> at what point does a tool remain merely a tool, and at what point does it become an end in itself?
As technological animals, our tools are IMO never "merely" tools - we adapt ourselves to them at least as much as we ask them to work for us. E.g., the process of making art is, often, the 2-way process of integrating yourself with your tools. (Maybe art is just the point on the spectrum where the use of the tool is in itself the point of the tool?)
And anyway, every occupation (professional and otherwise) that I can think of fetishizes its tools, at least a little. Or, in a different direction, we might consider how the nature of policing has changed as they've been given more and more military-style tools.
As technological animals, our tools are IMO never "merely" tools - we adapt ourselves to them at least as much as we ask them to work for us. E.g., the process of making art is, often, the 2-way process of integrating yourself with your tools. (Maybe art is just the point on the spectrum where the use of the tool is in itself the point of the tool?)
And anyway, every occupation (professional and otherwise) that I can think of fetishizes its tools, at least a little. Or, in a different direction, we might consider how the nature of policing has changed as they've been given more and more military-style tools.