Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Ambiguous Knowledge of Mètis: Enter the Street-Smart Expert

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Managing Knowledge in Organizations

  • 615 Accesses

Abstract

The ambiguous nature of mètis is first presented across the embodiment of the Sophists’ lifestyle and thinking, who, in stark contrast to Plato and Aristotle, rejected the notion of knowledge as truth and categorical abstractions. In contrast to the mind–body split, mètis as practiced by the Sophists contributed to the development of rhetoric as an art learned and performed by and with the body as well as the mind. Mètis is further elaborated across an entanglement of explicit, tacit, individual, and collective dimensions. Mindfulness plays a key role in both mètis’ acquisition and deployment. As an ambiguous expertise, it is called upon to address unexpected emergencies, which are in themselves dynamic and ambiguous. A particularly telling example of mètis is presented across the daring landing of US Airways Flight 1549 by Captain “Sully” Sullenberger and his crew on the Hudson River in January of 2009. Finally, the chapter concludes with the non-coincidental observation of how mètis’ presence and deployment has been concurrent with democratic social interactions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aftel, M. (2014). Fragrant: The Secret Life of Scent. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anagnostopoulos, K. P., & Chelidoni, S. (2008). Mêtis and the Artificial. In S. A. Paipetis (Ed.), Science and Technology in Homeric Epics (pp. 435–442). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. 1961. Metaphysics, Book I. (H. Tredennick, Trans.). Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. ‘Categories’, Book I of The Organon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumard, P. (1999). Tacit Knowledge in Organizations. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, E., Bunch, J., Canner, N., & Lee, M.. (2016). Beyond the Holacracy Hype. Harvard Business Review (July–August Issue). https://hbr.org/2016/07/beyond-the-holacracy-hype

  • Clegg, S., Kornberger, M., & Rhodes, C. (2005). Learning/Becoming/Organizing. Organization, 12(2), 147–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dane, E. (2013). Things Seen and Unseen: Investigating Experience-Based Qualities of Attention in a Dynamic Work Setting. Organization Studies, 34, 45–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. M. (1997). Liquid Leadership: The Wisdom of Mary Parker Follett (1868–1933). A Leadership Journal, 2(1), 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Certeau, M. (1984). Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Détienne, M., & Vernant, J. P. (1978). Les ruses de l’intélligence. La mètis des Grecs. Paris: Flammarion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1925). In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), Experience and Nature, The Later Works of J. Dewey, 1925–53, vol. 1 (LW 1). Carbondale/Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1927). The Public and Its Problems. New York: Holt Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1929). The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. New York: Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewulf, A., Craps, M., Bouwen, R., Taillieu, T., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2005). Integrated Management of Natural Resources: Dealing with Ambiguous Issues, Multiple Actors and Diverging Frames. Water Science and Technology, 52(6), 115–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. L. (1986). Mind Over Machine. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (2005). Peripheral Vision Expertise in Real World Contexts. Organization Studies, 26(5), 779–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feigenbaum, E., & McCorduck, P. (1983). The Fifth Generation: Artificial Intelligence and Japan’s Computer Challenge to the World. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenstermacher, G. D., & Sanger, M. (1998). What Is the Significance of John Dewey’s Approach to the Problem of Knowledge? The Elementary School Journal, 98(5), 467–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follett, M. P. (1924). Creative Experience. New York: Longmans, Green and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiette, A., & Vandenbempt, K. (2016). Learning in Times of Dynamic Complexity Through Balancing Phenomenal Qualities of Sensemaking. Management Learning, 47(1), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haack, S. (1996). Pragmatism. In N. Bunnin & E. P. Tsui-James (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy (pp. 643–661). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatt, B. (2007). Street Smarts vs. Book Smarts: The Figured World of Smartness in the Lives of Marginalized Urban Youth. Urban Review, 39(2), 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawhee, D. (2004). Bodily Arts: Rhetoric and Athletics in Ancient Greece. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernes, T. (2014). A Process Theory of Organization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschheim, R. A. (1992). Information Systems Epistemology: An Historical Perspective. In R. Galliers (Ed.), Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines (pp. 28–60). London: Blackweel Scientific Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt, R., & Cornelissen, J. (2014). Sensemaking Revisited. Management Learning, 45(5), 525–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivanov, S. (2011). Why Organizations Fail: A Conversation About American Competitiveness. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 4(1), 94–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, W. (1950). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Dover.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jullien, F. (2004). A Treatise on Efficacy Between Western and Chinese Thinking. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kania, J., & Kramer, M. (2013, January 21). Embracing Emergence: How Collective Impact Addresses Complexity. Stanford Innovation Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, B., & Wagner, J. (2014). The Rise of Innovation Districts: A New Geography of Innovation in America. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Metropolitan Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerferd, G. B. (1981). The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J. (2000). Mindful Learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(2), 220–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, D., & Swap, W. (2004). Deep Smarts. Harvard Business Review, 30(2), 157–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007, Spring). Social Entrepreneurship: The Case for Definition. Stanford Innovation Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, G. H. (1932). The Philosophy of the Present (this edition 2002). New York: Prometheus Books. (Originally published: Chicago: Open Court Pub).

    Google Scholar 

  • Meshkati, N., & Khashe, Y. (2015). Operators’ Improvisation in Complex Technological Systems: Successfully Tackling Ambiguity, Enhancing Resiliency and the Last Resort to Averting Disaster. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23(2), 90–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. R. (2008). The Aristotelian Topos: Hunting for Novelty. In A. G. Gross & A. E. Walzer (Eds.), Rereading Aristotle’s Rhetoric (pp. 130–148). Carbondale: Southern Illinois Universty Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G. M. (2017). Mary Parker Follett – Creativity and Democracy. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance, 41(2), 178–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, W. T., & Hacker, E. A. (1991). Aristotelian Logic. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauley, K., Flin, R., Yule, S., & Youngson, G. (2011). Surgeons’ Intraoperative Decision Making and Risk Management. The American Journal of Surgery, 202, 375–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plato, The Republic VII – Allegory of the Cave, 514a to 520a.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal Knowledge. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M., & Prosch, H. (1975). Meaning. Chicago: The University Of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, S. (2011). American Power: Mary Parker Follett and Michel Foucault. Foucault Studies, 11, 76–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinhold, M. (1949). Essentials of Greek and Roman Classics, Barron’s Educational Series Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, E. W. (2007). The Sophists and democracy Beyond Athens. Rhetorica: A Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 25(1), 109–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W. D. (1951). Plato’s Theory of Ideas. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler-Smith, E., & Sparrow, P. (2008). Intuition in Organizational Decision Making. In G. P. Hodgkinson & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Decision Making (pp. 305–324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2011). Grasping the Logic of Practice: Theorizing Through Practical Rationality. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 338–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiappa, E. (1991). Protagoras and Logos. A Study in Greek Philosophy and Rhetoric. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrader, S., Riggs, W. M., Smith, R. P., & R.P. (1993). Choice Over Uncertainty and Ambiguity in Technical Problem Solving. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 10, 13–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, J. C. (1998). Seing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human State Have Failed. Binghamton: Vail-Ballou Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. (2003). Do We Really Understand Tacit Knowledge. In M. Easterby-Smith & M. Lyles (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge Management (pp. 410–427). New York: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernant, J. P. (1985). Mythe et pensée chez les Grecs. Études de psychologie historique. Paris: Éditions de la Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virtanen, I. (2013). In Search for a Theoretically Firmer Epistemological Foundation for the Relationship Between Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 118–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachter, B. (2015, February 23). My Interview with Capt. Sully Sullenberger: On Aviation, Medicine and Technology. The Hospital Leader. https://thehospitalleader.org/my-interview-with-capt-sully-sullenberger-on-aviation-medicine-and-technology/

  • Walker, W., Harremoës, P., Rotmans, J., Van der Sluijs, J., Van Asselt, M., Jansen, P., & Krayer von Krauss, M. P. (2003). Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support. Journal of Integrated Assessment, 4(1), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (2012). Organized Sensemaking: A Commentary on Processes of Interpretive Work. Human Relations, 65(1), 141–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (2015). Ambiguity as Grasp: The Reworking of Sense. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 23(2), 117–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westbrook, R. (1991). John Dewey and American Democracy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westenholz, A. (1993). Paradoxical Thinking and Change in the Frames of Reference. Organization Studies, 14(1), 37–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winther, R. G. (2014). James and Dewey on Abstractions. The Pluralist, 9(2), 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Quebec at Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada

    W. David Holford

Authors
  1. W. David Holford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. David Holford .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Holford, W.D. (2020). The Ambiguous Knowledge of Mètis: Enter the Street-Smart Expert. In: Managing Knowledge in Organizations. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41156-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation