Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

We can paraphrase "we know more than we can tell" in at least two ways:

1. "We know [the manner in which we carry out a task] more than we can tell [...but are unable to articulate the procedure by which we do it]." 2. "We [can do] more than we [can explain in writing or verbally]."

The second statement is uncontroversial. No one would say that the ability to ride a bicycle logically entails the ability to explain how we do those things in writing such that, by reading alone, someone could learn to ride a bicycle.

But this is only mysterious if you consider the second statement to be a paraphrase of the first. I don't think that it is. The first statement suggests a mystery; it's as if we are always following rules when we act skillfully, but are sometimes unable to articulate those rules.

But this is a mistaken view. Not all skillful performance is rule-governed. In fact, most isn't (statement two). And that is easy to forget, but does not require a theory of "tacit knowledge".

See also: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-how/




Possibly the issue is your conflating knowing with doing.

The straightforward parsing of that sentence for me is: We are not capable of completely expressing our (personal) knowledge with language.


We are in agreement. Doing should not be conflated with knowing, as the "tacit knowledge" approach tends to.


Good, we (the 3 of us) are in agreement. So what's your beef with brother Polayni?




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: