Houses are shaped the way they are because of the technical means available to the people who built them at the time. Habitats from a thousand years ago are quite different from those built recently. Of course, you can argue that there is more to why habitats change over time: we don’t have the same needs or the same environment. But these, too, are conditioned by the technological world we’ve built around us. Technology indirectly impacts external conditions and needs. So tools define the answers we give to questions or problems.
In the case of a house, the question may be: how can I stay safe from external threats and conditions? Architects and bricklayers will have intentions and methods unique to their time, closely linked to the technology available to them. Also, threats and external conditions when you have firestones and wood are different from when you have the internet, a couch, and a fridge.
My point here is that tools influenced much our structure of thoughts because you use a set of tools that can adequately resolve issues in the physical world. It wouldn’t come to a bricklayer’s mind to build some kind of electromagnetic field to protect a kitchen from external threats. Even if it may be possible, those kinds of tools don’t exist yet; they need to be invented and preferably industrialized before being part of a bricklayer’s thought process.
This idea leads me to write this premise:
The way we create things is highly influenced by the tools we have.
And if we suppose all creations are ways to answer questions, then we can induce this conclusion:
Tools define our answers to questions.
Tools before computers were objects that, when handled properly with a technique following steps, could solve a problem. In the same way, a computer is a tool that executes steps using techniques (algorithms). But a computer is a system capable of processing logical steps, which means your tool will have more polyvalence, executing techniques according to external outputs.
Languages have been built to execute logical steps on a computer. Some languages are very technical (close to the language of a computer) and are not very understandable naturally by a human. So, to solve real-world problems, we use languages like Python that are high-level languages (high-level in the sense that they are far from what a computer understands but close to what humans understand).
Classical computers have led us to structure our reasoning in this way:
Do If [condition] else [alternative list of instructions] while [condition]
This kind of structure is not necessary, but it is convenient to use in computer science.
Most algorithms that use classical computers are effective ways to solve real-world problems. Computers changed the way we thought about problems. Applying algorithmic and computer science methods to problems that don’t necessarily require a computer often turns out to be quite efficient. So computers gave us a new way to think about problems. Now, quantum computers give us yet another way to think about them, and so on and so forth.
Here are two new ideas:
The way a language is structured shapes our questions and how we answer them.
The questions we ask ourselves and the answers we might give depend on the language we're using.
If I managed to prove that language is a tool, these two premises can be validated..
Sources: How to Prove It - Daniel J. Velleman