Implicit

From Encyclopedia of Scientonomy
Jump to navigation Jump to search

What is implicit knowledge? How should it be defined?

The distinction between explicit and implicit/tacit has played a prominent role in the discussions concerning scientific change, including scientonomic discourse. Thus, it is important to have a clear definition of the term.

In the scientonomic context, this question was first formulated by Hakob Barseghyan and Maxim Mirkin in 2018. The question is currently accepted as a legitimate topic for discussion by Scientonomy community. Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018) is currently accepted by Scientonomy community as the best available definition of the term. It is defined as: "Not explicit."

Scientonomic History

Acceptance Record

Here is the complete acceptance record of this term (it includes all the instances when the term was accepted as a part of a community's taxonomy):
CommunityAccepted FromAcceptance IndicatorsStill AcceptedAccepted UntilRejection Indicators
Scientonomy28 December 2018The publication of Maxim Mirkin's The Status of Technological Knowledge in the Scientific Mosaic is an indication of the acceptance of the term by the community.Yes

All Theories

The following definitions of the term have been suggested:
TheoryFormulationFormulated In
Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)Not explicit.2018
If a definition of this term is missing, please click here to add it.

Accepted Theories

The following definitions of the term have been accepted:
CommunityTheoryAccepted FromAccepted Until
ScientonomyImplicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018)1 September 2019

Suggested Modifications

Here is a list of modifications concerning this term:
ModificationCommunityDate SuggestedSummaryVerdictVerdict RationaleDate Assessed
Sciento-2018-0011Scientonomy28 December 2018Accept the three-fold distinction between explicit, explicable-implicit, and inexplicable.AcceptedThe consensus on this modification emerged primarily off-line. It was agreed that "the modification should be accepted".c1 It was also agreed "that the three-fold distinction is to be accepted as it introduces a distinction between explicable-implicit and inexplicable and thus contributes to the clarity of discussions concerning implicit and explicit."c21 September 2019

Current Definition

In Scientonomy, the accepted definition of the term is Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018).

Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018) states: "Not explicit." Implicit is the opposite of explicit and, thus, it doesn't require more than a very minimalist definition. This definition creates a strong link between the two concepts and won't require any changes in the definition of implicit when the respective definition of explicit happens to change.

Ontology

Existence

There is currently no accepted view concerning the existence of implicits.

Disjointness

No classes are currently accepted as being disjoint with this class.

Subtypes

No classes are currently accepted as subtypes of an implicit.

Supertypes

In Scientonomy, the following supertype of Implicit is currently accepted:

Associations

In Scientonomy, there are currently no accepted associations of Implicit.

Epistemic Stances Towards Implicits

The question has no accepted answer.


If a question concerning the ontology of an implicit is missing, please add it here.

Dynamics

Necessary Implicits

The question has no accepted answer.


If a question concerning the dynamics of an implicit is missing, please add it here.