Analysing Tacit Knowledge

Tradition and Discovery 38 (1):38-42 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I respond to the reviews by Henry and Lowney of my book Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. I stress the need to understand explicit knowledge if tacit knowledge is to be understood. Tacit knowledge must be divided into three kinds: relational, somatic and collective. The idea of relational tacit knowledge is keyto pulling the three kinds apart.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,164

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Ineffable, Tacit, Explicable and Explicit.Charles Lowney - 2011 - Tradition and Discovery 38 (1):18-37.
At the Margins of Tacit Knowledge.Michael Lynch - 2013 - Philosophia Scientiae 17 (3):55-73.
When Tacit is Not Tacit Enough: A Heideggerian Critique of Collins’ “Tacit” Knowledge.Ben Trubody - 2013 - Meta: Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy 5 (2):315-335.
Tacit Knowledge and Its Antonyms.Tim Thornton - 2013 - Philosophia Scientiae 17 (3):93-106.
Tacit Knowledge Meets Analytic Kantianism.Stephen Turner - 2014 - Tradition and Discovery 41 (1):33-47.
Building an Antenna for Tacit Knowledge.Harry Collins - 2013 - Philosophia Scientiae 17 (3):25-39.
Nothing is concealed: De-centring tacit knowledge and rules from social theory.Nigel Pleasants - 1996 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 26 (3):233–255.
The Concept of Tacit Knowledge – A Critique.Klaus Nielsen - 2002 - Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 4 (2):3-17.
Tacit Knowledge/Knowing and the Problem of Articulation.Zhenhua Yu - 2003 - Tradition and Discovery 30 (2):11-22.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
124 (#140,789)

6 months
3 (#880,460)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references