Tacit Knowledge and Logical Positivism Assignments | Online Assignments Services

I recently received an incoherent paper and would like someone to MAKE IT SMOOTH. I can work on it as well but would like someone to help me fix it because it is 10 pages of dog shhh

Pies
an hour ago
Introduction
This paper examines the logical positivism and compares it with the tacit knowledge theory. First and foremost, it is essential to note that there is always a mindset that people will have whenever someone makes statements. It can be regarded as a fact possibility or just facts. Some believe that certain criteria should be used to gauge the statements of someone before agreeing with them and concluding that they are true (Creath 8). Whereas on the other end, there those who will have a skepticism approach and examine them with a different approach. Polanyi’s tacit knowledge and logical positivism are two concepts used to describe the different processes or methods involved in knowledge deductions (Michael and Sen 11). However, the two concepts are used differently by different people who, to some extent, have different views on how knowledge is arrived at. Unlike logical positivism, which is based on facts and empirical testing, the tacit knowledge concept uses the idea of creativity to define the level of knowledge attained by different individuals.

Logical Positivism in the 1920’s
Logical positivism is also defined as logical empiricism, neopositivism, or logical neopositivism. In the 1920s, there were a number of people who arose from Germany and Australia and embarked on the logical scientific knowledge analysis (Philosophy Overdose 1). Some of the founder members in this group were
Moritz Schlick described as Vienna Circle, Hans Reichenbach, who was the lead founder in Berlin Circle, as well as Rudolf Carnap, regarded as the logical positivism leading figure. Other founding members in logical positivism such as Philipp Frank, Herbert Feigl, Hans Hahn, Kurt Grelling, Victor Kraft, Friedrich Waismann, and Otto Neurath (Philosophy Overdose 1). Most of the logical positivists have considered traditional and metaphysics philosophy as meaningless. This was evident when many of the logical positivism representatives emigrated to the United States of America and embarked on influencing the American philosophy. Mainly, logical positivism considers only two key elements as viable sources of information and knowledge. To them, practical experience and logical reasoning are the primary sources that one should ground his or her thinking while at the same time, they discredit any other source. A typical example is when Han talked about logical positivism as the synthetic possibility that constitutes the denial of prior knowledge. Fundamentally, logical knowledge incorporates the mathematical concept that can be reduced

The Vienna-Circle
These philosophers were considered as a group of individuals who came together in the early twentieth century with the focus of re-examining the reconceptualization empiricism and coming up with the interoperations that were resulting from the formal and physical science advances. Most of their radical arguments were primarily supported by empiricists who grounded their beliefs in mathematical concepts and logicist conception (Creath 8). Most of the claims stated by the Vienna Circle denied that there were any principles that were rooted in the synthetic a priori. Nonetheless, the Vienna Circle sought and established that there were logical presuppositions more so the one from the scientific theories that regimented and played essential roles when it comes to the issuing of the definitions as well as in analytic framework principles. In essence, the Vienna Circle tried to establish and develop logical positivism under the influence of Moritz Schlick. This model was developed and grounded on the application of the Comte that used the natural science technique in relation to the social sciences. In this context, the group largely embarked on the approach of embracing the empiricism while at the same time rejecting all the aesthetics, theology, metaphysics, and ethics.

The Verifiability Theory of Meaning
The verifiability Meaning Theory was considered as a major product of parametric logical positivism as the scholars of the early century in the twentieth. The theory was largely grounded on the verifiability principle (Creath 8). This principle claimed that any statement could only be literally meaningful is and when it can be examined analytically as well as approved empirically. Consequently, most scholars have come to terms that verifiability principles cannot be based on the empirical analysis alone. This alone has precipitated a lot of misunderstanding, with many claiming that the principle itself should be discredited on the ground that it sounds a invalidate. It is because too many, and there are some theoretical formulations that do not incorporate the use of analytical verifiability (Cole 2). Thus, there are no clear definitions and terms that have been used to describe the exact meaning of the verifiability theory. In many instances, it can be used to describe just mere proofs or even when giving confirmation as well as describing something that is weaker in nature. Thus, clarification of verifiability theory was established when the term was replaced with a confirmation. Nonetheless, confirmation is a criterion that can be used when describing the existence of weaker verifiability criterion.
The epitome of the verifiability theory is depicted based on the argument that was presented by David Hume. First and foremost, it is important to note that David Hume was a makeable and reputable forerunner and dealt with issues relating to verifiability principles in many instances. According to the argument presented by David Hume, it was evident that meaningful concepts could only be arrived at when there are basic relations and sense experience(Philosophy Overdose 1). Thus, something that could not be verified and traced back to the source should be considered meaningless. This claim was received with mixed reactions and led to the classification of the term as either synthetic or analytic. However, the classification faced a lot of opposition, and these terms are dropped from being used. In this case, only the idea of the empirical verifiable was drawn from this context by the Vienna Circle (Cole 2). Vienna Circle used the contemporary terms in building the language theory described as the Ludwig Wittgenstein. In addition to this, the Vienna Circle also decided to introduce this concept in his work, known as Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.
Importantly, the verifiability theory of meaning is used in laying down all the necessary rules that are required in constructing a meaningful expression. In essence, most of the outlined rules in this theory helps in comping up with a proper structure for the language to be used. The fun end is that nonene is ever bothered to check whether or not they are true since they are just mere rules. However, one has to make volitional decisions whenever he or she is interested in using this theory. It is indeed this concept that helps one in making cognitive statements using properties language that will be accepted based on these rules. Another thing that one noted when talking about the verifiability theory of meaning the correlation and the context upon which the cognitive norm is based on in this case. The clear evidence that emerges in this case, when one is keen, is that theory is not considering imperative meaning upon which most of the value judgments are made upon in the process. A typical example of an imperative statement is shut the do when maybe one meant that the speaker is directing someone to shut the door. In this case, the emphasis without the speaker is imperative, whereas the one that emphasizes on the speaker directing someone to shut the door is cognitive in nature. In this case, one thing is quite common that imperative statements and cognitive components have a unifying element that can be depicted in the verifiability theory of meaning.

Michael Polyani’s Response in The Tacti Dimesnion
Polanyi’s famous work of personal knowledge was encouraged by people’s belief that creative actions and, more specifically, those of discoveries are always achieved through commitments and the feelings of an individual (Michael and Sen 12). His focus was to explain these concerns critically by reasoning and researching more by using what he called ‘tacit’ form of knowledge. According to Polanyi, the well-versed imaginations and guesses that are found in the descriptive acts are facilitated by passion. He further reasons that even though these imaginations are aimed at finding out the realities, they cannot be formally stated. In his work, The Tacit Dimension, he states, “We should always start from the fact that we can know more than we can tell (Michael and Sen 16). According to Polanyi, this was the phase of pre-logical, and thus he named it tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge, therefore, consists of a wide variety of concepts and information as well as pictures that can be combined in order to create a sense of something or make an idea more sensible. Thus, many concepts on the tacit knowledge idea can be designed to form a theory. This fact pushed Polanyi to appreciate the process of exploration.
Michael Polanyi says that all scientific knowledge is designed from the case of knowledge that leads to discoveries. Hus holding on this kind of knowledge is an act committed based on the belief that indeed a discovery should be made (Michael and Sen 11). Polanyi stressed the discussions in public by identifying the strengths by which people hold on to the knowledge and views and the resistance made towards changing these thoughts. Contrary to his fellows, Polanyi’s thoughts appreciate God, specifically in his latest writings. The concepts of Polanyi in his tacit dimension helps create a sense of the place imaginations and views holds in the field of informal education, and the ways in which an individual can demonstrate a better understanding of the current situations

The Known Unknown
There is the tacit knowledge that is often considered when hiring new employees in a work play. First and foremost, it is important to note that people tend to possess various tacit as well as explicit knowledge that varies from one individual to the others, and these can be described as the Known-Unkown. Many of these differences and unique knowledge can be used when deriving solutions to different problems as well as when coming up with the devise solutions within a workplace. In essence, it has been noted that people show the knowledge which comes in in the form known-unknown with colleagues in a workplace. Most of the knowledge is always shared in the form of intellectual assets as well as among the group physically and in different creative ways (Michael and Sen 10). The use of tacit knowledge in a workplace is essential since it helps the organization in making the decision at critical times. It also assists the organization in ensuring that there are collective monitoring and influence of its members to behave in a certain manner. As per the description of philosopher Michael Polanyi that tacit knowledge is knowing just a lot and that one cannot actually tell how to do it without engaging in the practical aspect, most of the organization uses the employee’s performance as a key indicator towards this and more so when hiring new employees. In this case, most of the employers prefer to tends the tacit knowledge of the employees suing different criteria. Some of the criteria that many employers found to be essential in this case include the use of mental models, perceptions, values, insights, beliefs, as well as assumptions. Orientation and context is something that most employers will use to engage the persons during their interview. This is because the content is always used as a measure of management approach that one uses on oneself as well as on the others. The content will be tested based on global and local perceptive. In terms of the local approach, one will be tested based on the approach that he or she can use when dealing with the task at hand. On the other hand, global content involves the manner in which one can fit in the prevailing situation. In this case, employers are looking for someone who can work under pressure while at the same time, maintain the focus and giving the best performance that complies with the company missions and objectives.

On Creativity
Architect creativity can also be analyzed based on the tacit dimension as per the philosophy of Michael Polanyi (Michael and Sen 16). It is believed that architectural works majorly lies on the tacit knowledge. In essence, tacit knowledge is used greatly and immensely used in architectural design works. In many cases, it is important to note that the architect will be required to have design-based knowledge often considered as scientific in nature. There are approaches and methods of the science that are also involved in architectural works. Just like science, there is a need to have creative art in the architectural works, and this has to be based on some references just like tacit dimension (Michael and Sen 15). Indeed, the tacit dimension approach suggests that one can know more as opposed to what he or she can tell by just looking at the drawings as well as models used in the architectural works. It means that architectural material products are embodied to the tacit knowledge. Considerably, the model of tacit knowledge in the context of architectural work is key. It is because architects observe not only close working but also learning relationship based on tacit knowledge. The use of master-apprentice is not only important in facilitating knowledge sharing within the professional, but it also assists in preserving and conserving the relevant practices within that professional that would otherwise be lost in the societal development. It means that within the architectural profession, the tacit dimension helps in acquiring as well as strengthening professional identity. At the same time, the tacit dimension plays a huge role in the conservation and production of resistance change.

The Two in Practice
The influence of logical positivism has persisted over the years and is still used in the present day. In the present, most of the attention has been shifted, and more analysis has been conducted and given out by scientific thoughts and research. There is more technical research that is being conducted on a daily basis from the fiend on engineering, healthcare as well as on the social science to ascertain the real-time data. In the present day, one thing is clear, and that is present, there are no immense philosophers. In most cases, it is hard to find the philosophers who are willing to proceed with the Vienna circle traditions. However, there are a number of physicists who are still proceeding with the work. It is because the philosophy started in physics as a result of the work of Carnap and Mach, and it has been existence since it helps in understanding physics better. In this context, all the physics applications such as relativity, string theory, quantum mechanics as well as holography are all considered as the positivism end-products. On the contrary, most of the information that is drawn from the tacit knowledge they can’t be shared verbally or through writing. One of the areas where the Tacit Dimension and Knowledge is used in the organization. It helps in creating a competitive advantage since the element helps in creating immense opportunities (Souto 303). It is because there are many opportunities that one will establish in terms of creativity and innovation using tacit knowledge, and this can be translated into opportunities.

Conclusion
The interrelationships between logical positivism and tacit knowledge are clearly shown in work. Unlike logical positivism, which is based on science, craft, and wisdom, tacit knowledge is primarily based on defying the rules model concept of the logical positivists. The need to follow the rules when making views and imaginations in the real world should be given much greater importance. On comparing the two schools of thought, it is clear that they can both lead to the emergence of authentic knowledge, which is responsible for providing humans with a knowledgeable capacity that cannot be limited to explicit suggestions. Knowledge is, therefore, dependent on how an individual is able to use it in different ways. To some extent, the two approaches are basically similar in that they both try to explain the human understanding of knowledge based on either facts or imaginations. On the one hand, logical positivism relies on empirical tests, which further lead to knowledge formation while the tacit knowledge concept assumes that knowledge can be based on provable thought, intuitions, or imaginations. On the other hand, however, logical positivism and tacit knowledge are way much comparable, specifically in the way they arrive at conclusions regarding knowledge. Logical positivism does not give room to a priori knowledge, but instead, there is empirical testing and reducible mathematics which are meant to help an individual to attain knowledge. This differs from Polanyi’s work and beliefs on tacit knowledge and dimension. According to Polanyi, it is the creativity of an individual that renders the individual knowledgeable and not empirical tests and mathematics, which are used by logical positivists.