[Analysis] of consecutive operational levels necessitates the assumption of a principle which works in the manner of innovation achieved by tacit integration. The assumption that this process is evoked by the accessibility of the higher levels of stable meaning which it eventually achieves, seems compelling to me…higher potentiality might then be triggered into action either by accident or by the operation of first causes. It seems, furthermore, consonant with the conceptual framework of quantum mechanics on the one hand and of problem-solving on the other hand to assume that these creative releases are controlled, and yet never fully determined, by their potentialities. They may succeed or fail. And it seems reasonable to assume, then, on grounds of continuity, that this peculiar kind of indeterminacy is accompanied by the rise of consciousness.” Michael Polanyi
“This part of the universe, in which man has arisen, seems to be filled with a field of potentialities which evoke action. The action thus evoked in inanimate matter is rather poor, perhaps quite meaningless. But dead matter, matter that is both lifeless and deathless, takes on meaning by originating living things. With them a hazard enters the hitherto unerring universe: a hazard of life and death…The cosmic emergence of meaning is inspiring…[plants and animals might be satisfied with a brief existence]…Men need a purpose which bears on eternity. Truth does that; our ideals do it…Perhaps this problem cannot be resolved on secular grounds alone…” Michael Polanyi
Professor Michael Polanyi came to the University of Texas and I was fortunate enough to attend his class. He was quite old by then – he was born in 1891 in Budapest, Hungary. It must have been about 1969, and the class was well attended with his assistants playing a major role. I have a copy of his book, “The Tacit Dimension*” which he kindly signed for me “To John Paul Hinds, M. Polanyi.” I was twenty six in 1969 and ill prepared for exposure to such an imminent scientist, philosopher, psychologist, sociologist. This is true of all the great thinkers whose paths I’ve been fortunate enough to cross. It is a mark of intelligence that though incapable of taking fullest advantage of these encounters at the time I have had enough sense to revisit them as I grew older. Michael Polanyi and all the others a great many of whom I only encountered through their writings, had, have my deepest reverence. Polanyi was a man of his time, contemporary of Bakunin, Marx, Sartre, Stalin, he skillfully critiques all these as well as the thought of enlightenment philosophers; he had a thorough understanding of ancient philosophy, of Plato, Heraclitus, and of the politics and culture of ancient Greece and Rome. His ability to think outside the box, so to speak, enriches his exposition at every turn, he cuts through scientific as well as moralistic dogma. Rooted in the deep past, Plato, and so forth, he gave due credit to those pioneers; his concise analysis reveals the false, the fabricated, the fanciful, the true.
The realm of faith, though not a primary focus, is not foreign to Polanyi. He quotes Saint Augustine: “Unless you believe you will not understand.” I agree this is fundamental to knowing and understanding. He notes that the principle of self preservation having dominated evolution for “five hundred million years of self seeking” gives way to the advent of man’s moral sense; it’s unfortunate that because of man’s moral sense we have the emergence of evil. These are somehow connected he thinks. The development of the sense of morality marks a new plateau in man’s development, a new level of the noosphere I think. Reverence for men greater than oneself, he says, prefigures religion and philosophy to which realms morality and spiritual growth belong. Many believe that evil and good are features of a primordial universe, of course.
Discovery occurs coincidentally with the occurrence of “man’s capacity for anticipating the approach or proximity of hidden truth” and passionate commitment that the imagination can uncover the truth is key. Thus, to my way of thinking, indwelling manifested reality we are able to somehow harness the truth of creation which is to know more than we can tell, the tacit. Polanyi succinctly explains this as like aesthetic appreciation where one enters into the mind of the artist by entering, indwelling, the artists’ creation. To me it’s as if the truth, substratum of discovery, actively allows or promotes its being yoked and thus share the awakened impetus that by dwelling in things we get at meaning which eludes us when we merely look at things superficially. There is hidden meaning implied in the arising of spontaneous inclinations to which we ought follow when pursuing solutions to problems. People talk of a “gut feeling” or a “hunch” in this regard. Following one’s hunch makes it easier for a pianist, for instance, to forget about their fingers and apply themselves to the focal point of the music. Forget about the path at your feet and look ahead to the mountain peak.
Simply put the tacit, or hidden, dimension is that which one knows but can’t easily put in the forms of language. Walking is an automatic process, we think, yet there are hundreds of discrete acts involved that would be difficult to precisely enumerate. I understand these can be isolated and known meditatively but walking itself doesn’t depend on understanding of the minutiae. Thus, walking, and myriads of other actions, involve a commitment to a hidden reality. In my thought I merge this kind of hidden reality to that over riding hidden reality, the so called ultimate reality which though infinitely manifested yet ever eludes our fully grasping it as it truly is in its own nature. We forever only get at the true nature a bit at a time which follows from the usually gradual emergence of potentialities – controlled yet never fully determined, as Polanyi says. This is the nature of Polanyi’s idea of potentialities. They are indeterminate and remain so in their manifestation. Yes, he believes potentialities inexhaustibly increase in proportion to their manifestation. One discovery leads to the next revealing in the process ever increasing possibilities, ramifications. The challenge emerges to keep up with this cascade making for the emergence of the capabilities of heuristics; Self learning seems a built in feature necessary for problem solving.
Polanyi writes that “The first emergence, by which life comes into existence, is the prototype of all subsequent stages…by which rising forms of life, with their higher principles, emerge.” This process brings forth mental powers allowing for the recognition of our faculty of tacit knowing. This theory, he writes, is of a stratified universe “[emphasizing] the distinctive levels of living things.” Its a continuous process, he writes, and is characterized by the “gradual intensification of new functions as they emerge from forms in which they are not yet noticeable…[Man] is found not only liable to a…greater range of errors than animals are, but, by virtue of his moral sense, becomes capable also of evil.” Understandably individuality is weak in plants, a bit stronger in animals, and stronger still in man, and notably, is proportionate to levels of intelligence.
Perhaps not true as much as when Polanyi wrote “The Tacit Dimension” is the belief that biotic operations can all be accounted for by the laws of physics and chemistry, the laws governing inanimate matter. According to Polanyi, this is patent nonsense. “The most striking feature of our own existence is sentience.” he writes, “The laws of physics and chemistry include no conception of sentience.” Further, he holds that sentience is closely related to perception above which we notice conscious behavior and intellectual action and above all this is found our moral sense. So living things reflect the stratification of the universe mentioned above.
Going a bit further, if the tacit dimension is knowledge or understanding we have but can’t readily express then how is it not true that the substratum that characterizes ultimate reality is not the paradigm of the tacit dimension? Also, how is it true that all knowing and understanding is not tacit for the particulars only gain their meaning when joined and lose it when separated into discrete parts? How did I do so and so? I don’t know in detail. I was focused on the “joined particulars, the aggregate” not the finite elements themselves. So those pieces came together of their own volition, so to speak, to result in, for instance, the performing of a task, such as felling a tree – which it would be dangerous not to allow muscle memory to work unsupervised as concentration on the particulars causes loss of concentration of the whole job.
Science, according to Polanyi, has intrinsic powers derived from the belief there are hidden truths. This is, he says, the metaphysical basis, or ground, for intellectual life in a free society and he calls for the promotion of a “society of explorers.” I agree and would amplify this by stating that the emergence of sentience and consciousness support the notion that self awareness could be viewed, and I believe this, as a cosmic device facilitating self awareness by the creator or creatrix; in other words, our sentience is that by which the universe is aware of itself. Does the universe lack self awareness; is there a need? Is this attributing to the ultimate reality man’s nature? I can’t know. I believe, however, in respect to the understanding given me by others. One must wonder why sentience, as Polanyi writes, is the most striking feature of the universe. Surely this means something, if not my supposition, then something equally profound.
Michael Polanyi, not surprisingly, idealizes science which I look on as an interim stage in evolution. He is at the same time critical of science and most importantly recognizes the importance of emergence especially of consciousness as an apparent design feature. To my knowledge science in general assiduously avoids the role of consciousness, I guess because it is not subject to measurement which seems to be the sine qua non of science, it’s basis in materialism. I think R.G. Collingwood has the best take on this in whose scheme science comes after art and religion and before history and philosophy.
Here I have tried to make an attempt to approach that learning curve mentioned in the previous post. Along the way I hopefully have addressed some of the questions and issues raised in my writing of Michael Polanyi’s tacit dimension through the study of William Poteat.
I want to bring up one last item. I take it that tacit means, at least in one sense, hidden. So does occult. My use of tacit often has a meaning, to me at least, of occult, which naturally grows out of my personal proclivities and learning. The truth of the ultimate reality of the Mandukya Upanishad, for instance, while only revealed incrementally incidental to the manifestation of phenomenal outpouring of creation can never be directly known and is left therefore to indirect knowledge which I call understanding. It being hidden is a feature of its universality in a profound way. When one seeks a solution to whatever problem the wanting to own the solution as a personal possession acts as an impedance. I’ve noticed that if I get out of the way, the solution emerges of its own. My concentration on the problem having opened the door, if I step aside for a bit, a day, longer, the solution presents itself by its own impetus. This shares a close kinship with the Polanyian method I want to think. Surely the ultimate reality is in the realm of knowledge – or understanding – which we can’t easily express, or not at all. Yet we continuously see its working and it is that in which our “indwelling” is inescapable. Finally those who have the capacity to study this must conclude that intellect, the first tool of the scientist – and Polanyi was a scientist before he was a philosopher – is or at least can be, an impediment to revealing truth and the other concomitants of consciousness. The truth of a matter will out itself; to facilitate this practice yielding to that “gut feeling” or “hunch” mentioned above is helpful. Bill Poteat brought it to my attention that Paul Cezanne said “I wait until the landscape thinks itself in me” and that is what I’m thinking of here. This particularly applies to beauty and the other concomitants of consciousness. The artist’s best practice is to think about his work less than yielding to the creative impulse. A dancer, a musician, rely more than they might know on muscle memory on body consciousness; there is the presiding consciousness which we might think of as the conductor with body consciousness being the entire orchestra. Our action in the world is the symphony.
*The Tacit Dimension by Michael Polanyi, Doubleday and Company, 1966, and Anchor Books Edition, 1967