I see similarities between Gabriel Marcel's distinction between problem and mystery and Michael Polanyi's distinction between explicit and tacit knowledge. However, I suspect that similarity may be only on the surface.

Is there any paper that describes their differences? Finding difference may help clarify what each is trying to say.

One difference I suspect is that Polanyi may have a more positive view of explicit knowledge than Marcel does of the problem, but on that I might be mistaken.

Hence the question: What are points of disagreement between Gabriel Marcel and Michael Polanyi?

  • I am tempted to say that they are from parallel (or different) philosophical universes; somebody might have noticed a resemblance but I dont imagine a paper about their differences. Explicit/tacit knowledge would fit AI interests, while Marcel's problem/mystery is basically a defense for philosophy-cum-religion developments. Perhaps Michel Meyer's "Problematologie" could provide some insights for comparisons. – sand1 May 14 '19 at 22:57
  • Many authors note this similarity, see e.g. Poteat, The Primacy of Persons and the Language of Culture, p.49, but I have not seen any detailed comparisons between the two. – Conifold May 15 '19 at 5:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.