development of containers, the history of humanity as a tool-wielding species is a lopsided one.
Mumford is meticulous in this first volume (of two) tracing this parallel history. He carefully ties together the development of tools with social organization with the development of values. The scope and depth of research alone merits high stars, but my goodness, this was a tedious read at times.
Mumford’s founding premise is that we have collectively developed a mistaken understanding of human development due to an oversight about the archaeological record: things like stone arrowheads, plows, and grindstones are materially durable and have lasted through time. Things like reed baskets, art, stories, traditions, and rituals are either materially fragile or immaterial and do not last over time. Hence, we over value the importance of tools because they persist in the archaeological record.
The questions, then, is how do you extrapolate modern human civilization, with our obsessions about organization, efficiency, duty, and industriousness from a chipped stone axe? You can’t, unless you trace a parallel history of containers, by which Mumford means containers like clay pots, wine skins, baskets, etc., but also containers like stories, images, rituals, art, and written language.
Material containers hold things, allowing them to be transported over space. They also preserve things (think about fermentation, curing, preserving) which allows transport over time. The more metaphoric containers like ritual, art, and language are containers of experience, values, and beliefs, which also develop over time. When we add this piece to the historical development of tools, we start to get a better overall picture of the development of civilization.
Importantly, our development of the “technics” of civilization (i.e., technologies, practices, know how) is possible and only sensible when seen as a parallel development of both the technology and tools and an appropriate sociological mindset (e.g., one that values work and efficiency). Containers are vitally important to the development of the sociological mindset. Consider, alone, the connection between religious belief and work ethic. And how does religion persist over time without containers to transport it (e.g., icons, books, rituals, concepts). If we ignore the development of containers, the history of humanity as a tool-wielding species is a lopsided one.
Mumford is meticulous in this first volume (of two) tracing this parallel history. He carefully ties together the development of tools with social organization with the development of values. The scope and depth of research alone merits high stars, but my goodness, this was a tedious read at times.
January 27, 2009
After one false start three or four years ago, I picked this up again early last year. I'll admit, it was pretty rough going for me, but that's largely because the first half of the book doesn't concern the "megamachine"--my main interest in Mumford's thought. His roundabout phrasing structure also makes for reading that sometimes feels something like a maze and can be difficult to settle into. There were still enough significant insights to justify reading it. Some standouts below.
Mumford on the historical origin of the problem of death: "The desire for life without limits was part of the general lifting of limits which the first great assemblage of power by means of the megamachine brought about. Human weaknesses, above all the weakness of mortality, were both contested and defied.
"But if the biological inevitability of death and disintegration mock (sic) the infantile fantasy of absolute power, which the human machine promised to actualize, life mocks it even more. The notion of 'eternal life,' with neither conception, growth, fruition, nor decay--an existence as fixed, as sterilized, as loveless, as purposeless, as unchanging as that of a royal mummy--is only death in another form....(T)his assertion of absolute power was a confession of psychological immaturity--a radical failure to understand the natural processes of birth and growth, of maturation and death." (203) Deny that, Ernest Becker!
On the workers of the megamachine: "Each standardized component, below the top level of command, was only part of a man (sic), condemned to work at only part of a job and live only part of a life. Adam Smith's belated analysis of the division of labor, explaining changes that were taking place in the eighteenth century toward a more inflexible and dehumanized system, with greater productive efficiency, illuminates equally the earliest 'industrial revolution.'" (212)
On the burgeoning scientific/capitalist mind and its eventual costs: "These technical premises seemed so simple, their aim so rational, their methods so open to general imitation, that Leonardo never saw the need to put the question we must now ask: Is the intelligence alone, however purified and decontaminated, an adequate agent for doing justice to the needs and purposes of life?" (288)
Mumford on the historical origin of the problem of death: "The desire for life without limits was part of the general lifting of limits which the first great assemblage of power by means of the megamachine brought about. Human weaknesses, above all the weakness of mortality, were both contested and defied.
"But if the biological inevitability of death and disintegration mock (sic) the infantile fantasy of absolute power, which the human machine promised to actualize, life mocks it even more. The notion of 'eternal life,' with neither conception, growth, fruition, nor decay--an existence as fixed, as sterilized, as loveless, as purposeless, as unchanging as that of a royal mummy--is only death in another form....(T)his assertion of absolute power was a confession of psychological immaturity--a radical failure to understand the natural processes of birth and growth, of maturation and death." (203) Deny that, Ernest Becker!
On the workers of the megamachine: "Each standardized component, below the top level of command, was only part of a man (sic), condemned to work at only part of a job and live only part of a life. Adam Smith's belated analysis of the division of labor, explaining changes that were taking place in the eighteenth century toward a more inflexible and dehumanized system, with greater productive efficiency, illuminates equally the earliest 'industrial revolution.'" (212)
On the burgeoning scientific/capitalist mind and its eventual costs: "These technical premises seemed so simple, their aim so rational, their methods so open to general imitation, that Leonardo never saw the need to put the question we must now ask: Is the intelligence alone, however purified and decontaminated, an adequate agent for doing justice to the needs and purposes of life?" (288)
July 28, 2020
Mumford's argument in this book is that in our considerations of human history and progress, we have too often taken the machine and its technical elements to be of primacy, ignoring the related developments in human thinking and culture that enabled our "technical" inventions to flourish. For the most part, like Mumford's other books, this thesis is worked out in an engaging, entertaining, and interesting manner. And, like in his other books, the last chapter or two flag some, get a bit repetitive, and conclude with a bit more hope than is perhaps warranted following the conclusions of the earlier chapters. But altogether, this volume asks some important questions about how we consider the technological history of mankind, and how those things relate to the development of human culture. Having spent considerable time with Mumford and his works in the last several months, I can say that this was among his most provocative without being confrontational, and so reads with a bit more energy than some of his other long works.
April 26, 2021
This book is a masterpiece and one of the best i've ever read.
November 14, 2023
There are some nice things in the book that are "groundbreaking" and you will guaranteed learn something new by reading this book (or should I rather say by fighting the boring parts till you reach good stuff that is 1 paragraph long).
Why 1 out of 5? Well, the title explains it all - "The death of hero.". I was reading many works that quote Lewis Mumford and quote him in a positive way. Then I watched his interview and was a little bit surprised. He was boasting that he abandoned typewriter, because he thought that he was too dependent on it and it is bad because it is a technology so he is a slave to this technology and if it breaks then he will be defeated by this technology. But then he says in a proud way that he learned to write properly and use pen and paper properly WHICH IS ANOTHER TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY!!!!?! But he ignored that fact!
Then I decided that he would probably have a better stance when writing, because writing requires a level of abstraction and analysis that was clearly missing from his interview.
Guess what?! The same thing!!! All throughout the book he was explaining how the "mega-machine" is bad and how it forces us to do things and forces us to desire things, but then at the end he admires Leonardo da Vinci by writing how good and abstracted from the mega-machine he was when buying birds at the local market and releasing them. Guess what?! IS NOT BUYING THINGS an furthering the economy and the mega-machine FURTHERS the mega-machine so the MORE birds are captured and sold?!!!?!
First and last book from Lewis that I will read in my life.
Why 1 out of 5? Well, the title explains it all - "The death of hero.". I was reading many works that quote Lewis Mumford and quote him in a positive way. Then I watched his interview and was a little bit surprised. He was boasting that he abandoned typewriter, because he thought that he was too dependent on it and it is bad because it is a technology so he is a slave to this technology and if it breaks then he will be defeated by this technology. But then he says in a proud way that he learned to write properly and use pen and paper properly WHICH IS ANOTHER TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY!!!!?! But he ignored that fact!
Then I decided that he would probably have a better stance when writing, because writing requires a level of abstraction and analysis that was clearly missing from his interview.
Guess what?! The same thing!!! All throughout the book he was explaining how the "mega-machine" is bad and how it forces us to do things and forces us to desire things, but then at the end he admires Leonardo da Vinci by writing how good and abstracted from the mega-machine he was when buying birds at the local market and releasing them. Guess what?! IS NOT BUYING THINGS an furthering the economy and the mega-machine FURTHERS the mega-machine so the MORE birds are captured and sold?!!!?!
First and last book from Lewis that I will read in my life.
March 15, 2024
Was there ever a more clear-eyed thinker than Lewis Mumford? He saw the patterns, drew the conclusions, laid bare the currents of meaning and motivation that rule the world.
Returning to Technics & Human Development after nearly twenty years, intending just to flick through for the bits I needed, I found myself reading the whole thing once again and marvelling at Mumford's combination of perceptiveness and style. Rarely is genius so readable.
If you want to understand the current human predicament, this is the book for you. Instead of something novel and exceptional, you come to see the travails of the C21st as merely the apotheosis of a human dream that began in prehistory and which found its initial preeminence in the megamachine (constructed of human bodies) that built the Pyramids and the Great Wall, and which now, in its second mature flowering, made possible by "progress" in material and social technologies, promises (not 'threatens', we're beyond that) to engulf us in the waves of our unrelenting cupidity.
"With this new 'megatechnics' the dominant minority will create a uniform, all-enveloping, super-planetary structure, designed for automatic operation. Instead of functioning actively as an autonomous personality, man will become a passive, purposeless, machine-conditioned animal whose proper functions, as technicians now interpret man's role, will either be fed into the machine or strictly limited and controlled for the benefit of the personalised, collective organisations."
Enjoy being a symptom.
Returning to Technics & Human Development after nearly twenty years, intending just to flick through for the bits I needed, I found myself reading the whole thing once again and marvelling at Mumford's combination of perceptiveness and style. Rarely is genius so readable.
If you want to understand the current human predicament, this is the book for you. Instead of something novel and exceptional, you come to see the travails of the C21st as merely the apotheosis of a human dream that began in prehistory and which found its initial preeminence in the megamachine (constructed of human bodies) that built the Pyramids and the Great Wall, and which now, in its second mature flowering, made possible by "progress" in material and social technologies, promises (not 'threatens', we're beyond that) to engulf us in the waves of our unrelenting cupidity.
"With this new 'megatechnics' the dominant minority will create a uniform, all-enveloping, super-planetary structure, designed for automatic operation. Instead of functioning actively as an autonomous personality, man will become a passive, purposeless, machine-conditioned animal whose proper functions, as technicians now interpret man's role, will either be fed into the machine or strictly limited and controlled for the benefit of the personalised, collective organisations."
Enjoy being a symptom.
December 14, 2020
первая книга по антропологии, которую я прочитала, причем с огромным удовольствием. не уверена, что можно ее назначить однозначно книгой по антропологии, немало там и философских вопросов
главный принцип отделить машинный подход - построение систем, контролей, процессов от человеческого, ибо человек больше чем машина. человек стал человеком не столько благодаря труду, как это часто формулируется сколько благодаря и вопреки порой своей огромной психической энергии. Мамфорд в этом плане мне кажется очень чутко смотрит в прошлое и хотя фактических свидетельств недостаточно и многие поспешные выводы уже давно сделаны, умеет изменить точку зрения, увидеть, как тот человек жил и становился.
в принципе книга достаточно легко читается, множество глубоких, вскрывающих фактов и наблюдений
- неолит был по сути эпохой матриархата, когда человек начал обустраивать постоянное жилище, а это давалось именно женщине
- мужчинам труднее давались задачи без прямой отдачи
- классная мысль про культуру, как емкость, которую надо наполнять
- приручение домашнего скота шло в первую очередь через религию. рога бука ассоциировались с луной, чем-то небесным и божественным. чтобы было удобнее задабривать богов, человек приручил быка для жертвования
- интересно о становлении власти
вообще можно бесконечно выписывать тут интересные наблюдения из книги, так что просто рекомендую всем почитать.
главный принцип отделить машинный подход - построение систем, контролей, процессов от человеческого, ибо человек больше чем машина. человек стал человеком не столько благодаря труду, как это часто формулируется сколько благодаря и вопреки порой своей огромной психической энергии. Мамфорд в этом плане мне кажется очень чутко смотрит в прошлое и хотя фактических свидетельств недостаточно и многие поспешные выводы уже давно сделаны, умеет изменить точку зрения, увидеть, как тот человек жил и становился.
в принципе книга достаточно легко читается, множество глубоких, вскрывающих фактов и наблюдений
- неолит был по сути эпохой матриархата, когда человек начал обустраивать постоянное жилище, а это давалось именно женщине
- мужчинам труднее давались задачи без прямой отдачи
- классная мысль про культуру, как емкость, которую надо наполнять
- приручение домашнего скота шло в первую очередь через религию. рога бука ассоциировались с луной, чем-то небесным и божественным. чтобы было удобнее задабривать богов, человек приручил быка для жертвования
- интересно о становлении власти
вообще можно бесконечно выписывать тут интересные наблюдения из книги, так что просто рекомендую всем почитать.
May 24, 2017
Lewis Mumford is possibly the biggest thinker and highly articulate polymath that I've come across so far. This first volume of the two-volume set is an analysis of the development of homosapien anatomical development and mastering of dreams, vocalization, and using the body as the first tools in shaping current culture. He then goes on to analyze farming, hunting and labor production in addition to its development into divine kingship and the nation state. Such a fascinating read in the way he lauds human development and also condemns the transformation of culture and true progress into "civilization" complete with slavery, war, exploitation of natural resources, coercion, etc. Also, the annotated bibliography at the end is extensive and shows just what a polymath Mumford was, and I couldn't overlook that he's such a baller that he can include his own works in the bibliography (:
December 30, 2018
In this book, philosopher Lewis Mumford sketches out the transition between the Neolithic era of smaller farming communities and the emerging, more centralized industrial era. This shift is notable, technologically, as it represented a bifurcation of the way technology was managed -- either by a distributed, democratic community of participants, or by a top-down authoritarian body (I wrote more about this here. This disparity holds true until the present age and this book gives the armchair technology historian much ponder.
June 16, 2017
Читается медленно и тяжеловато, но автор очень уж умный, и много правильных вещей говорит.
January 3, 2018
Love it.
August 12, 2019
α - from Alan Kay's reading list
Ω - the rave reviews make me think I'm missing something essential...
Ω - the rave reviews make me think I'm missing something essential...
September 23, 2020
This book is a masterpiece. One of the best I ever read. Perfect language, clear ideas, no water, every page is precious.
June 19, 2023
Lewis Mumford's "Technics and Human Development" is a seminal work that explores the intricate relationship between technology and human progress. Published in 1934, the book delves into the profound impact of technological advancements on various aspects of society, including culture, economics, and individual development. In this review, we will examine the key themes and arguments presented by Mumford, evaluate the book's strengths and weaknesses, and discuss its enduring relevance in contemporary discourse on technology and human development.
Mumford's "Technics and Human Development" is a comprehensive study that analyzes the reciprocal relationship between technology and human civilization. He elucidates how technological innovations shape societal structures and the human psyche, while also asserting that human values and aspirations significantly influence the trajectory of technological progress. The book covers a broad range of topics, including the historical development of technology, its impact on urbanization, the rise of industrial capitalism, and the implications for individual autonomy and creativity.
Mumford's examination of the historical evolution of technology is particularly noteworthy. He meticulously traces the origins of technics from early human civilization to the modern era, highlighting the transformative influence of tools and machines on human societies. Mumford argues that technology is not simply a neutral tool, but rather a dynamic force that shapes and is shaped by cultural, economic, and political forces.
Furthermore, the author explores the consequences of technics on urbanization and industrialization. He critically examines the growth of cities and the mechanization of industry, emphasizing the environmental and social costs of such developments. Mumford challenges the prevailing belief that technology alone can solve societal problems, cautioning against the dehumanizing effects of unchecked industrialization.
Mumford's work stands as a remarkable achievement in its interdisciplinary approach, seamlessly blending historical analysis, sociological insights, and philosophical reflections. The book's comprehensive scope and erudite scholarship provide a robust foundation for understanding the complex interactions between technology and human development. Mumford's ability to integrate diverse perspectives and data into a coherent framework enhances the book's scholarly rigor and intellectual depth.
One of the book's strengths lies in Mumford's ability to present historical evidence and empirical data to support his arguments. By examining various historical periods and civilizations, he establishes a solid basis for understanding the long-standing relationship between technology and human progress. Furthermore, his critique of the dehumanizing effects of unbridled technological advancement remains highly relevant in the present context, where debates on artificial intelligence, automation, and digitalization continue to dominate scholarly discourse.
However, it is important to note that "Technics and Human Development" was published in 1934, and some of Mumford's analyses may benefit from additional contemporary perspectives. Given the significant technological advancements that have taken place since then, a revisiting of certain ideas in light of current developments would have enhanced the book's applicability to present-day discussions on technology and human development.
Lewis Mumford's "Technics and Human Development" remains a seminal work that illuminates the intricate dynamics between technology and human progress. The book's interdisciplinary approach, extensive historical analysis, and critical evaluation of technological impacts offer valuable insights into the complex relationship between society and technology. Despite its publication in 1934, the book's core arguments and cautionary perspectives continue to resonate in contemporary debates surrounding technological advancements. "Technics and Human Development" stands as a significant contribution to the field and a thought-provoking resource for scholars and researchers exploring the societal implications of technology.
GPT
Mumford's "Technics and Human Development" is a comprehensive study that analyzes the reciprocal relationship between technology and human civilization. He elucidates how technological innovations shape societal structures and the human psyche, while also asserting that human values and aspirations significantly influence the trajectory of technological progress. The book covers a broad range of topics, including the historical development of technology, its impact on urbanization, the rise of industrial capitalism, and the implications for individual autonomy and creativity.
Mumford's examination of the historical evolution of technology is particularly noteworthy. He meticulously traces the origins of technics from early human civilization to the modern era, highlighting the transformative influence of tools and machines on human societies. Mumford argues that technology is not simply a neutral tool, but rather a dynamic force that shapes and is shaped by cultural, economic, and political forces.
Furthermore, the author explores the consequences of technics on urbanization and industrialization. He critically examines the growth of cities and the mechanization of industry, emphasizing the environmental and social costs of such developments. Mumford challenges the prevailing belief that technology alone can solve societal problems, cautioning against the dehumanizing effects of unchecked industrialization.
Mumford's work stands as a remarkable achievement in its interdisciplinary approach, seamlessly blending historical analysis, sociological insights, and philosophical reflections. The book's comprehensive scope and erudite scholarship provide a robust foundation for understanding the complex interactions between technology and human development. Mumford's ability to integrate diverse perspectives and data into a coherent framework enhances the book's scholarly rigor and intellectual depth.
One of the book's strengths lies in Mumford's ability to present historical evidence and empirical data to support his arguments. By examining various historical periods and civilizations, he establishes a solid basis for understanding the long-standing relationship between technology and human progress. Furthermore, his critique of the dehumanizing effects of unbridled technological advancement remains highly relevant in the present context, where debates on artificial intelligence, automation, and digitalization continue to dominate scholarly discourse.
However, it is important to note that "Technics and Human Development" was published in 1934, and some of Mumford's analyses may benefit from additional contemporary perspectives. Given the significant technological advancements that have taken place since then, a revisiting of certain ideas in light of current developments would have enhanced the book's applicability to present-day discussions on technology and human development.
Lewis Mumford's "Technics and Human Development" remains a seminal work that illuminates the intricate dynamics between technology and human progress. The book's interdisciplinary approach, extensive historical analysis, and critical evaluation of technological impacts offer valuable insights into the complex relationship between society and technology. Despite its publication in 1934, the book's core arguments and cautionary perspectives continue to resonate in contemporary debates surrounding technological advancements. "Technics and Human Development" stands as a significant contribution to the field and a thought-provoking resource for scholars and researchers exploring the societal implications of technology.
GPT
May 30, 2010
In the "Myth of the Machine", Lewis Mumford depicts his version of human development from a hunter-gatherer society to our present, technology focused society.
The first interesting idea mentioned is the thought that language and rituals were far more important to human development than tool-making, which only followed when the cultural context allowed for it. Mumford discusses in depth the influence of dreams on early human development and comes to the conclusion that language worked as a tool to oppress the unconscious.
He depicts how hunter-gatherer societies vanished upon the upcoming of the idea of agriculture and how agriculture was the women's work back then.
The next step in human history according to Mumford, is the creation of 'civilization' by means of power: Kings claiming authority with reference to the gods. They were responsible for the creation of the first megamachines: the building of the pyramids.
At some point, a counter-movement came into existence, questioning the central role of authority and power and violence and focusing on love and compassion. This ideology stayed around for some time, until the catholic church decided to back up the megamachine of capitalism. Like in the ancient times, a new god has risen and is now used to rationalize the power of authority: the god of science and technology. This god has forced mankind into participating in the next megamachine.
Lewis Mumford has astonishing and certainly illuminating thoughts on the development of human culture and he knows how to use his pen: The book is easy to read, straightforward and mind-boggling!
A better synopsis of the content than mine can be found at:
http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/cl...
The first interesting idea mentioned is the thought that language and rituals were far more important to human development than tool-making, which only followed when the cultural context allowed for it. Mumford discusses in depth the influence of dreams on early human development and comes to the conclusion that language worked as a tool to oppress the unconscious.
He depicts how hunter-gatherer societies vanished upon the upcoming of the idea of agriculture and how agriculture was the women's work back then.
The next step in human history according to Mumford, is the creation of 'civilization' by means of power: Kings claiming authority with reference to the gods. They were responsible for the creation of the first megamachines: the building of the pyramids.
At some point, a counter-movement came into existence, questioning the central role of authority and power and violence and focusing on love and compassion. This ideology stayed around for some time, until the catholic church decided to back up the megamachine of capitalism. Like in the ancient times, a new god has risen and is now used to rationalize the power of authority: the god of science and technology. This god has forced mankind into participating in the next megamachine.
Lewis Mumford has astonishing and certainly illuminating thoughts on the development of human culture and he knows how to use his pen: The book is easy to read, straightforward and mind-boggling!
A better synopsis of the content than mine can be found at:
http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/cl...
September 15, 2011
I continue to enjoy reading Lewis Mumford. He is both a versatile and expansive thinker, and his writing is often punctuated by interesting images and comparisons. The Myth of the Machine is part 1 of a 2 volume series, and it represents a different tone then his earlier work, Technics and Civilization. Nonetheless, I found Mumford's concept and account of the megamachine to be thought provoking and I look forward to reading the second volume (The Pentagon of Power).
January 13, 2008
'I have taken life itself to be the primary phenomenon, and creativity, rather than the `conquest of nature,’ as the ultimate criterion of man’s biological and cultural success.' (Myth of the Machine, xi)
July 11, 2013
The themes stretching back over millennia are still powerful even if an occasional contemporary reference is 45 years out of date. I read this as background for a novel I am writing about a character who will "remember" the ancient history Mumford elucidates so well.
April 16, 2008
A bit of an over-reach from his usual solid perspective. Sort of like C. S. Lewis when he strays into minutiae from the one big picture he knows so well.
September 13, 2014
The Myth of the Machine addresses our relationship with technology. I found Mumford's consideration of dance and dreams as catalysts to human evolution refreshing.
Want to read
June 14, 2014I just don't have the energy to read this right now. I can tell from the first chapter that it will be interesting, though. Setting it aside until I have the brainspace to properly process it.
September 25, 2014
Mumford was definitely ahead of his time. This is too dated for me to say I'd actually recommend it at this point though.
February 17, 2012
An analysis well ahead of its time. Chapters 9 and 10 are particularly important.
Shelved as 'xx-dnf-skim-reference'
December 10, 2017Even the prologue too academic for me at this point. Wish I'd encountered when I was younger and willing to work at my readings... ah, those were the days. ;)
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews