4.2 KiB
The circles that talk about machines, economics, and politics in light of the gospels often find themselves making a distinction between "tools" and "machines", which is a very good distinction. There's often a connotation that "tools" are good whereas "machines" are evil.
<E.F. Schumacher quote from SIB>
At the end of the day, what is important is not so much being able to identify tools and machines, but the attributes that make something tool-like and something machine-like.
Let's begin by comparing two pieces of technology: the broom (obviously a tool) and the roomba (obviously a machine).
Aspect 0: Comprehensibility
Brooms make sense - they have a handle you push and bristles which conform to a surface to push debris. Tools are simple and understandable in their full by seeing them being used. A hammer is swung, and it makes contact with a nail. This is better than the person trying to push on the nail because it allows them to store up a bit of energy in the swing before releasing it quickly in the strike with the nail. Tools may not be completely appreciated upon first glance (particular angles and techniques required to use them may not be obvious) but the basic principle of the tool is.
The broom does still require practice to use well, as do most tools. However, this practice can be experiential and through use of the tool. Every proper use or mis-use of a tool, with attentiveness, gives one insights into the physics of the universe. Tools allow their operators engagement with the numinous nature of reality.
The Roomba does not present itself in this way - Machines are difficult, even impossible to understand in their workings. One needs to peel layers off of them and devote serious amounts of study to begin understanding them. This study is study - and not practice.
The Roomba also does not require practice to use, and repeatedly pushing the button on it to begin its operation does not help one understand its operation better. One does not come to understanding of the machine through its use, but only through study (and perhaps maintenance).
Tools are simple and understandable. Machines are complicated and opaque.
Aspect 1: Fuel
A broom does not need any power aside from that the operator supplies by pushing it. Tools may transform energy, as bellows transform the mechanical energy a blacksmith puts in into the kinetic energy of the air flowing out. A knife concentrates force into a razor-thin area, creating pressures high enough to cut through material. Other tools may store energy that was put in by the operator - take a crossbow for instance, drawn back by a hunter before being latched in place, in the future to be released to propel a projectile.
A roomba needs power from the electrical grid. The machine has its own power, and usually must be recharged (or given continuous shore power) from a fuel. Cars need gasoline to fill up its tank.
Tools take energy directly from their operators. Machines must be provided a fuel.
Aspect 2: Use Case
A roomba has very only one well-suited function: to clean tiny things off of house floors. A planter is only good for planting seeds. Machines are single-purpose and specialized.
A broom has multiple uses: to sweep away items (big or small) from house floors, a paddling stick for disobedient children or robbers, sweeping walls and cobwebs, smoothing or texturing concrete, cleaning air vents, or cleaning out a grain bin. Tools, since they operate in the context of other systems and are "reconfigured" without thought, are inherently capable of performing a greater variety of tasks. Most of the functions of a "multitool" like a Leatherman are performed by just one of the tools: the knife.
Machines are single-purpose and specialized. Tools are multi-purpose, even undiscovered ones.
Aspect 3: Capital vs. Labor
Machines require heavy capital outlays and investment in hopes of long-term payoffs Tools allow immediate use but require more labor
“Equally, to strive for leisure as an alternative to work would be considered a complete misunderstanding of one of the basic truths of human existence, namely that work and leisure are complementary parts of the same living process and cannot be separated without destroying the joy of work and the bliss of leisure.”