Lewis Mumford

A major similarity between Mumford's view on the evolution of human consciousness and Shepard's is that they both acknowledge that the enlargement of the brain was not an adaptation of immediate value. It carried with it many factors that would seem to be counter-adaptive, such as the fragile state of a newborn whose skull has not fused, and the problems with birthing a larger cranium through a birth canal already restricted by bipedalism. Although this long period of infant dependency created the conditions for cultural learning, effective use of culture to formulate and pass down human experience was not a direct result of cranial capacity.

The hardware was there to create Aristotle before we even learned to effectively use language. (Mumford, 39, 40) It took much experimentation to arrive at the level of tribal culture. That is what evolution gave us, the ability to use free-thinking to devise new strategies, to experiment. The proactive creation of the human identity is very important to Mumford's thinking. He feels that the evolution of human culture was not innate or passive. It was active, evolution made us more than animals, but we became human on our own, through trial and error using our minds to adapt our behavior and cultural institutions to the environment. All culture functions by shaping the plastic human personality offered by biology. We don't instinctually follow, but attempt to use our bodies and organs for different purposes. (Mumford, 46) Technologies, as extensions of our bodies, build on this foundation.

In a dog eat dog world, I'm a bowl of antifreeze.
If it really is me against the world, I think I'd put my money on the world.
If you really have to play the hand thats dealt you, can't we at least choose the game??