David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
AI and Society 12 (3):185-213 (1998)
Instead of seeing technology as outside ourselves, it is argued that it is an innate human function and the main driving force in human evolution. Opportunistic ‘thing using’, long before stone tools appeared, was the likeliest cause of bipedalism. It also forced brain development and the emergence of creativity. The neural basis for this creative technical activity later provided the brain functions on which language could develop. This simple unifying hypothesis has interesting implications for the way that we see technology in history, and for determinist theories of the future. It also bears on the way engineers are trained, and more important, the human faculties which need to be fostered in children.
|Keywords||Bipedalism Creativity Language origins Palaeontology Technology Tool using|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Norwood Russell Hanson (1958). Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge [Eng.]University Press.
Donald Alan Schon (1963/1967). Invention and the Evolution of Ideas. London, Tavistock Publications.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
René Víctor Valqui Vidal (2013). To Be Human is to Be Creative. AI and Society 28 (2):237-248.
Prof Dr Uner Tan (2006). Evidence for "Unertan Syndrome" and the Evolution of the Human Mind. Philosophical Explorations.
Thomas Suddendorf & Claire Fletcher-Flinn (1997). Theory of Mind and the Origins of Divergent Thinking. Journal of Creative Behavior 31:169-179.
Peter Carruthers (2011). Creative Action in Mind. Philosophical Psychology 24 (4):437 - 461.
Subrata Dasgupta (2008). Shedding Computational Light on Human Creativity. Perspectives on Science 16 (2):pp. 121-136.
Margaret A. Boden (2003). The Creative Mind. Routledge.
Peter Carruthers & Elizabeth Picciuto (forthcoming). The Origins of Creativity. In E. Paul & S. Kaufman (eds.), The Philosophy of Creativity. Oxford University Press
Martin Sereno (1986). A Program for the Neurobiology of Mind. Inquiry 29 (June):217-240.
Y. J. Erden (2010). Could a Created Being Ever Be Creative? Some Philosophical Remarks on Creativity and AI Development. Minds and Machines 20 (3):349-362.
Mike W. Martin (2006). Moral Creativity in Science and Engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):421-433.
George Allan (1999). Forms, Transforms, and the Creative Process. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1999:231-238.
L. K. B. (1956). Review: Miller, The Kantian Thing-in-Itself, or The Creative Mind. Review of Metaphysics 10 (1):180-180.
Richard R. Baker (1957). The Kantian Thing-in-Ltself or The Creative Mind. New Scholasticism 31 (3):428-430.
Ephrem McCarthy (1956). The Kantian Thing-in-Itself or Creative Mind. Philosophical Studies 6:220-221.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-08-30
Total downloads1 ( #635,303 of 1,725,949 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #349,693 of 1,725,949 )
How can I increase my downloads?