User Tools

Site Tools


blog:polanyi-and-science

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
blog:polanyi-and-science [2017/03/07 10:23]
seanburns [Part 1: Polanyi and the Epistemology of Science]
blog:polanyi-and-science [2017/03/07 10:29] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Polanyi and Science ====== ====== Polanyi and Science ======
  
-**date: 2014-02-07 16:18+**date: 2014-02-07 16:18**
  
-Some notes on the demarcation of science with respect to Polanyi. +Some notes Polanyi and the Epistemology of Science.
- +
-===== Part 1: Polanyi and the Epistemology of Science =====+
  
 There are a number of ways to read Polanyi (2009), and the knowledge management literature has taken off with the very singular aspect of his work -- that "we can know more than what we can tell" (p. 4) (as well as Nonaka's ((http://www.citeulike.org/user/seancsb/article/12818193)) version of tacit knowledge), and much of the focus has been on business and organizational management. However, Polanyi's idea has an important implication for the nature and work of science, with implications for science policy, and Polanyi discusses this in some detail in the third chapter. There are a number of ways to read Polanyi (2009), and the knowledge management literature has taken off with the very singular aspect of his work -- that "we can know more than what we can tell" (p. 4) (as well as Nonaka's ((http://www.citeulike.org/user/seancsb/article/12818193)) version of tacit knowledge), and much of the focus has been on business and organizational management. However, Polanyi's idea has an important implication for the nature and work of science, with implications for science policy, and Polanyi discusses this in some detail in the third chapter.
Line 18: Line 16:
 What is also not fully acknowledged are other ideas about the demarcation of science--issues related to problem-solving (ala Kuhn ((http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/34548541))) and problem-finding (ala [[blog:reading-robert-k-merton-matthew-effect|Merton]]). Here we can refer to, I think, one of the best passages (pp. 64-66) of Polanyi's book, the ending of which he writes: What is also not fully acknowledged are other ideas about the demarcation of science--issues related to problem-solving (ala Kuhn ((http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/34548541))) and problem-finding (ala [[blog:reading-robert-k-merton-matthew-effect|Merton]]). Here we can refer to, I think, one of the best passages (pp. 64-66) of Polanyi's book, the ending of which he writes:
  
 +> Thus the scientific interest--or scientific value--of a contribution is formed by three factors: its //exactitude//, its //systematic importance//, and the //intrinsic interest of its subject matter// (p. 66).
 +
 +In other words, Polanyi argues that we can demarcate science not just by its truthfulness, its coherence, but also by whether it's //interesting// in the right //theoretical// way.
 +
 +In later posts, I'll write more about the commensurability issue--as it relates to Polanyi's description of tacit knowledge.
 +
 +Revision date: 2015-01-21 ((https://github.com/seancsb/research-notebook/commit/ec1d76115f453ed5f2a5b4a6db547659cae569e0))
 +
 +===== References =====
 +
 +Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. //Organization Science, 5//(1), 14-37. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.1.14
 +
 +Polanyi, Michael. (2009). //The tacit dimension//. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1966) URL: http://www.worldcat.org/isbn/0226672980
 +
 +Woelfle, M., Olliaro, P., & Todd, Matthew H. (2011). Open science is a research accelerator. //Nature Chemistry, 3//(10), 745-748. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nchem.1149
 +
 +  * categories:
 +      * academic libraries
 +      * open science
 +      * knowledge management
 +      * LIS658
  
blog/polanyi-and-science.txt · Last modified: 2017/03/07 10:29 (external edit)