Tools for Conviviality
- Downloads：2646
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-07-04 07:53:29
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Ivan Illich
- ISBN：1842300113
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
A work of seminal importance， this book presents Ivan Illich's penetrating analysis of the industrial mode of production which characterises our contemporary world。
Reviews
Matt Carpenter
，
In this book Ivan Illich calls for a level of decentralization that I've rarely encountered。 He calls for it in all major areas of life: education， production， politics， transportation， you name it， he says it should be decentralized。 This thesis of the book is that the tools we use should be convivial， that is， should lead to improved relationships between people， rather than further individualizing people。 He wrote this decades ago， but the predictions he made have remarkably come true in most In this book Ivan Illich calls for a level of decentralization that I've rarely encountered。 He calls for it in all major areas of life: education， production， politics， transportation， you name it， he says it should be decentralized。 This thesis of the book is that the tools we use should be convivial， that is， should lead to improved relationships between people， rather than further individualizing people。 He wrote this decades ago， but the predictions he made have remarkably come true in most instances。 We've probably continued further down the road of automation and industrialization that he expected - he predicted a return to more humane ways sooner rather than later - but his call to change the myth by which we live （the story of continual progress） is necessary。 My disagreement comes when he speaks of the need for population control。 This was during the population fears of the 1970's which have since proven unfounded。 He references abortion as a method of birth control at one point， although he wasn't specifically condoning it。 Nevertheless the ambiguity of equating the two is disappointing。 。。。more
Evelyn
，
This book was an interesting critique on how as technology develops we have less and less influence on our daily life。 The idea seemed similar to Marxist reification and how technology dehumanizes people at the workplace， making them feel as if they are just a cog in a machine。 Similarly， a lack of conviviality dehumanizes people in their daily life， and this lack of control over our lives makes us unhappy。 Important book but not very well written and felt dated （was published in 1973）。 My ratin This book was an interesting critique on how as technology develops we have less and less influence on our daily life。 The idea seemed similar to Marxist reification and how technology dehumanizes people at the workplace， making them feel as if they are just a cog in a machine。 Similarly， a lack of conviviality dehumanizes people in their daily life， and this lack of control over our lives makes us unhappy。 Important book but not very well written and felt dated （was published in 1973）。 My rating is probably biased because I value accessibility and writing style a lot。 Here's a good quote。An individual relates himself in action to his society through the use of tools that he actively masters， or by which he is passively acted upon。 To the degree that he masters his tools， he can invest the world with his meaning; to the degree that he is mastered by his tools， the shape of the tool determines his own self-image。 Convivial tools are those which give each person who uses them the greatest opportunity to enrich the environment with the fruits of his or her vision。 Industrial tools deny this possibility to those who use them and they allow their designers to determine the meaning and expectations of others。 Most tools today cannot be used in a convivial fashion。 。。。more
Sarai Mitnick
，
As our society relentlessly pursues unhindered growth， we find that our lives （and even our bodies） are being engineered not for human happiness， but to enable more growth。 Where once we had control of our human-powered tools and could use them to suit our individual needs， today many of our tools are created by an elite class of experts and wielded for the purpose of social control。 The purpose of that control is often turning people into consumers。"A convivial society should be designed to all As our society relentlessly pursues unhindered growth， we find that our lives （and even our bodies） are being engineered not for human happiness， but to enable more growth。 Where once we had control of our human-powered tools and could use them to suit our individual needs， today many of our tools are created by an elite class of experts and wielded for the purpose of social control。 The purpose of that control is often turning people into consumers。"A convivial society should be designed to allow all its members the most autonomous action by means of tools least controlled by others。 People feel joy， as opposed to mere pleasure， to the extent that their activities are creative; while the growth of tools beyond a certain point increases regimentation， dependence， exploitation， and impotence。"Illich includes not only technological tools， but also systems such as education and healthcare。 All are tools that take away our autonomy and self-reliance， making us not just dependent but controlled。His theories lose me when it comes to actual solutions。 The ideas he proposes seem too radical and unfeasible at our current scale。 But I don't usually read radical thinkers for solutions， I read for a clear-eyed view of the monstrous problems so often ignored。 I do think there are personal actions that we can take to resist becoming consumer slaves， to learn to create with our hands again， to be careful with technology， and to construct convivial lives and communities without completely rejecting modern life。 。。。more
Nina
，
not rly feeling the birth control parts， but 。。 this book is A1
Monica Riva
，
Pensiero incredibilmente lucido di Illich sulla società post-industriale e sul suo destino， che assume toni quasi profetici se si sottolinea il fatto che è stato scritto una quarantina di anni fa。
Orcogiuda_
，
Analisi decisamente interessante ed ancora attuale della società dei consumi e industriale nei suoi aspetti malati。 Secondo me offre spunti particolari ma forse un po' troppo malleabili verso idee non esattamente sensate。 Coinvolgente per lo stile di esporre le argomentazioni e i suoi pensieri。 Analisi decisamente interessante ed ancora attuale della società dei consumi e industriale nei suoi aspetti malati。 Secondo me offre spunti particolari ma forse un po' troppo malleabili verso idee non esattamente sensate。 Coinvolgente per lo stile di esporre le argomentazioni e i suoi pensieri。 。。。more
Meg
，
There's a lot here that will feel redundant if one has read Medical Nemesis or Deschooling Society， but the examples from those two fields serve well to prove Illich's broader points here about the structure of production and industrialization。 There's a lot here that will feel redundant if one has read Medical Nemesis or Deschooling Society， but the examples from those two fields serve well to prove Illich's broader points here about the structure of production and industrialization。 。。。more
Ruth
，
This isn't something I would have picked up on my own， but in the end， it's turned out to be a very timely read。 Illich's points about an enforced pace of life land especially hard when read mid-pandemic， during which most aspects of my life have ground to a hault， giving me space to consider the way I think about time （and its relationship with transportation， etc。）。 His points about overcommitting to the future merit deep consideration。 This isn't something I would have picked up on my own， but in the end， it's turned out to be a very timely read。 Illich's points about an enforced pace of life land especially hard when read mid-pandemic， during which most aspects of my life have ground to a hault， giving me space to consider the way I think about time （and its relationship with transportation， etc。）。 His points about overcommitting to the future merit deep consideration。 。。。more
Adrien Pastor WI
，
Écrit en 1972， Ivan touche des points sensibles de notre société qui sont clairement d’actualité comme le réchauffement climatique， la sur-croissance ou encore la crise des marchés financiers。Peut on en conclure que cet homme est devin ？Assez difficile à lire cependant。
Onur Akdağ
，
Çok iyi bir kitabın çok hem de çok köti bir çevirisi。
Matt
，
The modern West has fallen prey to the tools they use。 Tools have grown out of man's control， first becoming his master， and then ultimately man's executioner。 The way forward from our current situation is not to abstain from tools， but to make convivial tools。Convivial tools are tools which are free， creative， and can be used by anyone with minimal special training。 Ivan Illich spends much of the book outlining examples of convivial tools and how many of our current tools aren't convivial。 An e The modern West has fallen prey to the tools they use。 Tools have grown out of man's control， first becoming his master， and then ultimately man's executioner。 The way forward from our current situation is not to abstain from tools， but to make convivial tools。Convivial tools are tools which are free， creative， and can be used by anyone with minimal special training。 Ivan Illich spends much of the book outlining examples of convivial tools and how many of our current tools aren't convivial。 An example of a convivial tool is the alphabet。 Almost anyone can learn to use the alphabet， and for his own purpose。 The alphabet is cheap， it is not easily controlled by third parties， and people can take them or leave them as they wish。 Other examples include the printing press （and I think email）。Contrasted with convivial tools are many of our modern tools。 A nonconvivial tool would require special training， be too expensive to be used by most people， or would be limited to only a certain group of people。 A dental drill could be convivial， but the licensing required limit it to dentists and make the tool nonconvivial。 An example of a nonconvivial tool is a car。 Like many nonconvivial tools， cars share the same serious problem where the means have turned into an end。 Cars are also tools which require special training not available to everyone to use。 They are too expensive to be used by all people， and not all people can use cars。 In addition， cars create what Illich calls a radical monopoly on transportation。 If I wanted to get from one side of Houston to the other， I can get there quite easily using cars， but I am not free to walk or bike there， at least not if I want to get there safely。 Cars then have a monopoly on how to travel within the city。 Cars are also not available for everyone to use， but only for the rich。 Cars don't benefit the poor， but the poor have to pay for the usage of cars by the rich。 Highways are considered public services， but they aren't。 They are for private usage of those wealthy enough to own a car or have access to good public transportation。 If highways were truly public utilities， then all would have the same access to them， but they are instead limited by income level。Much of Tools for Conviviality is devoted to the themes I have written about above。 The need for convivial tools and the captivity of modern， Western society to nonconvivial tools。 As you may guess from what I have written above， this is not a cheerful book。 Illich is profoundly pessimistic about modern， Western culture， and rejects many of the assumptions our society operates on unthinkingly。 He denies that modern technology， public schooling， and modern medicine are good。 All three have fallen out of balance with nature， and have become nonconvivial。 As a result， the tools can no longer achieve their purpose。 Public schooling no longer helps educate society， and modern medicine creates medical issues and limits our ability to be healthy。 Tools for Conviviality is a challenging read， especially for those of us in the West。Tools for Conviviality is also a challenging read because of the density of the material covered。 A quick glimpse at the title and the chapter subsections will alert the reader what kind of book they should be expecting。 Subsections titles include biological degradation， obsolescence， the demythologization of science， and the rediscovery of language。 None of those sections are easy to read， but working through them to understand what Illich is saying is a worthwhile experience。One of the reasons reading Illich is a worthwhile undertaking is because of the depth of his learning。 Illich was a uniquely gifted man， and also one who was blessed with a unique life situation and community。 He was one of the last true polymaths， a scholar of the middle ages who worked in 10 languages and developed his critique of Western society with the help of many other intelligent people and in several cultures。 He does not reveal the depth of his erudition with copious footnotes （the book is free of footnotes）， but you can tell the depth of his knowledge from his writing。 The combination of individual brilliance， plus working in Latin America combine to give Illich a truly unique perspective。My summary above of the book is woefully inadequate。 I have mentioned what I understand to be the main ideas of the book， though many of the twists and turns and arguments I have left out。 I hope I have conveyed the depth and importance of this book， and all thinking people would benefit from engaging with his arguments。 Like Wendell Berry， Illich makes arguments which aren't easily rejected。 They can be rejected， but more often they present hard truths we don't know what to do with。 Even if you do end up disagreeing with Illich （or Berry）， you need to face the depth of their struggle， the depth of their disagreement with our modern world， and their rejection of cultural axioms。The weakest part of the book was the final chapter where Illich turned to predicting what will bring about a convivial society。 I suspect he will be right about some things， but I am doubtful all of his predictions will prove accurate。 For example， his hope in politics seems misguided and doesn't take into account the power political parties have over their voters。 But I don't think the benefit of this book comes from the prognosis of the future。 The strength of the book lies in Illich exposing modern Western assumptions and trying to shape our imaginations to what a better future looks like。 More than any specific predictions， those two strengths make the book worth reading。Reading the last chapter is also interesting in light of Illich's last years。 He later would go on to repudiate his hopeful belief that a new future could be had。 Instead we must renounce the assumptions of the world。 This is what led to him dying of cancer and refusing to receive treatment。 As I read Tools for Conviviality， I find myself wandering what a more mature Illich would have written as his conclusion。 I also find myself wandering what does hope look like？ Illich was a Catholic priest， and I am curious what part his faith played in providing him with hope。 Faith is not explicit in this book， but from what I understand of Illich's life， his faith was always a guiding source for him。 What would Illich's hope be given his faith？ And how can that hope guide and shape my hope？ And what does renunciation of the assumptions of the world look like for us？ If Illich's prognosis is correct， then we are headed towards a crisis， but in the meantime our current ways are not working。 We can learn much from Illich， though we still have to figure out our own path forward。 。。。more
Herval Freire
，
Well， this did not age too well。
Gazi Tuğrul
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Küçük de olsa bir spoiler olacak ama özellikle Radikal Tekel kavramına bayıldım。 Bugüne kadar bakmayı düşünmediğim bir açıdan yaklaşmış。 üretme ve tüketme ve toplumun sıkıştığı kıskaçların genellikle iki Kutup arasına sıkışmasının ötesinde bir şeyler düşünmeyi ve düşündürtmeyi başarmış。 Eleştirmek gerekirse sadece başlığında takıldım şenlikli toplum yazarın vermek istediği duyguyu Çeviride vermemiş bence。 Bu sebeple ister istemez temkinli başlamıştım okumaya ister istemez bir önyargı oluşmuş idi Küçük de olsa bir spoiler olacak ama özellikle Radikal Tekel kavramına bayıldım。 Bugüne kadar bakmayı düşünmediğim bir açıdan yaklaşmış。 üretme ve tüketme ve toplumun sıkıştığı kıskaçların genellikle iki Kutup arasına sıkışmasının ötesinde bir şeyler düşünmeyi ve düşündürtmeyi başarmış。 Eleştirmek gerekirse sadece başlığında takıldım şenlikli toplum yazarın vermek istediği duyguyu Çeviride vermemiş bence。 Bu sebeple ister istemez temkinli başlamıştım okumaya ister istemez bir önyargı oluşmuş idi。 Bu yıl okuduğum kitaplar arasında ilk üçte an itibarı ile。 。。。more
Julius
，
i know that the points in this book are good， but it's just really really quite dry to read。 im at like 60% on kindle， prob wont pick it up again i know that the points in this book are good， but it's just really really quite dry to read。 im at like 60% on kindle， prob wont pick it up again 。。。more
Ajeje Brazov
，
Da un po' di tempo girovagando per la città， mi ritrovo a guardare più attentamente le automobili che tappezzano le strade， i marciapiedi e mi succede di analizzarle。 il fatto è che senza farlo apposta ho realizzato che vedo tutte automobili nuove o comunque non così "vecchie"。 Perchè？ La risposta è semplice， ormai gli "strumenti" che usiamo quotidianamente si "deteriorano" sempre più velocemente （obsolescenza programmata？ :-P） e l'esempio delle automobili è palese， quanto inquietante。 Mi ricord Da un po' di tempo girovagando per la città， mi ritrovo a guardare più attentamente le automobili che tappezzano le strade， i marciapiedi e mi succede di analizzarle。 il fatto è che senza farlo apposta ho realizzato che vedo tutte automobili nuove o comunque non così "vecchie"。 Perchè？ La risposta è semplice， ormai gli "strumenti" che usiamo quotidianamente si "deteriorano" sempre più velocemente （obsolescenza programmata？ :-P） e l'esempio delle automobili è palese， quanto inquietante。 Mi ricordo al periodo della mia infanzia， ormai 30 anni or sono， il tappezzamento stradale dato dalle automobili parcheggiate o in transito c'era già， ma gli oggetti erano più vari， c'erano automobili molto più vecchie， antiche ecc。。。 Quindi ci stiamo sempre più conformando alla suddetta obsolescenza？L'esempio della automobile è un esempio， ma lo si può declinare a tutti gli altri （ormai sconfinati） "strumenti" della nostra vita。 Così arriviamo al saggio politico/sociale/ecologico che ho appena finito di leggere: "La convivialità"。 La convivialità c'è quando una società riesce （ci arriveremo mai？！） a eliminare i pregiudizi， la cattiveria， l'egoismo， insomma quando si arriverà ad instaurare una legame di relazioni sociali aperte alla gioia， al bene ed alla comodità altrui e proprie。Ivan Illich in nemmeno 150 pagine ci racconta come la società odierna （nel caso del saggio， pubblicato nel 1973， di quegli anni， ma è declinabile tranquillamente anche alla nostra， di quasi 50 anni dopo， gli anni non li risente questo libro） è talmente narcotizzata e drogata dall'industrializzazione sfrenata， dove le libertà personali vengono meno e la creatività è sempre più messa a rischio dagli "strumenti" che l'industria ci propina e che noi consumiamo。Libro fondamentale per chi come me vuol capire come funziona la "megamacchina" del potere costituito e vede nella convivialità e l'ecologia， il punto di partenza per una vita "nuova" e sana。 Il sapere ed il conoscere sono indispensabili per potersi difendere dai soprusi。Illich mi ha proprio sbalordito， scrittura a tratti anche complessa， ma sempre chiara ed aperta all'avvenire， non ha scritto un libro di regole da seguire， ma un saggio dove si analizza la società malata， sia nell'ambiente circostante che nell'anima degli individui che la abitano。Un capolavoro， un libro che tutti dovrebbero leggere， per poi trarne le personali considerazioni/riflessioni！L'industrializzazione moltiplica gli uomini e le cose。 I sottoprivilegiati crescono di numero， mentre i privilegiati consumano sempre di più。 Di conseguenza， tra i poveri aumenta la fame e tra i ricchi la paura。 Guidato dal bisogno e dal sentimento d'impotenza， il povero reclama un'industrializzazione accelerata; spinto dalla paura e dal desiderio di proteggere il suo stare meglio， il ricco s'impegna in una difesa sempre più rabbiosa e rigida。 Mentre il potere si polarizza， l'insoddisfazione di generalizza。 La possibilità che pur ci è data di creare per tutti maggiore felicità con meno abbondanza， è relegata al punto cieco della visione sociale。 。。。more
Jeremy German
，
Did not finish， I couldn't take it anymore。 There are a few insightful ideas in there but you have to claw through a mountain of bullshit to get there。 Pretentious， bad arguments， and outright nonsense in places。 Did not finish， I couldn't take it anymore。 There are a few insightful ideas in there but you have to claw through a mountain of bullshit to get there。 Pretentious， bad arguments， and outright nonsense in places。 。。。more
Martin Henson
，
This book is as terrifying as it was when I first read it back in the 70s。 Despite （still） not following his arguments in their entirety （I wonder who does - I doubt it: the perspectives are as difficult and radical as any I've ever read） I not only remember so much of my first reading but I am reminded of how often the ideas in this short book have come to mind when reading so many other authors in the meantime - it （and his other books， which I intend to re-read later in the year） have continu This book is as terrifying as it was when I first read it back in the 70s。 Despite （still） not following his arguments in their entirety （I wonder who does - I doubt it: the perspectives are as difficult and radical as any I've ever read） I not only remember so much of my first reading but I am reminded of how often the ideas in this short book have come to mind when reading so many other authors in the meantime - it （and his other books， which I intend to re-read later in the year） have continued to haunt me since。 I say "terrifying" because， between his observations that strike me immediately as blisteringly precise （about the climate， transport， technology， economics， 。。。） there are others that I find incomprehensible or - at least as challenging - upset a life-time of preconceptions （about health， education， 。。。）。 I am left with exactly the same impression that I had as a youngster in 70s - Illich writes so clearly but from a perspective that is very hard to fathom。 He seems， at turns， almost a seer （he sometimes seems to be talking about things that have happened， or are now happening， long after he wrote） and as a cultural historian who has， not just the facts of the past at his fingertips， but a deep understanding of these past cultures and how they relate to modernity。 I think he remains an unavoidable critic - and however much one wishes that some of his conclusions are wrong - his challenges should still be part of the conversation。 。。。more
John Davis
，
Illich argues here that tools whose purpose are to enrich （either monetarily or socially） the people who control and distribute them rather than to be useful for purposes friendly to a just society will create inequality and injustice regardless of the politics of their owners/creators/users。 （Though this book was written 40 years before it， Twitter is a pretty great example of this phenomenon - people on Twitter behave the way Twitter-the-software needs them to behave， which is mostly like jerk Illich argues here that tools whose purpose are to enrich （either monetarily or socially） the people who control and distribute them rather than to be useful for purposes friendly to a just society will create inequality and injustice regardless of the politics of their owners/creators/users。 （Though this book was written 40 years before it， Twitter is a pretty great example of this phenomenon - people on Twitter behave the way Twitter-the-software needs them to behave， which is mostly like jerks， regardless of their politics。）Illich believes that even though we get some good out of modern industrial societies and the professionalisation of practices like medicine or transportation or education， that the tools we make in the process of professionalizing end up moulding people to fit the needs of the tools， usually with injustice and inequality and also ineffectiveness as the results。 （BMI is great example of this in medicine: what was once a handy rule of thumb for estimating health has become a means by which insurance companies attempt to control and profit from the unique bodies of their customers。）In some places Illich's arguments seem extreme （he'd be pro-choice about vaccinations for instance， which would aide him with anti-vaxxers- not because he doubts the science， but because he believes the trade-off in health isn't worth becoming a vassal indentured to the medical industry - all part of become permanently sick， something the medical industry prefers because that's more profitable after all）。 But these moments aside， his arguments are compelling and it's fascinating to know that he was addressing matters of structural sexism and racism in the 1970s， though of course he wasn't using those terms。 。。。more
Friedrich Hayek
，
People have lost the right to declare themselves sick; societynow accepts their claims to sickness only after certificationby medical bureaucrats。As the power of machines increases， the role ofpersons more and more decreases to that of mere consumers。At present people tend to relinquish the task of envisagingthe future to a professional elite。People will rediscover the value of joyful sobriety and liberatingausterity only if they relearn to depend on each otherrather than on energy slaves。Our im People have lost the right to declare themselves sick; societynow accepts their claims to sickness only after certificationby medical bureaucrats。As the power of machines increases， the role ofpersons more and more decreases to that of mere consumers。At present people tend to relinquish the task of envisagingthe future to a professional elite。People will rediscover the value of joyful sobriety and liberatingausterity only if they relearn to depend on each otherrather than on energy slaves。Our imaginationshave been industrially deformed to conceive only what can bemoulded into an engineered system or social habits that fit thelogic of large-scale production。The use of industrial tools stampsin an identical way the landscape of cities each having itsown history and culture。 Highways， hospital wards， classrooms，office buildings， apartments， and stores look everywherethe same 。Identical tools also promote the developmentof the same character types。 Policemen in patrol carsor accountants at computers look and act alike all over theworld， while their poor cousins using nightstick or pen aredifferent from region to rt"gion。We often forget that education acquired its present sense onlyrecently。 It was unknown before the Reformation， except asthat part of early upbringing which is common to piglets，ducks， and men。 It was clearly distinguished from the instructionneeded by the young， and from the study in whichsome engaged later on in life and for which a teacher wasneeded。But no matter how much each generation spent onschools， it always turned out that the majority of people werecertified as unfit for higher grades of enlightenment and hadto be discarded as unprepared for the good life in a manmadeworld。Most people do not feel at home unless a significant proportionof the value of their houses is the result of the inputof their own labour。Changes in management are not revolutions。The institutionalization of knowledge leads to a more generaland degrading delusion。 It makes people dependent on havingtheir knowledge produced for them。 It leads to a paralysis ofthe moral and political imagination。 。。。more
Steph
，
Written in 1973 but so eerily relevant to our world today。 “Imperialist mercenaries can poison or maim but never conquer a people who have chosen to set boundaries to their tools for the sake of conviviality”。
Ediz Altun
，
Aydinlatici super bir kitap。 Sadece cevirisi daha iyi olabilirdi。。。
Jeff
，
This holds up surprisingly well （better than most of the political/technological/ecological polemics of the 60s and 70s）。 While many of the conclusions seem like jumping the shark， the basic frameworks for decision making deserve to be revisited。
Jonathan Hockey
，
A lot of prophetic insights into our current malaise from a book written back in 1973 when most， if not confident in aspects of the political elite， certainly most still had faith in technological progress and the unqualified goodness of welfare and social state measures。 This book explodes the whole faith in technological progress as an unqualified virtue。 Showing how this is just the last phase of dependence on an industrial， depersonalised mode of being， of a consumer society that has reached A lot of prophetic insights into our current malaise from a book written back in 1973 when most， if not confident in aspects of the political elite， certainly most still had faith in technological progress and the unqualified goodness of welfare and social state measures。 This book explodes the whole faith in technological progress as an unqualified virtue。 Showing how this is just the last phase of dependence on an industrial， depersonalised mode of being， of a consumer society that has reached a dead end of economic progress and knows no other way to run its societies， other than with notions of more state， more education， more health services， more everything and the issue of a quality service never gets a look in， and the issue of independence and self care gets lost as we become more and more passive， consumers with no independent self worth and no community spirit。Here is one quote on progress， and how it becomes used purely as a way to perpetuate professional elites who must find ever more subtle ways to manipulate us:"。。。first， new knowledge is applied to the solution of a clearly stated problem and scientific measuring sticks are applied to account for the new efficiency。 But at a second point， the progress previously demonstrated is used as a rationale for the exploitation of society as a whole in the service of a value which is determined and constantly revised by an element of society， by its selfcertifying professional elites。"Regarding this dystopian situation this creates， Illich states:"。。。People would be confined from birth to death in a world-wide schoolhouse， treated in a world-wide hospital， surrounded by television screens， and the man-made environment would be distinguishable in name only from a worldwide prison。 " The not so good side of the book is in his positive predictions。 Where he talks of an oppressed group inverting this social order。 This just seems like a typical marxist dialectical analysis that deals in fantasies and not realities。 The oppressed people right now have been made way too dependent and unable to be self sufficient in any area of their lives that they would be simply too scared to ever rise up against the system they depend on。 A more realistic uprising might come from a group somewhere in the middle of society， feeling under threat of becoming totally dependent， but still currently independent enough to do something about it。 Or it might come from other parts of the world taking over from the West on the world wide stage， such as China。 But he only flirts with this kind of Marxist analysis every now and then， and for the most part his suggestion of tools for a convivial society makes for very good guidelines for how we should aim to run our societies。 He even brought up the notion of austerity， something the conservatives have lately talked of in the UK as a policy for fighting against aspects of the state leviathan dependency situation。 But of course it often gets caught up as being just to help the rich corporations avoid taxes and exploit workers more。 But then on the other side we only create more state dependence， that will ultimately bring down civil society completely。 Devolution is another policy that has been implemented much and is also a suggestion of Illich。 But on the other side the dangers of the technological elite controlling us all is still there。 With their professionals extorting money from us all under fears of global catastrophe where they are the "experts" and we are expected to trust all our ideas and all our resources to them to save us from disaster。 Such a situation is clearly dangerous and I think a sober appreciation of some tools for a convivial society， and of the implications of our dependence on a non-convivial state bureacracy can be a good basis for a reasonable political discussion not tied up in the outdated paradigm of the simplistic more state， or less state dichotomy。 。。。more
David Rush
，
Before I get to definitions and goals for Tools for Conviviality， I have to point out that Ivan really buries the lead in this story。 I admit he leads up to it but he doesn’t really spell it out until the last few pages。 That people would accept multiple limits to growth without catastrophe seems highly improbable。 The inevitable catastrophic event could be either a crisis in civilization or its end: end by annihilation or end in B。F。 Skinner’s world-wide concentration camp run by a T。E。 Frazier Before I get to definitions and goals for Tools for Conviviality， I have to point out that Ivan really buries the lead in this story。 I admit he leads up to it but he doesn’t really spell it out until the last few pages。 That people would accept multiple limits to growth without catastrophe seems highly improbable。 The inevitable catastrophic event could be either a crisis in civilization or its end: end by annihilation or end in B。F。 Skinner’s world-wide concentration camp run by a T。E。 Frazier。 Pg 105So he is trying to address an impending collapse of civilization or its enslavement。 Pretty heavy stuff。This was published in 1970 and I guess those were turbulent times， although for me I didn’t notice as I was only focused on comic books at the time。 Now as an aging middle aged white dude I think this brilliant innovative thinker missed the boat on the ways humans can adapt and change and escape complete self-destruction。 We humans， like the earth itself， has amazing flexibility。 It may still come but it will probably not be the storm trooper take over or Mad Max landscape he imagined。The extreme predictions shouldn’t take away from some of his insights and accurate observation。 But it is probably hard for some to accept his observations while discounting his predictions。My rear view mirror recollection of this books is that the social structure of our industrial age is actually a “tool” that limits rather than helps mankind。 He sees “convivial tools” as actual tools but also ways of doing and thinking that mesh more harmonically with man’s true nature。At one level it sounds all cool and neat man， but the hard edge （which may be the truth but in today’s world is super harsh） is that he is saying people have to change the whole way they think of living， of success， and what a good life really is。Honesty requires that we each recognize the need to limit procreation， consumption， and waste， but equally we must radically reduce our expectations that machines will do our work for us or that therapists can make us leaned or healthy。 The only solution to the environmental crisis is the shared insight of people that they would be happier if they could work together and car for each other。Pg 50Hey， I love my stuff and all my cool toys， but I have to admit I don’t think they add one wit to making me a better person。 BUT even if I was ready to change may way of living， the world is not so accommodating。 AND all all political discussion is about the best way for more people to have more stuff and the argument is just over who gets the most and who has to pay for it。He coins some most excellent terms like “Radical Monopoly” and some piercing insights like what really fulfills a person is when they can use their own energy and natural gifts to something for themselves， not when somebody else or some societal tool fills their needs。The establishment of radical monopoly happens when people give up their native ability to do what they can do for themselves and for each other， in exchange for something “better” that can be done for them only by a major tool。 Radical monopoly reflects the industrial institutionalization of values。 Pg。 54Basically he imagines a world designed with the right amount of technology to do the most good while causing the least harm。 For Illich each tool or technology reaches first a watershed of most effectiveness but after that the forces driving it move towards diminishing returns until it is actively hurting people。 And his favorite tools to complain about are Education， Modern Medicine and Transportation。And I sure dig his view that the bicycle is the best example of the most efficient use of technology。 It allows a person to cover many miles with absolutely no harm to the environment nor imposes on anybody else’s freedom。 But if that is great， how do you force the rest of the world to adopt this view。And that may be the weakest part of his worldview。 It seems he thinks people will see the elegance of low energy technology and adopt it out of pure logicalness。 Well that is what it seems early on in the book。But toward the end he gets very darkWhat we need is ration research on the dimensions within which technology can be used by concrete communities to implement their aspirations without frustrating equivalent aspirations by others…Supersonic transport could be easily ruled out to protect the environment， air transport to avoid social polarization， cars to protect against radical monopoly…Tools， in other words， have an optimal， a tolerable， and a negative range。 Pg 78And who will decide what is tolerable？ He doesn’t really say other than that people in distress will be vulnerable to these obvious logics。 Which brings us again to the end of the world as we know it。Final thoughts。 Loved many of the ideas and insight but can’t possibly imagining anybody in today’s world being so rational。 。。。more
Matthew
，
When everyone was a farmer， you simply could not find yourself in your particular line of work。 Everyone was a farmer！ Illich sees this circumstance as one in which you were forced to find your identity in your character: What kind of farmer are you？ That is， what kind of man， or person are you？ Are you generous？ Are you patient？ Are you kind？ Are you sober？ Are you chaste？ Are you temperate？ Are you humble？ Just because the modern world is specialized， I see no reason not to look to the way thi When everyone was a farmer， you simply could not find yourself in your particular line of work。 Everyone was a farmer！ Illich sees this circumstance as one in which you were forced to find your identity in your character: What kind of farmer are you？ That is， what kind of man， or person are you？ Are you generous？ Are you patient？ Are you kind？ Are you sober？ Are you chaste？ Are you temperate？ Are you humble？ Just because the modern world is specialized， I see no reason not to look to the way things were as a guide to reality。 We may not all be farmers， but we are all workers; all work has dignity。 What really matters ultimately is one's character， not career -- or multiple careers。 If you are x， or were x， but are no longer x， are you no longer you？ Must you constantly look back to find yourself？ If you are y today， but may cease to be y tomorrow， are you in danger of losing yourself？ This inner anxiety due to attachment to a fake identity can be overcome by nurturing Illich's view that we are our character。 One can make the course of their life the inner person， not the particular circumstance in which that person lived， such as occupation。 Society may be blinded by the present moment to confer greater honors on your past， present， or future， but the wise man， in my opinion， transcends human opinion and attaches to the reality of the one person he or she will always be -- the soul。 And in this naked exposure to the reality of who one is， there is always a realization of what is truly right or wrong with oneself， not supressed by momentary accolades at work。 There is also an awakening to seeking the truth， holding onto it， and becoming more and more morally excellent in light of it。 In this， one can die peacefully， not attached to childhood， young adulthood， a particular career one had -- or never had， having died too young， parenthood， and so on。 One can seek virtue， be defined by it。 Furthermore， one can stop evaluating others by their momentary property， beauty， and reputation， but by their true person as well。 Friendships can be entered into， perhaps for the first time。 They can develop， they can mature， they can embrace the truth about who we really are and foster the greatest intimacy possible。 There can be no hidden pride about how one may be x or y instead of the z of one's companion; nor can one feel falsely inferior due to being a or b。 The one soul we all are manifests itself and allows for a bond of mutual respect and love， patience for real faults， persistence in helping each other overcome then， and a developing -- not of a false identity， pushing each other to greater delusion， but of a real identity， where both become the truest persons they could ever be。I believe this book can help make a man most adaptable to any situation， diligent to take the work available to him， knowing himself intimately -- who he really is， as well as those around him。 At peace， compassionate， generous， patient， 。。。 virtuous。 。。。more
Nathan Anderson
，
3/5
Çağatay Boz
，
İvan İlyiç reis ateş ediyor。 Endüstriyel toplumdan teknokrat elitlere， sağlık ve eğitim sistemi adı altında sunulan ve "hizmet" olarak insanlara kakalanan ürünlerden bilime， teknolojiden ilerlemeciliğe， üretim/tüketim çılgınlığından araç/insan ilişkisine kadar sayısız kavrama， kuruma ve kişiye saydırıyor İlyiç。 Pek de haksız sayılmaz bu eleştirilerinde。 İşin güzel yanı， her eleştirisini belirli bir savın üzerine oturtuyor， altı boş bir iddia yok kitapta。"Sağlık bilgisi bir erdem olmaktan çıkıp b İvan İlyiç reis ateş ediyor。 Endüstriyel toplumdan teknokrat elitlere， sağlık ve eğitim sistemi adı altında sunulan ve "hizmet" olarak insanlara kakalanan ürünlerden bilime， teknolojiden ilerlemeciliğe， üretim/tüketim çılgınlığından araç/insan ilişkisine kadar sayısız kavrama， kuruma ve kişiye saydırıyor İlyiç。 Pek de haksız sayılmaz bu eleştirilerinde。 İşin güzel yanı， her eleştirisini belirli bir savın üzerine oturtuyor， altı boş bir iddia yok kitapta。"Sağlık bilgisi bir erdem olmaktan çıkıp bilimin sunağında， profesyonel biçimde örgütlenmiş bir ayine dönüştü。""Bilim ve teknoloji nerede bir sorun yaratsa， bunların ancak daha fazla bilimsel kavrayış ve daha iyi teknolojiyle aşılabileceğini söylemek moda oldu。""Makinelerin gücü arttıkça， kişilerin rolü gitgide salt tüketiciliğe indirgeniyor。""Voltaire hâlâ， yalnızca gösteriş düşkünü öğretmenlerin uyguladığı， haddini bilmezce bir uydurma diyordu eğitim için。""Stalin'in marksizmi yeniden yorumlayışı， o günden beri sosyalistlere ve sola karşı bir tür şantaj işlevi gördü。""İlerleme， tıbbi bakıma gittikçe daha bağımlı olmak değil， gittikçe daha çok kendine yetmek anlamına gelmelidir。""Uluslar ve çok uluslu şirketler， uluslararası mesleklerin giderek genişleyen imparatorluğunun aracı durumundadır。 Meslek emperyalizmi， siyasal ve ekonomik egemenliğin kırıldığı yerlerde bile galip geliyor。 Okullar her yerde， öğrenme teorisi ve ders programı hazırlama konularında aynı kitapları okumuş pedagoglarca yönetiliyor。""Susayan bir adam soğuk， gazlı ve tatlı bir içecek isterken， seçiminin bir tek markayla kısıtlandığını görebilir。 Yine de susuzluğunu birayla ya da suyla gidermekte özgürdür。 Ama eğer susuzluğu， anlamlı alternatifler olmaksızın Coca-Cola ihtiyacına dönüşürse， o zaman tekel， radikal olur。""Hiçbir eğitimin zenginlere hayatta kalmayı öğretemeyeceği ortamlarda， yoksullar onurla yaşamayı bilirler。""Malların egemenliğine girmiş insanlar acizleşir， öfkelendikleri zaman ise， ya öldürür ya da ölürler。 Öğrenme dengesinin çökmesi， insanları kendi araçlarının kuklası durumuna getirir。""Tıptaki teknolojik ilerleme， önce iyileştirici olmaktan çıkar， sonra artık ömrü de uzatamaz。 Bir tür， ölümü inkâr etme törenine dönüşür。 Makinelere en uygun kişiliğin en göz alıcı performansı gösterdiği son bir yarıştır bu。""İlerleme tutkunluğu hiç kimsenin asla hedefe ulaşamadığı bir yarışa mahkûm edebilir insanları。""Anneler， reklamcının ya da doktorun tavsiyelerine göre çocuklarını zehirler。""Otoyolların yanı başında doğmuş insanlar， hızsız bir dünya düşünemez， Andlardaki köylü ise bir kimsenin niçin bu kadar hızlı yolculuk etmesi gerektiğine akıl erdiremez。""Nüfusun artıp， kaynakların kıtlaştığını gösteren kanıtların gittikçe çoğalması insanları öylesine korkutur ki， gönüllü olarak Büyük Biraderler'in eline bırakabilirler kaderlerini。""Büyük kurumlar saygıdeğerliklerini， meşruluklarını ve kamu yararına hizmet ettikleri düşüncesine dayanan itibarlarını kısa sürede yitirebilir。 Reformasyon sırasında Roma Kilisesi'nin ve Amerikan Devrimi sırasında krallığın başına gelen de buydu。 Akıl almaz olan， bir gecede gerçeğe dönüştü: Halk， yöneticilerin boynunu vurabilirdi ve vurdu da。""Emperyalistlerin paralı askerleri， şenlikli yaşam adına araçlarına sınırlar koyan bir halkı zehirleyebilir ya da belki zayıf düşürebilirler; ama asla yenemezler。"Eğer ki mevcut çerçevenin dışına çıkabilecek bir zihniyete sahip değilseniz hiç başlamayın bile。 Hoşunuza gitmeyecek ve saçma bulacaksınız。 。。。more
dv
，
Illich espone le sue idee con forza， coraggio e senza cercare di imbonire il lettore: ne è prova l'uso non immediato del linguaggio （la stessa parola "convivialità"）， l'assumere un ruolo necessariamente impopolare， il proporre tesi certo non immediatamente condivisibili， perché lontane anni luce dai valori oggi operanti。 Un grande testo， davvero rivoluzionario， che mette necessariamente nella condizione di porsi tutti i problemi sollevati nel testo。 Questo è il libro da leggere per affrontare il Illich espone le sue idee con forza， coraggio e senza cercare di imbonire il lettore: ne è prova l'uso non immediato del linguaggio （la stessa parola "convivialità"）， l'assumere un ruolo necessariamente impopolare， il proporre tesi certo non immediatamente condivisibili， perché lontane anni luce dai valori oggi operanti。 Un grande testo， davvero rivoluzionario， che mette necessariamente nella condizione di porsi tutti i problemi sollevati nel testo。 Questo è il libro da leggere per affrontare il tema dei necessari freni allo sviluppo。 Scritto nel 1973。 。。。more
ger
，
Ivan Illich got a lot of predictions wrong。 So do most people who try to see the future （Problem of induction）。 He still has excellent points to make about virtually everything else though。 His view is that Mankind believed machines （And I assume now computers） would be his slave and free him。 We thus trained ourselves to operate these machines （Or code them） and it turned out they enslaved us。 Growth without end， escalation of problems by trying to solve them with 'More' 。 monopolies in Educati Ivan Illich got a lot of predictions wrong。 So do most people who try to see the future （Problem of induction）。 He still has excellent points to make about virtually everything else though。 His view is that Mankind believed machines （And I assume now computers） would be his slave and free him。 We thus trained ourselves to operate these machines （Or code them） and it turned out they enslaved us。 Growth without end， escalation of problems by trying to solve them with 'More' 。 monopolies in Education， Medicine， Law， Politics， Welfare and Industry。 He challenges us to look at everything from language to means and ends。 The writing can be hard going at times and of course is decades old in context but I think he is an essential part of the mix。 。。。more
Alfredo Bojórquez
，
Texto importante para lxs que creemos que hay que volver a ciertas máquinas útiles， como la bicicleta y otros artefactos artesanales útiles。
Reference
google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Tools for Conviviality
hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Tools for Conviviality&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft