You will be provided with a reference and some statements. Please determine whether each statement is 'supported', 'unsupported', or 'unknown' with respect to the reference. Please note:
First, assess whether the reference contains any valid content. If the reference contains no valid information, such as a 'page not found' message, then all statements should be considered 'unknown'.
If the reference is valid, for a given statement: if the facts or data it contains can be found entirely or partially within the reference, it is considered 'supported' (data accepts rounding); if all facts and data in the statement cannot be found in the reference, it is considered 'unsupported'.

You should return the result in a JSON list format, where each item in the list contains the statement's index and the judgment result, for example:
[
    {
        "idx": 1,
        "result": "supported"
    },
    {
        "idx": 2,
        "result": "unsupported"
    }
]

Below are the reference and statements:
<reference>
Polanyi's paradox - Wikipedia



Jump to content

Main menu

Main menu

move to sidebar

hide

Navigation

Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us

Contribute

Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
Special pages

Search

Search

Appearance

Donate

Create account

Log in

Personal tools

Donate

Create account

Log in

Contents

move to sidebar

hide

(Top)

1

Origins

2

Implications

3

Criticism

4

Related theories

Toggle Related theories subsection

4.1

Moravec's paradox

4.2

Plato's Problem

4.3

Poverty of the stimulus (POS)

4.4

Meno’s Paradox

4.5

The Learning Paradox

5

References

Toggle the table of contents

Polanyi's paradox

1 language

বাংলা

Edit links

Article

Talk

English

Read

Edit

View history

Tools

Tools

move to sidebar

hide

Actions

Read

Edit

View history

General

What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Permanent link
Page information
Cite this page
Get shortened URL
Switch to legacy parser

Print/export

Download as PDF
Printable version

In other projects

Wikidata item

Appearance

move to sidebar

hide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Philosophical theory

Professor Michael Polanyi on a hike in England

Polanyi's paradox
, named in honour of the British-Hungarian philosopher
Michael Polanyi
, is the theory that human knowledge of how the world functions and of our own capability are, to a large extent, beyond our explicit understanding. The theory was articulated by Michael Polanyi in his book
The Tacit Dimension
in 1966, and economist
David Autor
gave it a name in his 2014 research paper "Polanyi's Paradox and the Shape of Employment Growth".
[
1
]

Summarised in the slogan "We can know more than we can tell", Polanyi's paradox is mainly to explain the cognitive phenomenon that there exist many tasks which we, human beings, understand intuitively how to perform but cannot verbalize their rules or procedures.
[
2
]

This "self-ignorance" is common to many human activities, from driving a car in traffic to face recognition.
[
3
]
As Polanyi argues, humans are relying on their
tacit knowledge
, which is difficult to adequately express by verbal means, when engaging these tasks.
[
2
]
Polanyi's paradox has been widely considered to identify a major obstacle in the fields of AI and automation, since programming an automated task or system is difficult unless a complete and fully specific description of the procedure is available.
[
4
]

Origins
[
edit
]

British-Hungarian philosopher Michael Polanyi regularly studied the causes behind human ability to acquire knowledge that they cannot explain through logical deduction. In his work
The Tacit Dimension
(1966)
,
Polanyi explored the 'tacit' dimension to human knowledge and developed the concept of "tacit knowledge", as opposed to the term "
explicit knowledge
".
[
2
]

Tacit knowledge
can be defined as knowledge people learn from experiences and internalize unconsciously, which is therefore difficult to articulate and codify it in a tangible form. Explicit knowledge, the opposite of tacit knowledge, is knowledge that can be readily verbalized and formalized.
[
2
]
Tacit knowledge is largely acquired through
implicit learning
, the process by which information is learned independently of the subjects' awareness. For example, native speakers tacitly acquire their language in early childhood without consciously studying specific grammar rules (explicit knowledge), but with extensive exposure to day-to-day communication.
[
5
]
Besides, people can only limitedly transfer their tacit knowledge through close interactions (sharing experiences with one another or observing others' behaviors). A certain level of trust needs to be established between individuals to capture tacit knowledge.
[
6
]

Tacit knowledge comprises a range of conceptual and sensory information that is featured with strong personal subjectivity. It is implicitly reflected in human actions; as argued by Polanyi, "tacit knowledge dwells in our awareness".
[
2
]
People's skills, experiences, insight, creativity and judgement all fall into this dimension.
[
7
]
Tacit knowledge can also be described as
know-how,
distinguishing from
know-that
or
facts.
[
6
]
Before Polanyi,
Gilbert Ryle
published a paper in 1945 drawing the distinction between
knowing-that (knowledge of proposition)
and
knowing-how.
According to Ryle, this
know-how
knowledge is the instinctive and intrinsic knowledge ingrained in the individual's human capability.
[
8
]

Since tacit knowledge cannot be stated in propositional or formal form, Polanyi concludes such inability in articulation in the slogan ‘We can know more than we can tell’.
[
2
]
Daily activities based on tacit knowledge include recognizing a face, driving a car, riding a bike, writing a persuasive paragraph, developing a hypothesis to explain a poorly understood phenomenon.
[
7
]
Take facial recognition as an illustration: we can recognize our acquaintance's face out of a million others while we are not conscious about the knowledge of his face. It would be difficult for us to describe the precise arrangement of his eyes, nose and mouth, since we memorize the face unconsciously.
[
4
]

As a prelude to
The Tacit Dimension
, in his book
Personal Knowledge
(1958), Polanyi claims that all knowing is personal, emphasizing the profound effects of personal feelings and commitments on the practice of science and knowledge. Arguing against the then dominant Empiricists view that minds and experiences are reducible to
sense data
and collections of rules, he advocates a
post-positivist
approach that recognizes human knowledge is often beyond their explicit expression. Any attempt to specify tacit knowing only leads to self-evident axioms that cannot tell us why we should accept them.
[
9
]

Implications
[
edit
]

Polanyi's observation has deep implications in the AI field since the paradox he identified that "our tacit knowledge of how the world works often exceeds our explicit understanding" accounts for many of the challenges for computerization and automation over the past five decades.
[
1
]
Automation requires high levels of exactness to inform the computer what is supposed to be done while tacit knowledge cannot be conveyed in a propositional form. Therefore, machines cannot provide successful outcomes in many cases: they have explicit knowledge (raw data) but nevertheless, do not know how to use such knowledge to understand the task as whole.
[
6
]
This discrepancy between human reasoning and AI learning algorithms makes it difficult to automate tasks that demand common sense, flexibility, adaptability and judgment — human intuitive knowledge.
[
4
]

MIT economist David Autor is one of the leading sceptics who doubt the prospects for machine intelligence. Despite the exponential growth in computational resources and the relentless pace of automation since the 1990s, Autor argues, Polanyi's paradox impedes modern algorithms to replace human labor in a range of skilled jobs. The extent of machine substitution of human labor, therefore, has been overestimated by journalists and expert commentators.
[
1
]
Although contemporary computer science strives for prevailing over Polanyi's paradox, the ever-changing, unstructured nature of some activities currently presents intimidating challenges for automation. Despite years of time and billions of investment spent on the development of
self-driving cars
and cleaning robots, these machine learning systems continue to struggle with their low adaptability and interpretability, from self-driving cars' inability to make an unexpected detour to cleaning robots' vulnerability to unmonitored pets or kids.
[
10
]
Instead, to let self-driving cars function optimally, we have to change current road infrastructure significantly, minimizing the need for human capabilities in the whole driving process.
[
11
]

The increasing
occupational polarisation
in the past few decades —the growth of both high-paid, high-skill abstract jobs and lower-paid, low-skill manual jobs — has been a manifestation of Polanyi's paradox. According to Autor, there are two types of tasks proven stubbornly challenging for artificial intelligence (AI): abstract tasks that require problem-solving capabilities, intuition, creativity and persuasion on the one hand, and manual tasks demanding situational adaptability, visual recognition, language understanding, and in-person interactions on the other. Abstract tasks are characteristic of professional, managerial, and technical occupations, while service and laborer occupations involve many manual tasks (e.g. cleaning, lifting and throwing). These jobs tend to be complemented by machines rather than substituted.
[
1
]

By contrast, as the price of computing power declines, computers extensively substitute for routine tasks that can be codified into clear sets of instructions, resulting in a dramatical decline in employment of routine task-
­
intensive jobs.
[
1
]
This polarization has resulted in a shrinking middle class across industrialized economies since many middle-income occupations in sales, office and administrative work and repetitive production work are task-
­
intensive. Moreover, the subsequent growth in income inequality and wealth disparity has recently emerged as a major socio-economic issue in developed countries.
[
12
]

Criticism
[
edit
]

This section
may contain material
unrelated to its topic

and should be moved to
Artificial intelligence
instead.
Please help
improve this section
or discuss this issue on the
talk page
.

(
August 2022
)
(
Learn how and when to remove this message
)

Some technological optimists argue that recent advances in
machine learning
have overcome Polanyi's paradox. Instead of relying on programmer’s algorithms to instruct them in human knowledge, computer systems are now able to learn tacit rules from context, abundant data, and applied statistics on their own. Since machines can infer the tacit knowledge that human beings draw upon from examples without human assistance, they are no longer limited by those rules tacitly applied but not explicitly understood by humans.
[
13
]

Lee Sedol (B) vs AlphaGo (W) - Game 1

AlphaGo
program built by the Google subsidiary
DeepMind
is an example of how advances in AI have allowed mindless machines to perform very well in tasks based on tacit knowledge. In the 2016 tournament of the strategy game Go, DeepMind's AlphaGo program successfully defeated one of the world's top GO players,
Lee Se-dol
, four games to one. DeepMind team employed an approach known as
deep learning
to build human-type judgment into AI systems; such a system can figure out complex winning strategies by analyzing large amounts of data from previous Go matches.
[
3
]

On the other hand, as Carr argues, the assumption that computers need to be able to reproduce the tacit knowledge humans would apply to perform complicated tasks is itself open to doubt. When performing tasks, it is not at all necessary for systems and machines to follow the rules that human beings follow. The goal in having a machine perform a task is to replicate our outcomes for practical purposes, rather than our means.
[
14
]

Jerry Kaplan
, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur and AI expert, also illustrates this point in his book
Humans Need Not Apply
by discussing four resources and capabilities required to accomplish any given task: awareness, energy, reasoning and means. Humans' biological system (the brain-body complex) naturally integrates all these four properties, while in the electronic domain machines can be given these abilities by developments in robotics, machine learning, and perception powering systems. For example, data provided by a wide network of sensors enable AI to perceive various aspects of the environment and respond instantly in chaotic and complex real-world situations (i.e. awareness); orders and signals for actuating devices can be centralised and managed in
server clusters
or on the 'cloud' (reasoning).
[
15
]
Kaplan's argument directly supports the proposition that Polanyi's paradox can no longer impede further levels of automation, whether in performing routine jobs or manual jobs. As Kaplan puts it, "Automation is blind to the colour of your collar."
[
15
]

One example confirms Kaplan's argument is the introduction of Cloud AutoML, an automated system that could help every business design AI software, by Google Brain AI research group in 2017. The learning algorithms of AutoML automates the process of building machine-learning models that can take on a particular task, aiming to democratize AI to the largest possible community of developers and businesses. According to Google’s CEO, Cloud AutoML has taken over some of the work of programmers (which is, in the words of Autor, "abstract task") and thereby offered one solution to the shortage in machine-learning experts.
[
16
]

Related theories
[
edit
]

Moravec's paradox
[
edit
]

Moravec’s paradox
claims that compared with sophisticated tasks demanding high-level reasoning, it is harder for computers to master low-level physical and cognitive skills that are natural and easy for humans to perform. Examples include
natural language processing
and dextrous physical movements (e.g. running over rough terrain).
[
17
]

Robotics experts have, accordingly, found it difficult to automate the skills of even the least-trained manual worker, since these jobs require perception and mobility (tacit knowledge).
[
17
]
In the words of the cognitive scientist
Steven Pinker
from his book
The Language Instinct
,
"The main lesson of thirty-five years of AI research is that the hard problems are easy and the easy problems are hard."
[
18
]

Corresponding to David Autor's discussion on jobs polarization, Pinker maintains that the appearance of the new generation's intelligent machines would place stock analysts, petrochemical engineers and parole board members in danger of being replaced. Gardeners, receptionists, and cooks are, by contrast, currently secure.
[
18
]

Plato's Problem
[
edit
]

Plato's Problem
is the term given by Noam Chomsky to "the problem of explaining how we can know so much" given our limited experience.

Poverty of the stimulus (POS)
[
edit
]

Poverty of the stimulus (POS)
is the argument from linguistics that children are not exposed to rich enough data within their linguistic environments to acquire every feature of their language.

Meno’s Paradox
[
edit
]

Meno’s Paradox
can be formulated as follows:

If you know what you’re looking for, inquiry is unnecessary.

If you don’t know what you’re looking for, inquiry is impossible.

Therefore, inquiry is either unnecessary or impossible.

There is within these arguments an implicit premise that either you know what you’re looking for or you don’t know what you’re looking for.

The Learning Paradox
[
edit
]

The Learning Paradox (Fodor 1980) holds that knowledge can either not be new, or not be learned. If new knowledge can be expressed in terms of old knowledge, it is not new. If it cannot be expressed in terms of old knowledge, it cannot be understood. Therefore, learning something genuinely novel is impossible and all essential structures must be present at birth.

References
[
edit
]

1

2

3

4

5

Autor, David (2014),
Polanyi's Paradox and the Shape of Employment Growth
, NBER Working Paper Series, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, pp.

1–
48

1

2

3

4

5

6

Polanyi, Michael (May 2009).
The Tacit Dimension
. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp.

1–
26.
ISBN

9780226672984
.
OCLC

262429494
.

1

2

McAfee, Andrew; Brynjolfsson, Erik (16 March 2016).
"Where Computers Defeat Humans, and Where They Can't"
.
The New York Times
.
Archived
from the original on 16 October 2018
. Retrieved
2018-10-04
.

1

2

3

Walsh, Toby (September 7, 2017).
Android Dreams: the Past, Present and Future of Artificial Intelligence
. London: C Hurst & Co Publishers Ltd. pp.

89–
97.
ISBN

9781849048712
.
OCLC

985805795
.

↑

Reber, Arthur (September 1989).
"Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge"
.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
.
118
(3):
219–
235.
CiteSeerX

10.1.1.207.6707
.
doi
:
10.1037/0096-3445.118.3.219
.

{{
cite journal
}}
:
Cite uses deprecated parameter
|
citeseerx=
(
help
)

1

2

3

Asanarong, Thanathorn; Jeon, Sowon; Ren, Yuanlin; Yeo, Christopher (18 December 2018). "Creating a Knowledge Management Culture for Ganga River".
Ganga Rejuvenation

: Governance Challenges and Policy Options
. Wu Xun, Robert James Wasson, Ora-Orn Poocharoen. New Jersey: World Scientific. p.

349.
ISBN

9789814704588
.
OCLC

1013819475
.

1

2

Chugh, Ritesh (2015),
"Do Australian Universities Encourage Tacit Knowledge Transfer"
,
Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management
, Lisbon, PT:
128–
135

↑

Ryle, Gilbert (1945). "Knowing How and Knowing That: The Presidential Address".
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society
.
46
:
1–
16.
doi
:
10.1093/aristotelian/46.1.1
.
JSTOR

4544405
.

↑

Polanyi, Michael (1974).
Personal Knowledge

: Towards a Post-critical Philosophy
. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
ISBN

978-0226672885
.
OCLC

880960082
.

↑

Prassl, Jeremias (2018).
Humans as a Service

: the Promise and Perils of Work in the Gig Economy
. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp.

138–
139.
ISBN

9780198797012
.
OCLC

1005117556
.

↑

Badger, Emily (January 15, 2015).
"5 Confounding Questions that Hold the Key to the Future of Driverless Cars"
.
Washington Post
.
Archived
from the original on August 25, 2018
. Retrieved
2018-10-31
.

↑

Vardi, Moshe (February 2015).
"Is Information Technology Destroying the Middle Class?"
.
Communications of the ACM
.
58
(2): 5.
doi
:
10.1145/2666241
.

↑

Susskind, Daniel (2017),
Re-Thinking the Capabilities of Machines in Economics

(PDF)
, University of Oxford Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series, Oxford, OX, pp.

1–
14,
archived

(PDF)
from the original on 2017-06-26
, retrieved
2018-10-04
{{
citation
}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
link
)

↑

Carr, Nicholas (September 29, 2014).
The Glass Cage: Automation and Us
(First

ed.). New York: W. W. Norton & Company. pp.

11–
12.
ISBN

9780393240764
.
OCLC

870098283
.

1

2

Kaplan, Jerry (August 4, 2015).
Humans Need Not Apply

: a Guide to Wealth and Work in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
. New Haven: Yale University Press. pp.

41–
43, 145.
ISBN

9780300223576
.
OCLC

907143085
.

↑

Simonite, Tom (May 17, 2017).
"Google's CEO is excited about seeing AI take over some work of his AI experts"
.
MIT Technology Review
. Retrieved
2018-10-30
.

1

2

Brynjolfsson, Erik; McAfee, Andrew (January 20, 2014).
The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies
(First

ed.). New York: W. W. Norton & Company. pp.

47–
50.
ISBN

9780393239355
.
OCLC

867423744
.

1

2

Pinker, Steven (1994).
The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language
. New York: William Morrow and Company.
ISBN

978-0688121419
.
OCLC

28723210
.

Retrieved from "
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polanyi%27s_paradox&oldid=1317754023
"

Category
:
Philosophical paradoxes
Hidden categories:
Articles with short description
Short description matches Wikidata
CS1 errors: deprecated parameters
Wikipedia articles that may have off-topic sections from August 2022
All articles that may have off-topic sections
CS1 maint: location missing publisher

This page was last edited on 19 October 2025, at 21:01
(UTC)
.

Page was rendered with
Parsoid
.

Text is available under the
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License
;
additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the
Terms of Use
and
Privacy Policy
. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
, a non-profit organization.

Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Legal & safety contacts

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view

Search

Search

Toggle the table of contents

Polanyi's paradox

1 language

Add topic
</reference>

<statements>
1. Tasks requiring tacit knowledge, adaptability, common sense, and interpersonal judgment resist codification and therefore substitution
</statements>

Begin the assessment now. Output only the JSON list, without any conversational text or explanations.