Its not a given that our genes have evolved as influenced by our intentions, as is implied. They may be connected, but the nature of that interaction certainly isn't something that can really be assumed. Also, there is an implied view of technology as something other than an outgrowth of intelligence - a misleading dichotomy suggesting a possible scenario whereby a person could not improvise some kind of technology if some sort. This is an unrealistic view, as most such dichotomies often end up being. They distort more than they clarify. One may as well commiserate about how we can't live without air or water. At the bottom of this is the question as to what he is trying to say about technology or about us when he says we can't live without it.

Just read what John said, because he put it best. It's likely true that our tools have affected our biology (Indirectly and at this point in time, even directly to some degree), but the statement that we can't survive or even BE human without our technology is quite a stretch. What about tribes of humans deep in the South American jungles who look just like us and survive without any technology that the modern human would even classify as "technology"? And to say that we aren't human without our tools sounds to me more like an opinion rather than any sort of logical assertion. Does a tiger stop being tiger if you shave its fur off? Yes, its stripes are gones, but that isn't the only aspect of what makes it a tiger.

''Yes, its stripes are gone'' - A shaved tiger would still have stripes. The striped pattern is on the tigers skin, not just the fur.

Beautiful sentiment, brilliantly explained. We've chosen to step not outside of but up from nature and make the world as we see fit rather than be tossed around by it in chaos. Another few thousand years and we will be fully one with our own inventions.