{"id":29178,"date":"2022-10-20T14:46:55","date_gmt":"2022-10-20T21:46:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/?p=29178"},"modified":"2022-10-22T09:02:46","modified_gmt":"2022-10-22T16:02:46","slug":"well-what-do-you-know","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/well-what-do-you-know\/","title":{"rendered":"Well, What Do You Know?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Tacit Dimension<\/em> by Michael Polanyi contains a clear and concise premise, namely, \u201cwe can know more than we can tell.\u201d[1]<\/a> The book primarily addresses knowledge management, more specifically, tacit knowledge. Polanyi, a Hungarian-British author, and a professor worked in physical chemistry, economics, and philosophy. The book is divided into three sections, containing his Terry <\/em>lectures delivered in 1962. Polanyi illustrates how people, whether they know it or not, use tacit powers of knowledge to solve problems, intuition, comprehend the meaning of signs, use tools, and the awareness of objects around them and forces within them. Gestalt psychology greatly informs Polanyi\u2019s concept of tacit knowledge. A fundamental tenet of Gestalt psychology includes holism, a belief that the whole is great than the sum of its parts.[2]<\/a> Gestalt theory also introduced the concept that perception includes more than merely seeing objects in the world but get influenced by one\u2019s motivations and expectations.<\/p>\n

Hilda Werschkul blogged, \u201cPolanyi presents an insight about preconscious, unarticulated knowing, which shows that perception constructs an integrated unity of our sensory experiences in order to construct meaning.\u201d[3]<\/a> Certain aspects of knowledge reside in one\u2019s conscious and unconscious mind but are not transferred to others easily. He uses the example of recognizing a face in a crowd of even millions to illustrate constructed meaning of the whole based on parts. While on a deep philosophical level, Polanyi sounds a lot like Daniel Kahneman and System 1 thinking informed by heuristics which are mental short-cuts based on assumptions. Kahneman points out that most of the time, System 1 thinking is correct and helpful. Polanyi helps the understanding of how those heuristics get established in the conscious and unconscious. If I had more time, I would try to understand if Kahneman\u2019s heuristics align with Polanyi\u2019s tacit knowledge or if they differ in specific ways. Agrawal also dealt with bias in her book, Sway<\/em>, primarily from the negative perspective of ways prejudice forms. [4]<\/a> Reading both the positive aspects of what we know and how that helps and the negative ways our assumptions can go awry call for a careful tension between the benefits and the detriments of what we bring to the application of knowledge.<\/p>\n

As I process Polanyi\u2019s deep and powerful argument, I think of what it means in a faith community context. A few applications and implications stand out:<\/p>\n