The Science of Discovery
Michael Polanyi, a scientist and philosopher of Hungarian-British descent, facilitates an interesting discussion in The Tacit Dimension. At the core of this philosophical work is the “the fact that we can know more than we can tell.”[1] While the example in use is the ability to know a person’s face from a crowd without the knowledge of how we recognized it.[2] In exploring this work, it was clear to me that this concept that knowing what and knowing how work together in any given situation to develop a tactic knowing which develops meaning to us.[3] While Polanyi focuses on the sciences, this work can be applied across a variety of facets of life – religion, politics, culture – nearly anything and everything. Tacit knowledge and the meaning connected to it then become guides in how we function in our daily lives.
While much of Polanyi’s writing is philosophy beyond my understanding, I do appreciate his desire for his concepts and discoveries to be known and reacted to by a wide range of academic disciplines. While not explicit in his discussion of a Creator, I did find several connections to biblical concepts and applications for me as a follower of Christ, including:
- Polanyi states, “how can we recognize truth by its fruitfulness…. It makes sense if we admit that we can have a tacit foreknowledge of yet undiscovered things.”[4] I immediately thought of the fruit of the Spirit in Galatians 5 and that the following verses state that those belonging to Christ will be evidenced by these fruit;
- The key conclusion of an approaching discovery and the anticipation of its implications points towards the awe of discovery of the Creator, specifically I think of Ecclesiastes 3 and that we cannot fully discover the work of God;[5]
- The principle of mutual control and the parallels to the body of Christ – the concepts of mutual care and submission for one another as each continues to focus on their specific task;[6]
- Polanyi states, “men need a purpose which beans on eternity,” and concludes this work with accentuating that our individual and societal shortcomings “cannot be resolved on secular grounds alone” but also need religious solutions.[7]
Looking at this work from a broad-stroke cultural perspective lens, he states:
“In the last few thousand years human beings have enormously increased the range of comprehension by equipping our tacit powers with a cultural machinery of language and writing. Immersed in this cultural milieu, we now respond to a much increased range of potential thought.”[8]
This statement leaves me with a few questions:
- While he is not likely using culture in the same way as I am, it makes me consider how much of this tacit knowledge is at play when engaging in cross-cultural communication. How much of what we discovered recently in the Intercultural Discovery Inventory (IDI) points back to this knowledge or dimension?
- What is the interplay between tacit knowledge and the development or solidification of our biases as discussed with Agarwal?
- Likewise, what is the interplay between Kahneman’s System 1 and System 2 thinking when considering this dimension? Is there a way to become more mindful of the ‘knowing how’ if our thinking was slowed down?
At the end, I’m reminded of just how much detail has gone into the creation of our physical bodies, especially our minds, by our Creator. As we continue to dive into works that push my knowledge and understanding of concepts and theories that can feel a bit beyond me, it makes me even more realize how crucial the Romans 12 passage on the importance of renewing our minds is.
[1] Polanyi, 4.
[2] Ibid., 4.
[3] Ibid., 11.
[4] Ibid., 23.
[5] Ibid., 24.
[6] Ibid., 72.
[7] Ibid., 92.
[8] Ibid., 91.
About the Author
Kayli Hillebrand
Associate Dean of International and Experiential Education11 responses to “The Science of Discovery”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Kayli,
I especially resonated with your final paragraph. It reminds me of Jesus’s invitation and the literal translation of repentance, change your way of thinking and living.
I kept thinking while reading Polayni that, yes, there is a lot we cannot fully explain about what we know and how we learned it, but that doesn’t mean we are right. And yet, how do we identify what we tacitly know and measure its accuracy of what is right, good, noble, and true?
Hey Andy: I think that is the challenge right now with so much of the polarization in our society and the need to be ‘right’ on any given subject. They mystery that Polanyi writes about encouraged me more this week in terms of leaders being comfortable living in the in-between/gray areas.
In terms of how do we identify and measure what we tacitly know, for me, it goes back to measuring all things against scripture. Scripture in relation to its historical, societal, linguistic context and then moving through a process of discernment from the Lord to reveal the areas that are ‘wrong’ or off.
Ms. Kayli: You wrote, “While much of Polanyi’s writing is philosophy beyond my understanding…” And I agree. This was not an easy book to understand it was slow-going for me. I’m thankful it was less than one hundred pages. But I also can appreciate his intensity in searching for truth and knowledge. It was so very different than Bolsinger’s book from last week. Polanyi’s book provides theoretical foundations; Bolsinger’s book was practical for immediate application. Which variety do you prefer?
On the regular, I enjoy the more practical application of writings like Bolsinger, but I do find myself more and more appreciating the works like Polanyi that challenge me to think differently or push through the hard. I think engaging with both styles also helps form my leadership ability in how I’m able to relate to different types of people that I engage and lead in a more holistic manner.
Thank you, Kayli, for your post and thoughtful interaction with Polayni, scripture, life with Christ, and some of the other authors we’ve read. What of Polayni’s perspective did you find most challenging (or encouraging) to how you had previously understood the journey of knowing/knowledge?
Elmarie: I think what I appreciate most about being challenged by Polanyi is that it took me to a place of engaging the why/how. Even in the example of the face among the crowd, I found myself asking how I would answer if someone were to question how I knew that face was someone specific. I think anytime I can engage with minds that are so different than mind, it helps expand my perspectives that much more.
Kayli, thanks for you post and your honesty in engaging this “heavy” book. I had to reread a lot of sections and was still struggling to comprehend it all. I also enjoyed the way you connected the material to the arena of faith as I sought to do the same. You asked the question about the interplay between Polanyi and Agarwal. Polanyi seems very optimistic about the learning process while Agarwal spent much of her work on the negative side of bias. Do you think they were arguing two sides of the same coin or do you see a difference altogether with how they approached their topic?
Roy: I think as I’ve leaned into the materials over the last few years I am moving away from the coin analogy and moving towards one of a spider web. There are so many perspectives on any given issue, so many little connection points and ways to get there. Ultimately I think they both brought a different way to approach the topic of biases – and both are needed as they will meet different needs and contexts.
Kayli, great blog. I love that I am always challenged by your musings. What I especially love is your rootedness in the gospel and in the hope we find in Him. I could not agree with you more.
I find this portion of Polanyi interesting… the portion of us knowing more than we can communicate. It is my sense that this has to do with our Imago Dei – He has made us to know, love, and delight in Him. Until we are reconciled back to Him through the cross, we are still hardwired for Him who has made us.
How do you see these principles at work in your students, as God draws them nearer?
Thanks Kayli, for your thoughts on this small but challenging book. I think you ask some important questions. Do you see any keys from Polanyi’s thoughts that could assist in further understanding or overcoming cultural biasis?
Kayli, thank you for sharing all of your wonderings and questions. If you were to take a tacit hunch, what might Polanyi say about humans knowing about scripture?