87
There's no such thing as Just a Tool | deadSimpleTech
deadsimpletech.comHeidegger thinks about tools like so: a tool is something (a thing that has being in the Heideggerian sense, not necessarily an object) that represents an extension of human capabilities in some way. A tool is thus any kind of thing that *lets you do something you wouldn't otherwise have been able to*. The important (for us) conceptual leap here is that when a tool works well, or isn't broken, it develops what Heidegger describes as a "ready-to-hand" quality: the tool fades into the background as a kind of human-tool gestalt of a human with the additional capability afforded by a tool forms. As a simple example of this, consider eating with a fork. When the fork is well-designed and not broken, *you don't explicitly have "I am using a fork" in your conscious mind while eating dinner*.



I’m pretty sure the only requirement of a thought-terminating cliche is that they are
It genuinely doesn’t matter what Heidegger’s human-tool gestalt says if people are using “it’s just a tool” as a thought-terminating cliche.
The reason it sounded like a thought-terminating cliche to me was this part of the article itself:
They’re describing aspects that are cliche and constructed to not have a point.
The reason I decided to reply was this:
Here you’re treating thought-terminating clicheness as a quality inherent to the phrase “it’s just a tool”, not to the subjective motivations of the people using the phrase in a thought-terminating capacity.
I think, especially in discussions where strong opinions abound and form cliques, labeling certain phrases as “thought-terminating cliches” is itself a form of permission to forego any critical engagement with an argument. Or, to put it another way, to use a cliche to terminate thought. I think it’s worth my time and effort to say, essentially, “hold on, I don’t think we should immediately dismiss anyone who tries to distinguish the tools from the tool users, that line of thought has some important and useful ramifications for this conversation.”