Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:28:54.697Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The dual nature of tools and their makeover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2012

Antonio Rizzo
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Science, Università di Siena, Siena, 53100Italy. [email protected]://rizzo.media.unisi.it

Abstract

Vaesen argues that functional knowledge differentiates humans from non-human primates. However, the rationale he provides for this position is open to question – with respect to both the underlying theoretical assumptions and inferences drawn from certain empirical studies. Indeed, there is some recent empirical work that suggests that functional fixedness is not necessarily uniquely human. I also question the central role of stable function representations in Vaesen's account of tool production and use.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Banzi, M. (2008) Getting started with Arduino. O'Reilly/Make Books.Google Scholar
Butler, S. (1912/1951) Tools. In: Samuel Butler's notebooks, ed. Keynes, G. & Hill, B., pp. 115–24. Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
Cole, M. (1996) Cultural psychology. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hanus, D., Mendes, N., Tennie, C. & Call, J. (2011) Comparing the performances of apes (Gorilla gorilla, Pan troglodytes, Pongo pygmaeus) and human children (Homo sapiens) in the floating peanut task. PLoS ONE 6(6):e19555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977) The concept of the ideal. In: Philosophy in the USSR: Problems of dialectical materialism, ed. Fedoseyev, P. N., pp. 7199. Progress.Google Scholar
Mendes, N., Hanus, D. & Call, J. (2007) Raising the level: Orangutans use water as a tool. Biology Letters 3:453–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rakoczy, H. (2008) Pretence as individual and collective intentionality. Mind and Language 23:499517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzo, A. (2000) La natura degli artefatti e la loro progettazione. Sistemi Intelligenti 12:437–52.Google Scholar
Rizzo, A. (2006) The origin and design of intentional affordances. In: Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 239–40. ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzo, A. & Bacigalupo, M. (2004) Scenarios: Heuristics for action. In: Proceedings of XII European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, Living and Working with Technology, ed. Reed, D. J., Baxter, G. & Blythe, M., pp. 153–60. EACE.Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1995) The construction of social reality. Free Press.Google Scholar
Szolonsky, A. (2006) Object use in pretend play: Symbolic or functional? In: Doing things with things, ed. Costall, A. & Dreier, O., pp. 6785. Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Tennie, C., Call, J. & Tomasello, M. (2010) Evidence for emulation in chimpanzees in social settings using the floating peanut task. PLoS ONE 5(5):e10544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. (1999) The cultural origins of human cognition. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vaesen, K. (2011) The functional bias in the dual nature of technical artefacts program. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42:190–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1933/1967) Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology 5:618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar