What do you think?
Rate this book
Cambridge Studies in the History of Science
The Evolution of Technology
Presents an evolutionary theory of technological change based on recent scholarship in the history of technology and on relevant material drawn from economic history and anthropology. Challenges the popular notion that technological advances arise from the efforts of a few heroic individuals who produce a series of revolutionary inventions that owe little or nothing to the technological past. Therefore, the book's argument is shaped by analogies drawn selectively from the theory of organic evolution, and not from the theory and practice of political revolution. Three themes appear, with variations, throughout the study. The first is diversity: an acknowledgment of the vast numbers of different kinds of made things (artifacts) that long have been available to humanity. The second theme is necessity: the mistaken belief that humans are driven to invent new artifacts in order to meet basic biological needs such as food, shelter, and defense. And the third theme is technological evolution: an organic analogy that explains both the emergence of the novel artifacts and their subsequent selection by society for incorporation into its material life without invoking either biological necessity or technological process.
248 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
March 26, 2015
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.
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.
May 13, 2020
Basalla provides multiple examples how lifeform patterns are similar to trends in technology akin to saying it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, flies like a duck but then says it's not a duck. He misses the chance for a breakthrough in understanding the diversity of life.
December 25, 2020
Teknolojinin gelişim süreci ile ilgili yazılan klasik eserlerin aksine evrimci bir bakış açısıyla tarihsel süreçte teknolojinin gelişiminin örneklerle etkili bir şekilde incelendigi güzel bir eser. Kitaplıklarda olmalı.
July 25, 2022
Doğu batı yayınlarından çıkan versiyonu okudum. Teknolojik gelişmelerin evrimsel açıdan ele alınması bir teknoloji profesyoneli olarak beni oldukça şaşırttı. Motor ve elektrik gibi teknolojiye yön veren icatların dâhi mucitler tarafından birden icat edilmediği, öncül versiyonlarının ufak veya görece büyük dokunuşlarla bugüne kadar getirilmiş olduğunu somut örneklerle gösteriyor yazar.
February 8, 2010
History is more than just a series of events happening in sequence. So many history books focus on discussing their subject matter as a series of chronological events, however, so books that flout this convention always feel the need to warn us. This is what George Basalla does in The Evolution of Technology. At the same time as he reassures us that this is an historical account of how technology develops, he dispels any misapprehension that this will be a chronological look at technology from fire through Stone Age hammers all the way to the atomic bomb. Rather, this is a well-structured argument that includes historical examples as needed.
The Evolution of Technology works because Basalla articulates his thesis so clearly and precisely that his entire argument is, if not convincing, at least admirable. Although the title is a loaded one, Basalla is careful to always demarcate where the metaphor he consciously invokes breaks down, such as is the case when discussing natural selection in evolution versus artificial selection in technology. By treading so carefully, Basalla avoids overreaching and weakening his argument.
The first two chapters are introductory, establishing the topic and the terms in which Basalla will discuss the evolution of technology. Here we're given an idea of the historical and contemporary attitudes toward technological development, both with regards to what gets developed (Chapter I: "Diversity, Necessity, and Evolution") and how it gets developed ("Chapter II: Continuity and Discontinuity"). Basalla's most concerned with dispelling the—fallacious, in his view—idea that technological development occurs in a series of discontinuous revolutions initiated by individual "genius" inventors. While he doesn't dispute that individuals can make significant contributions to invention, he goes to great lengths to establish a sense of continuity when it comes to innovation.
This yields a perfect segue into the next two chapters, which are all about novelty. If it's the case that "revolutions" are more a product of historical analysis than actual fact, what criteria can we use for calling an artifact or invention "novel", and what factors in society determine these criteria? Basalla divides this analysis into four major types of factors that he splits across the two chapters: psychological and intellectual factors, and socioeconomic and cultural factors. Far from being abstract and abstruse, Basalla's arguments employ specific examples from a wide variety of technologies. He does tend to focus on nineteenth- and early twentieth-century innovations, including the steam engine and the automobile, probably because of the plethora of economic and historical data available for these inventions and the people involved in their production. This is a sound strategy, for it provides a common thread of investigation throughout the entire book (and he includes enough examples from other eras, like xylography in ancient China, to avoid charges of hasty generalization). Basalla makes a convincing case for why novelty emerged as a very individualist, Western concept while China and the Middle East did not embrace novelty as the mother of invention.
From novelty, Basalla moves on to selection. His factors are similar, although in this case he pays more attention to involvement of the economy and the military. Once again, the steam engine and the automobile feature heavily in the examples he invokes. However, he also discusses the ill-fated attempt to develop commercial supersonic transport and the propaganda-saturated era of nuclear power. Of particular interest is his counterfactual look at how there are potential alternative technologies for those adapted at various points in history: for instance, if railroads hadn't connected the United States in the nineteenth century, it's possible that canals and rivers could have picked up the slack. This isn't random science fiction speculation on his part—while any counterfactual history is ultimately speculative, Basalla draws on serious studies on the subject to marshal support for his anti-deterministic argument for the evolution of technology.
Basalla claims that The Evolution of Technology is an historical look at technology, and not a philosophy of science textbook. Well, I read this for a Philosophy of Science & Technology class. It's definitely an historical account, but I think there's more philosophy in here than Basalla admits. It's good philosophy though, interesting and well-argued. Of the two books I'm reading for this class (the other is Introduction to the Philosophy of Science , by Robert Klee), I liked this one better.
The Evolution of Technology works because Basalla articulates his thesis so clearly and precisely that his entire argument is, if not convincing, at least admirable. Although the title is a loaded one, Basalla is careful to always demarcate where the metaphor he consciously invokes breaks down, such as is the case when discussing natural selection in evolution versus artificial selection in technology. By treading so carefully, Basalla avoids overreaching and weakening his argument.
The first two chapters are introductory, establishing the topic and the terms in which Basalla will discuss the evolution of technology. Here we're given an idea of the historical and contemporary attitudes toward technological development, both with regards to what gets developed (Chapter I: "Diversity, Necessity, and Evolution") and how it gets developed ("Chapter II: Continuity and Discontinuity"). Basalla's most concerned with dispelling the—fallacious, in his view—idea that technological development occurs in a series of discontinuous revolutions initiated by individual "genius" inventors. While he doesn't dispute that individuals can make significant contributions to invention, he goes to great lengths to establish a sense of continuity when it comes to innovation.
This yields a perfect segue into the next two chapters, which are all about novelty. If it's the case that "revolutions" are more a product of historical analysis than actual fact, what criteria can we use for calling an artifact or invention "novel", and what factors in society determine these criteria? Basalla divides this analysis into four major types of factors that he splits across the two chapters: psychological and intellectual factors, and socioeconomic and cultural factors. Far from being abstract and abstruse, Basalla's arguments employ specific examples from a wide variety of technologies. He does tend to focus on nineteenth- and early twentieth-century innovations, including the steam engine and the automobile, probably because of the plethora of economic and historical data available for these inventions and the people involved in their production. This is a sound strategy, for it provides a common thread of investigation throughout the entire book (and he includes enough examples from other eras, like xylography in ancient China, to avoid charges of hasty generalization). Basalla makes a convincing case for why novelty emerged as a very individualist, Western concept while China and the Middle East did not embrace novelty as the mother of invention.
From novelty, Basalla moves on to selection. His factors are similar, although in this case he pays more attention to involvement of the economy and the military. Once again, the steam engine and the automobile feature heavily in the examples he invokes. However, he also discusses the ill-fated attempt to develop commercial supersonic transport and the propaganda-saturated era of nuclear power. Of particular interest is his counterfactual look at how there are potential alternative technologies for those adapted at various points in history: for instance, if railroads hadn't connected the United States in the nineteenth century, it's possible that canals and rivers could have picked up the slack. This isn't random science fiction speculation on his part—while any counterfactual history is ultimately speculative, Basalla draws on serious studies on the subject to marshal support for his anti-deterministic argument for the evolution of technology.
Basalla claims that The Evolution of Technology is an historical look at technology, and not a philosophy of science textbook. Well, I read this for a Philosophy of Science & Technology class. It's definitely an historical account, but I think there's more philosophy in here than Basalla admits. It's good philosophy though, interesting and well-argued. Of the two books I'm reading for this class (the other is Introduction to the Philosophy of Science , by Robert Klee), I liked this one better.
February 5, 2008
It's interesting that technology is held up as the prime example of 'intelligent design', but this book shows that technology is poorly understood as a process, and may be best explained in evolutionary terms.
December 5, 2012
I taught this book to engineering students doing a history course at the University of Toronto in 1990 and 1991. The analogy of evolution to human activity that is often goal oriented (which evolution most assuredly is not) is problematic.
January 21, 2008
A bit simplistic. Good example of sticking to a thesis. Overall a good introductory book.
December 27, 2020
A masterpiece!
Although I disagree with the author's evolutionary point of view, I must say that this is a great book nonetheless. Putting anything else aside, I learned invaluable lessons from this book.
I recommend it to anyone interested in learning about technology and how it, seemingly, "evolved."
'All things continue the way they have been since the beginning. What has happened will happen again; there is nothing new here on earth. Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.'
Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 (NCV)
Although I disagree with the author's evolutionary point of view, I must say that this is a great book nonetheless. Putting anything else aside, I learned invaluable lessons from this book.
I recommend it to anyone interested in learning about technology and how it, seemingly, "evolved."
'All things continue the way they have been since the beginning. What has happened will happen again; there is nothing new here on earth. Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.'
Ecclesiastes 1:9-10 (NCV)
March 10, 2022
İlmi, fikri ve felsefi bir derinliği yok...bazi teknolojik gelişmelerin tarihi seyrini izlemek babında okunabilir.
Read
February 28, 2023The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge Studies in the History of Science) by George Basalla (1989)
Read
February 28, 2023Teknolojinin Evrimi by George Basalla
January 31, 2024
Surprisingly engaging and relevant for a tech book written in the 80s!
Read
September 12, 2007This is a briliant survey on the evolution of technological novelties, narrated inside the paradigm of classical "Mullerian" theories of cultural evolution.
May 18, 2016
Interesting perspective on the topic, but the writing detracts from the presentation.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews