Analysing Tacit Knowledge

Tradition and Discovery 38 (1):38-42 (2011)
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
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,360
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA

    No citations found.

    Similar books and articles
    Stephen Turner (2012). Making the Tacit Explicit. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 42 (4):385-402.
    Zhenhua Yu (2006). Tacit Knowledge. Tradition and Discovery 33 (3):9-25.
    Jon Cogburn (2004). Inferentialism and Tacit Knowledge. Behavior and Philosophy 32 (2):503 - 524.
    Martin Davies (1989). Connectionism, Modularity and Tacit Knowledge. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 40 (December):541-55.
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2012-03-18

    Total downloads

    23 ( #63,411 of 1,089,057 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    6 ( #17,284 of 1,089,057 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.