Humpty, I'll disagree (as will other historians of technology) with your statement:
" A flint axe was cutting-edge technology in 30,000 B.C.; yet any [censored] Sapience who hadn't seen an axe before, could figure out how to make one for oneself just by looking at it for fifteen minutes."
Neither you nor I could duplicate that axe after 15 minutes' examination. Knapping stone edges is simple in principle but very difficult to do well. (I know people who can do it very well and it took years of effort) Further, if you've ever handled stone tools you would be amazed at how ergonomic they are. Same thing with finely-made African war clubs. These artifacts have superb balance - they handle like "bests!" Stone artifacts (axes, scrapers, tips, knives) were not the products of individual hunters or end-users but rather were generally made in "factories" by specialists. There was very good knowledge of stone quality, mining technology, knapping and a large trade network. There still exist (they have been restored) fairly deep Neolithic-period flint mines where the miners dug for the really good flint. High-quality stone was exported and often traveled many thousands of miles to distant end-users. It's quite a remarkable story, indeed. It is amazing to think of a trading network where people carried rocks by hand for thousands of miles!
So even stone axe-heads represent a sophisticated technology and required a social and "business" infrastructure.
Your post suggests interesting points regarding "progress" but I think that really speaks to technological succession and how rapidly a newer technology can replace an older.
There is also the well-documented issue of "transparency" in manufactured items. Even the stone axe had opacity. We can all discern that it was man-made and that the edges were formed but simple observation will not reveal how the flakes were removed from the edge in a controlled manner (hint - they were not chipped). This is a bit like not knowing the plastic used in Humpty's Benelli example.
Take a look at Newcomen's atmospheric steam engine in the Science Museum in London - we can all "understand" how this was made but even tho it looks like a shade-tree blacksmith's creation (and to some extent it is) it represents the best technology of the period - the roundness of the cylinder is at the limit of that era's technical ability.
I do wonder, however, when the term "high-tech" was first used. Anybody know?
