another query

[rm]

More shit I'm thinking about:

Do you believe a society that either lacks, or shuns, mass mechanical production can be technologically advanced?

N.B. -- steampunk is not an answer

Comments

[delchi.livejournal.com]

That would depend on if the society had something in the place of mechanical technology, ... say a different type of technology that achieves the same result as mass mechanical would.

I'm thinking along the lines of castaways who land on a tropical island - and end up making treehouses, rope bridges, defense devices ( bow/arrow, spring traps, etc ) , hunting devices, elevators to bring food up to the treehouse, waterways to capture / store water and so on. All this done without mass mechanical production BUT technologically advanced past where they were when they first landed.

In a more realistic example, consider the Amish folks who still blacksmith their own implements for farming and so on. If they need something, they make it from scratch, and don't rely on mass preproduced items. They may hae a centeral person, say a 'village smithy' who makes things for everyone - and that person may have some things they invented to make their job easier... but still not mass mechanical.

From where I'm sitting, it has alot to do with how you define 'advanced' in the term technilogically advanced. Any level of technology is advanced when compared to the previous. The cotton gin was considered high tech in it's day. Likewise compare the waterwheel powered by a nearby stream to hoover dam. Each one is more advanced than what came before it. I think the only way you can observe somethign as technologically advanced is when you are looking at the technology in question, and what technology came before it at the same time.