Domains of Existence

Are satellites physical objects that possess an existence with an object—like information, for example? Is information a “thing”? It is evident that the information exists, but the domain in which it exists is not space and time. And what is the domain of existence of an organization? A network of any kind is an even more subtle case. Although it is made up of equipment, instruments, and people, these elements do not constitute the network. The network lies in the way those people and instruments are interconnected: it is a topological concept that belongs to a different realm than the physical components. The concept of a domain of existence is highly fertile.

It is essential to recognize the importance and necessity of separating the concept of “technological object” from spatial and temporal limitations. Otherwise, we cannot move beyond the most elementary technological objects, nor understand what modern technology truly is. Even in ancient periods there existed technological objects whose domain of existence was not physical space. A clear example was the complex social structure of guilds in the Middle Ages. However, one characteristic of contemporary social organization is the merging of all realms into a genuine Technological Civilization that tends to encompass every aspect of human life. For this reason, we adopt the concept of domain of existence as the main criterion for classifying technological objects. The first major group, and the easiest to understand, is that of artifacts in the usual sense: objects whose domain of existence is ordinary physical space.

Tools and Other Instrumental Objects

The earliest tools were extensions of human limbs and amplifiers of muscular strength, enabling actions otherwise impossible. Over millennia, tools increased in sophistication, precision, and efficiency. There is an uninterrupted sequence of guiding ideas that links the primitive scrapers and knives of the Paleolithic era with modern numerically controlled machine tools; the first looms with today’s automatic systems; the early hearths that fired pottery or smelted bronze with the vast chemical and metallurgical plants of the present. This is the great group of utilitarian objects and tools.

This broad and varied group can be classified in multiple ways. Beginning with traditional artifacts, Lewis Mumford proposed a classification into utensils, clothing, buildings, tools, and service objects such as roads. This list is disputable because the category “utensils” is too broad—embracing kitchen tools, weapons, and musical instruments—and because major categories such as transportation are missing.

Mumford’s classification fits the economic systems of traditional societies, which are now in decline. It is less adequate for modern, developed societies, where artifacts multiply in number and purpose. Ideally, one would classify them within a coherent framework spanning simple objects of ancient societies to highly complex systems such as modern medical imaging equipment.

Various main axes for classification exist, all debatable. One divides artifacts according to whether they serve individual use or collective purposes. This cuts across previous categories: clothing and toothbrushes are strictly personal, roads strictly communal, while buildings and machinery may serve either depending on context.

Another axis considers the intended function of the artifact. Traditionally this distinguishes strict consumer goods—like food and personal hygiene items—from broader modern categories that include jewelry, automobiles, and personal computers. Production goods belong to another category. One may also include objects for leisure and sports.

Sports have changed dramatically over recent decades. What was once ritual, or later physical culture in Greece, has today become a mass spectacle. The rise of the “leisure industry” has turned sports-related objects into a major global business. Below, the text also notes objects linked to art and religious practice.

Another possible axis concerns the complexity of artifacts, production technologies, or other technological objects required for their use. Some artifacts use electricity, others do not; some are mechanical, others electromechanical or electronic. However, drawing boundaries between these categories is difficult and often disrupts evolutionary continuity. For instance, artisans increasingly use motorized tools that descend directly from traditional versions.

In this book, none of these classificatory lines will be used for instrumental objects, because they are neither clear nor particularly useful. Classifications are ways of structuring knowledge that vary by purpose. In the next chapter, the concept of “meaningful structuring” will be introduced for this task.