Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two legs, thing using and talking: The origins of the creative engineering mind

  • Published:
AI & SOCIETY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

  1. Advice to the author from the Librarian of the Seeley Historical Library, Cambridge, in 1959.

  2. Samuel C. Forman (1995),The Existential Pleasures of Engineering, Souvenier Press, pp. 18–19, gives some of these definitions.

  3. Manfred Korfman, (October 1973), The Sling as a Weapon,Scientific American, vol. 229 pages 34–42

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hanson, N. R. (1958).Patterns of Discovery, Cambridge University Press, 14.

  5. Evans, F. T. (January 1981): Roads, Railways and Canals: Technical Choices in 19th Century Britain.Technology and Culture, Vol. 22, pp. 26–34.

    Google Scholar 

  6. W, Kingston, (1977),The Creative process in Human Progress, John Calder. Kingston offers valuable insights into the relationship between creative thinking and the process of innovation.

  7. Alan Smith, Engines Moved by Fire and Water,Transactions of the Newcomen Society, Vol. 66, 1994–1995, ppl-25. A useful account of the work done by others, notably Denis Papin, on early steam power.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hobbes, T.Leviathan; John Locke,Treatises on Government; J. J. Rousseau,Social Contract.

  9. I was guilty of whiggery as described in Professor Herbert Butterfield's bookThe Whig Interpretation of History (Cambridge University Press, 1931). The book criticises the tendency to judge past events from a later standpoint. In his workds, ‘What is discussed is the tendency of many historians to write on the side of Protestants and Whigs, to praise revolutions provided they have been successful, to emphasise certain principles of progress in the past and to produce a story which is the ratification if not the glorification of the present’. page v.

  10. Evans, F. T. ‘The Maudslay Touch’.Transactions of the Newcomen Society. Vol. 66, 1994–1995, pp 153–174.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Roger Lewin:Bones of Contention. Penguin 1989

  12. Ingold, T., (1993), ‘Tools, Techniques and Technology’ inTools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, ed. K. R. Gibson and T. Ingold, Cambridge. pp 337–338.

  13. For a general background to the topic of tools and language Lewin and Gibson and Ingold (vide supra) give a valuable picture. An older but impressive work is A. Leroi GourhanLe Geste et La Parole (1964), translated asGesture and Speech, M.I.T. Press 1993. Another seminal work is the shortMan the Toolmaker by Kenneth Oakey, London 1972.

  14. Yves Coppens. (1994 May). East Side Story: The Origin of Humankind.Scientific American, vol. 270, no.5: 62–69.

  15. Lovejoy, C. Owen. (1988 Nov.) Evolution of Human Walking,Scientific American, vol. 259 (5).

  16. Leakey R. and Lewin R. (1992):Origins Reconsidered, Little, Brown and Co., p.90–91. offer an opposing view, that a bipedal chimp was faster.

  17. Dean Falk (1993). Sex Differences in visuospatial skills. InTools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, ed K.R. Gibson and T Ingold. Cambridge University Press. See also the BBC Horizon programme,Hothead, 1994.

  18. Jablonski, N. G. and Chaplin, G. (1994 Jan.): Avant les Premiers Pas: l'origine de la bipédie,La Recherche, vol. 25, no. 261.

  19. Elaine Morgan. (1994).The Descent of the Child, Souvenir Press, London, pp156–168 offers the most recent summary of the hypothesis.

    Google Scholar 

  20. , 38.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Calvin, W. H. (1994 Oct.). The Emergence of Intelligence,Scientific American, vol. 271, no. 4: pp 78–83.

    Google Scholar 

  22. The irregular termthing using has been adopted because it is more direct than “opportunistic tool using’ and perhaps it will convey more of the importance of the activity. Alternativelyhomo opportunus may be more suitable, with its connotations of ‘advantageous’ and serviceable’.

  23. Gregory R. L. (1976).Eye and Brain, 2nd ed., pp. 50–59

  24. Cooper L. A. and Shepherd R. N. (1984 Dec.). Turning Something Over in the Mind,Scientific American, vol. 251 no 6: 114–121.

    Google Scholar 

  25. R. L. Gregory:op. cit. (1976).Eye and Brain, 2nd ed. pp. 50–59

  26. Cooper L. A. and Shepherd R. N. 1984,.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Brooke Hindle (1981)Emulation and Invention. New York University Press. Also see Eugene S. Ferguson: (1993) Engineering and the Mind's Eye. MIT Press, pp.41–59.

  28. K. Connolly and M. Dalgleish. 1989. The Emergence of a Tool-Using Skill in Infancy.Developmental Psychology, vol. 25, no. 6: 894–912.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Henry Petroski (1985),To Engineer is Human Macmillan, page 11.

  30. Calvin, 1994. He also makes the valuable point that trying out things mentally, comparing possible outcomes, has evolutionary value: he quotes Popper, that this permits our hypotheses to die in our stead.

  31. Schon D. A., (1967).Invention and the Evolution of Ideas. Tavistock Publications.

  32. Hopkins H. J., (1970):Span of Bridges, David and Charles.

  33. L. T. C. Rolt (1965)Tools for the Job. Batsford.

  34. R. Dawkins. (1988). The Blind Watchmaker, Penguin Books, London.

    Google Scholar 

  35. G. Barsalla, G. (1988).The Evolution of Technology, Cambridge, uses this metaphor.

  36. Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza: (1991 Nov.) Genes, Peoples and Languages.Scientific American pp. 72–78.

  37. J. Lyons,Chomsky, Fotana, 3rd edition, 1991.

  38. Jackendoff, R. (1993),Patterns in the Mind. Harvester, pp. 66–82.

  39. The universality of this basic linguistic form is described by Steven Pinker (1994),The language Instinct, William Morrow, pp. 232–237.

  40. It will be interesting, if the language of dolphins and whales is craked, to see whether they have the same basic syntactical structures as human languages; if they do, then thething using hypothesis is weakened. I am indebted to my wife for this, and many other suggestions.

  41. J. Lyon, op. cit. pp. 24–25.Chomsky, Fotana, 3rd edition, 1991.

  42. R. Wallace (1989). Cognitive Mapping and the Origin of Language and Mind,Current Anthropology, Vol. 30, no. 4, 518–526. Ron Wallace offers a different scenario to explain the development of language. He suggests that the breakaway hominids found themselves in the new drier environment and that scavenging was accompanied by a return to sites where stone tools were used for butchering. Thus their spatial sense became more highly developed and this was located neurologically in the hippocampus. He goes on to suggest that there are strong analogies between the mental processes involved in this mental processing of spatial problems and the Chomskian deep-structure processes such as tracing (inserting a place-holder when a linguistic transformation is made) and embedding, where a sentence is built up from subordinate clauses. Wallace's suggestion relates to complicated language structures like the ability to transform a sentence from active to passive. The idea ofthing using thought and the subject-verb-object structure is analogous, but plainly relates to a more basic level of language formation. Furthermore,thing using refers to activities before the use of stone.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Oldfield, R. C., (1969). Handedness in Musicians.British Journal of Psychology,90, 91–9. Quoted by K. A. Flowers in article ‘Handedness’,Companion to the Mind, ed. R. L. Gregory, Oxford. 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Allman, J. M. (1987) in article “Evolution of Brain in Primates’,Companion to the Mind, ed. Gregory, Oxford.

  45. This outline hypothesis does not aim to give a complete review of recent work in the field of human origins. For that, the collection of articles inTools Language and Cognition in Human Evolution (see note 13), forms a good introductory sample. It contains useful accounts of many of the approaches to the dialogue on human origins, including tool-using and language in chimps and monkeys and the growth of cognition and skills in human infants. As a stimulating introduction to the state of linguistics and the idea of a wired in grammar, the reader may find Steven Pinker,The Language Instinct, Morrow 1994, or Ray Jackendoff,Patterns in the Mind, Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993. Nowhere, however, so far as I am aware, is the idea put forward explicitly that ‘thing using’, distinguished from the much later stone-tool making, may be the primary activity leading to bipedalism, brain growth and the neural basis which would later accommodate language.

  46. The high proportion of the motor areas of the brain devoted to the hands is clearly illustrated by the well known homunculus diagram. See A. Leroi GourhanLe Geste et La Parole (1964) (vol. 1 page 120), or page 82 in the English translation,Gesture and Speech, MIT Press 1993.

  47. Allan Walker & Pat Shipman (1996).The Wisdom of Bones. Weidenfeld and Nicolson. The authors argue strongly that the Nariokotome boy fossil (homo erectus) could not speak; and they point out that Cavalli Sforza's arguments suggest that even Neanderthal lacked language. If speech came about so late, the importance of tool using in mental development becomes even clearer. pp 210–223.

  48. C Daryl Forde (1934):Habitat, Economy and Society. Methuen.

  49. Evans, F. T. (1982), “Wood since the Industrial Revolution: a strategic Retreat?”,History of Technology, Vol. 7, pp. 37–55.

    Google Scholar 

  50. English is imprecise in its ability to state exactly when we are talking about applied scientific knowledge (technology?), its systematic application (technique?), the experience of a craftsman (skill?). See Ingold, p. 433 ‘Tool-use, sociality and Intelligence’, in Gibson and Ingold supra. Also see Jacques Ellul (1964),The Technological Society for a philosophical view of the stifling of creativity by technique.

  51. Cyclopaedia of Useful Arts and Manufactures, ed. C. Tomlinson. Plate ‘Bishopp’s Rotary Steam Engine or Disc Engine. (circa 1853.)

  52. Eugene S. Ferguson (1992):Engineering and the Mind's Eye. MIT Press. Ferguson argues that good engineering is a matter of intuition and non-verbal thinking.

  53. The model is based on H.C. Fleeming Jenkin's work.Encyclopaedia Britannica, 9th edition, 4, 1876: article ‘Bridges’ 308.

  54. Yao Tsu Li, D G Jansson, E G Cravalho (1981).Technological Innovation in Education and Industry. Van Nostrand.

  55. Evans, F. T. (1987), ‘Designing and Making exhibits’, in Stephen Pizzey, ed.Interactive Science and Technology Centres, Science Projects Publishing, pp. 182–188.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering, Sheffield Hallam University, 14 Edgehill Road, S7 1SP, Sheffield, UK

    F. T. Evans

Authors
  1. F. T. Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. T. Evans.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Evans, F.T. Two legs, thing using and talking: The origins of the creative engineering mind. AI & Soc 12, 185–213 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01206195

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01206195

Keywords

Search

Navigation