Burgers and Brains

A common distinction within knowledge management is explicit and tacit knowledge.

Explicit knowledge is linguistic in nature, so is easily expressed in sentences. It is what people can learn about in books, and includes what Aristotle described as scientific knowledge. Knowing about the brain is explicit knowledge because specific names are given to parts and processes. of the brain,. How those sections interact with each other can be detailed by writing down which chemical or electrical processes occur.

Tacit knowledge is messier, given that it is how-to knowledge, rather than stated facts about the world. A hamburger recipe can be described explicitly by saying chop a cup of onions, but that isn’t a description of the way I should move my hands for chopping well, along with every fine motor movement involved.

Hands-on skills, like chopping, are a process of doing, making them non-linguistic in nature; chopping is know-how rather than know-what. Certainly, this can be articulated. I can say: "I chop with my fingers curled and keep one end of the knife against the chopping board." But that articulation is only a partial, since I still have no way to state my individual perception of chopping, with all the accompanying sensations. More detail is difficult.

False Dichotomy

Difficulty articulating know-how could indicate that tacit knowledge can't be codified. Tacit knowledge can’t be communicated to others - or even oneself.

The distinction between tacit and explicit knowledge is useful for describing the ways people interact with the world. The one problem is that the distinction is a dichotomy of two opposing types. Either knowledge is explicit, or it is tacit - there is no third option. Knowledge, being so varied and complex, is not realistically so straightforward.

They might make more sense on a continuum between tacit and explicit: the more explicit knowledge is, the less tacit it is, and vice versa. The problem here is still that tacit and explicit are in opposition.

A better solution is to frame knowledge differently. Knowledge is the result active process, no matter what is involved. Being active, there are always tacit and explicit elements. The process of coming to know about the brain is not necessarily any less tacit than knowing how to chop onions. Chopping onions isn’t necessarily less explicit than knowing about the difference between Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area in the brain. Saying “I need to curl my fingers” is just as explicit and important to chopping onions as the know-how implied in my motor movements.

I maintain that tacit and explicit knowledge are valid distinctions, but they are not opposing ends of a spectrum. Instead, the two concepts complement each other, and are different aspects that make up a piece of knowledge.

#knowledge