Comments on: Four Pillars: More on Nanny Languages http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/06/29/four-pillars-more-on-nanny-languages/ a blog about information Mon, 06 Feb 2012 01:37:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: JP http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/06/29/four-pillars-more-on-nanny-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-1899 JP Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:27:37 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/06/29/four-pillars-more-on-nanny-languages/#comment-1899 John, I believe the reference is from that book, though it could be an article I read. The reason I didn't give full reference is that I didn't have the books to hand; a change of role has meant that I no longer have all my books with me :-( I think social software can help us with tacit knowledge in three ways: 1. What I can't articulate someone else can; we have a power-of-many opensource-like effect. 2. What I couldn't articulate I may now be able to articulate, given the capacity to view relationships and links in powerful ways. 3. What I was anchored-and-framed from articulating I may now be freer to visualise, given the frame-free nature of social software. These are guesses. I don't know. But my hunch is that there is real power in social software, particularly the serendipity aspect, of getting us closer to making tacit things explicit. John, I believe the reference is from that book, though it could be an article I read. The reason I didn’t give full reference is that I didn’t have the books to hand; a change of role has meant that I no longer have all my books with me :-(

I think social software can help us with tacit knowledge in three ways:

1. What I can’t articulate someone else can; we have a power-of-many opensource-like effect.
2. What I couldn’t articulate I may now be able to articulate, given the capacity to view relationships and links in powerful ways.
3. What I was anchored-and-framed from articulating I may now be freer to visualise, given the frame-free nature of social software.

These are guesses. I don’t know. But my hunch is that there is real power in social software, particularly the serendipity aspect, of getting us closer to making tacit things explicit.

]]> By: John http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/06/29/four-pillars-more-on-nanny-languages/comment-page-1/#comment-1896 John Thu, 29 Jun 2006 09:34:22 +0000 http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/06/29/four-pillars-more-on-nanny-languages/#comment-1896 Is that from Polanyi's How to Solve It ? Std text for MS intake ? Wittgenstein says the same thing when he points out that there are things that can be shown, but can't be said. This is where we must admit variance, and avoid imposing conformance. Tacit knowledge is shared by implicit assent and convention, which can't be formalised as explicit process. But can social software facilitate externalisation of some of this by capturing examples of the ad hoc application of the tacit knowledge ? Is that from Polanyi’s How to Solve It ? Std text for MS intake ?

Wittgenstein says the same thing when he points out that there are things that can be shown, but can’t be said. This is where we must admit variance, and avoid imposing conformance. Tacit knowledge is shared by implicit assent and convention, which can’t be formalised as explicit process. But can social software facilitate externalisation of some of this by capturing examples of the ad hoc application of the tacit knowledge ?

]]>