This is a definition of Implicit that states "Not explicit."
|Community||Accepted From||Acceptance Indicators||Still Accepted||Accepted Until||Rejection Indicators|
|Scientonomy||1 September 2019||The definition became accepted as a result of the acceptance of the respective suggested modification.||Yes|
Suggestions To Accept
|Modification||Community||Date Suggested||Summary||Verdict||Verdict Rationale||Date Assessed|
|Sciento-2018-0011||Scientonomy||28 December 2018||Accept the three-fold distinction between explicit, explicable-implicit, and inexplicable.||Accepted||The 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."c2||1 September 2019|
Implicit (Mirkin-Barseghyan-2018) is an attempt to definition the following question: What is implicit knowledge? How should it be defined?
See Implicit for more details.
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.
No reasons are indicated for this definition.
If a reason supporting this definition is missing, please add it here.
Questions About This Definition
There are no higher-order questions concerning this definition.
If a question about this definition is missing, please add it here.
- Mirkin, Maxim. (2018) The Status of Technological Knowledge in the Scientific Mosaic. Scientonomy 2, 39-53. Retrieved from https://scientojournal.com/index.php/scientonomy/article/view/29645.