Cited by 1,410Education, Politics, and Culture StudiesPhilosophical Thought and AnalysisCritical and Liberation Pedagogy

Tools for Conviviality

Illich, Ivan·1973·Equinox Publishing eBooks

Abstract

Tools for Conviviality was published in 1973, only two years after Deschooling Society. In this work, Illich generalized the themes that he had previously applied to the field of education: the institutionalization of specialized knowledge, the dominant role of technocratic elites in industrial society, and the need to develop new instruments for the reconquest of practical knowledge by the average citizen. Illich proposed that we should ‘invert the present deep structure of tools’ in order to give people tools that guarantee their right to work with independent efficiency.’ Tools for Conviviality attracted worldwide attention. A resume of it was published by French social philosopher Andre Gorz in Les Temps Modernes, under the title ‘Freeing the Future’. The book’s vision of tools that would be developed and maintained by a community of users had significant influence of the first developers of the personal computer, notably Lee Felsentein. Illich wrote: ‘I choose the term ‘conviviality’ to designate the opposite of industrial productivity. I intend it to mean autonomous and creative intercourse among persons, and the intercourse of persons with their environment, and this in contrast with the conditioned response of persons to the demands made upon them by others, and by a man-made environment. I consider conviviality to be the individual freedom realized in personal interdependence and, as such, an intrinsic ethical value. I believe that, in any society, as conviviality is…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1558/isbn.9780714521602

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Technologies should be understood as having three aspects: material, organizational, and cultural.

    “This text operates based on a triadic formulation of technology drawn from Arnold Pacey (1984) and also found in the work of Clifford Christians (1989) and Ivan Illich (1973)-namely, technologies should be understood as having three aspects: material, organizational, and cultural.”

    From Distributed Blackness: African American Cybercultures (2020) · cites this paper as Illich, 1973

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Illich, I.
Corresponding author
Illich, Ivan
Venue
Equinox Publishing eBooks
Published
1973
OpenAlex
W2062675355
Cited by
1,410
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 122 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 64 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 60 · 2020: 66 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 83 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 44 · 2012: 50
FWCI
37.43
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Equinox Publishing eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Education, Politics, and Culture Studies
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Philosophical Thought and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Education › Critical and Liberation Pedagogy
Keywords
Ivan Illich, conviviality, tools, deschooling, industrial productivity, technocratic elites, practical knowledge, self-reliance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review