Subject:
       Words and Writing  (Part  IV)
       ( continuation )

3. Technology

The historical relation nature  a n d  society has been converted, within and throughout the labour process, into the non-relation of unilateral exploitation and final destruction of nature by society, as reflected by the contradiction "History versus Nature" in both, idealist and materialist conceptions of history.
In the labour process, there is a visible, concrete, material expression of this non-relation society versus nature and its respective degree of exploitation: technology. Technology is the objectivation, the "materialization" of the non-relation society versus nature; it contains both physical and intellectual labour and appears twofold, as means of production (tools) and means of destruction (weapons). Being technology the materialized expression of the non-relation society versus nature, and containing both physical and intellectual labour, we can measure the degree of exploitation of nature by society by analysing the technology of a given mode of production.

4. Prehistoric Human Society

The distinct modes of production in the labour process differ from each other exactly according to the degree of exploitation of nature by society. For us, in what has been denominated "pre-history", we find, that the historic relation nature  a n d  society has not yet come to its full conversion into the non-relation society versus nature. Consequently, the "pre-historic" relation nature  a n d  society is of a different quality than is it’s converted non-relation later on in the labour process.

In the epoch prior to the "younger" Stone Age or Neolithic Period , where agriculture and cattle breeding sets in, we have the ancient Stone Age or Palaeolithic Period and the Middle Stone Age, where the dominant "mode of production" is the "society of the hunters and collectors" (Problem: time data available on the classification of Stone Age periods often vary from each other and do not specify geographical regions of the earth). We cannot really denominate this period as a "mode of production", because "labour", in the sense of conscious and systematic production, did not constitute the dominant process, but probably occurred as an occasional and isolated, accidental phenomenon. The "production" in the period in question mainly consisted of direct consumption of what nature provided, with the help of rudimentary tools, playing chance a major role, and being nature an equally "immediate" factor as "society" itself, which was characterized by natural relations that did not differ that much from the natural relations of the other species on the planet, that have been called "animals", even "insects" and "plants".

We want to emphasize here, that we do not state this in a declassifying or dequalifying manner. On the contrary, the "pre-"historic relation nature a n d  society of the ancient Stone Age, that probably extended to a much larger period of time than assumed today, is the last vestige of what we understand by the real historic relation "nature a n d  society", that is, proper history. We repeat, that it is of a different quality than the later, unilateral non-relation society versus nature, in other words, labour, which starts to become the dominant process ever since the Neolithicum.

As shown above, Marx does not define nature and society as the two moments of the same process, history, but as two moments of nature itself, when he determines nature as "the inorganic body of the human being", and the human being as "an intrinsic part of Nature itself". So, for Marx, in prehistory there is only nature, therefore pre-history. We remind here, that for Marx, the human being in prehistory is nothing but an animal. Only through the labour process, only by "stepping out of nature" does the human being create itself and history, consciously converting nature into its means of life.

In the Ancient and Middle Stone Age, nature equals the process with regard to "society", where society almost does not differ from nature itself and nature not from society, and where the relation nature  a n d  society is that of an almost "organical" interchange. In other words, the labour process itself has not yet set in, thus, differentiation between nature and society, and differentiation between physical and intellectual labour, is not yet on the order of the day.
This is exactly why the idealist and materialist conceptions of history denominate this period as the "primitive society" and de-classify this stage as pre-history; precisely because society has not yet begun the domination and systematic exploitation of nature, which only sets in with the neolithic revolution, that is, with the beginning of proper production, where society gets in control of nature with the rather "systematic" cultivation of the soil, breeding of cattle, and where the production and reproduction of tools, the development of technology, takes on different forms according to the demands of the beginning production process.
Only then the differentiation of original, historical relations into natural and social non-relations begin, and the differentiation of labour into physical  a n d  intellectual labour sets in.

(For information on the latest development in archaeological research on Ancient Stone Age artefacts and skulls, and the consequences of the new findings for the traditional theory of the origin of Native Americans. (see: Newsweek International, June 7th, 1999, Vol. CXXXIII, Nr. 23. We also learn, that "primitive" society was not that primitive, after all. The "first Americans" might have been travelling by boat along the frozen shoreline from Europe into North America. - Early paintings date back to 11000 years ago.)

5. The Origin and Context of "words and writing"

With the differentiation of labour into physical and intellectual labour, the expression of  which is, amongst other things, the development of words and writing, the proper labour process starts. This is where, according to Marx, society "leaves nature" and "steps into history", converting nature from an inconscious means of consumption into a conscious means of production, including the production and reproduction of labouring tools, of technology.

According to our conception of history, and even according to the view of Marx himself, as shown above, we cannot really speak of  "technology" in the sense of conscious production and reproduction of labouring tools in pre-history as a dominant phenomenon, due to the different quality of historic relations vis-a-vis the non-relations of the later labour process.

Yet, we can still make an approximation and assume, that prehistoric tools do have a rudimentary element comparable to what later on in the labour process would be "intellectual labour", the corresponding expression of which, in prehistory, are sounds and paintings (not yet words and writing), that may have had a rudimentary influence on the further development of tools.

6. Summary

In all conceptions of history, a comparatively very large period of mankind, that is determined by a  "primitive" relation towards nature, where society has not come to a certain degree of exploitation of nature, is de-classified as "pre-history". This period roughly covers between 1 and 2 million years, including the "missing link", the tool producing and reproducing Homo Zinjanthropus, who is supposed to have lived some 1,8 million years ago, and who was discovered by Dr. L.S.B. Leakey at the beginning of the 20th Century, in the Olduvai Gorge, in present day Tanzania. The proper labour process begins with the differentiation of physical into physical and intellectual labour, being intellectual labour in nuce directed towards organizing the physical performance of labour, including the production of tools and the development of language and writing.

"Words and writings", expression of intellectual labour, arise at a certain stage of the labour process in history, product of the non-relation society versus nature, reflecting exactly this non-relation and back feeding technology in this very sense: to be applied against nature, in the name of exploitation of nature by society. The influence of intellectual labour and its expression in words and writings on the production process and technology itself, becomes decisive not in prehistoric society, but precisely at a stage, where the production process starts exploiting physical and intellectual labour.

The "pre-historic" creative spark turns out to be one of a different kind than the "historic" destructive spark, that kindled the birth of the labour process.

                      Warmest regards,
                                                      Jutta