Explicitness has usually been approached from two points of view, labelled by Kirsh the structural and the process view, that hold opposite assumptions to determine when information is explicit. In this paper, we offer an intermediate view that retains intuitions from both of them. We establish three conditions for explicit information that preserve a structural requirement, and a notion of explicitness as a continuous dimension. A problem with the former accounts was their disconnection with psychological work on the issue. We (...) review studies by Karmiloff-Smith, and Shanks and St. John to show that the proposed conditions have psychological grounds. Finally, we examine the problem of explicit rules in connectionist systems in the light of our framework. (shrink)

Explicitness has usually been approached from two points of view, labelled by Kirsh the structural and the process view, that hold opposite assumptions to determine when information is explicit. In this paper, we offer an intermediate view that retains intuitions from both of them. We establish three conditions for explicit information that preserve a structural requirement, and a notion of explicitness as a continuous dimension. A problem with the former accounts was their disconnection with psychological work on the issue. We (...) review studies by Karmiloff-Smith, and Shanks and St. John to show that the proposed conditions have psychological grounds. Finally, we examine the problem of explicit rules in connectionist systems in the light of our framework. (shrink)

The sociological work of Elias is studied, together with his characteristic outcast position, typical of judaism at the end of the century. From such judaic root stems the metapolitical approach observed in the process of civilization from the platform of a Human Genre already assume as formed and defined by the civilized conscience. The idea of a metapolitical (extraterritorial) platform is determined, and its possible historical and political efficiency. Finally, the work focuses on the limits of the civilization process, contrasting (...) N. Elias and G. Bueno conceptions on the issue. Hence a third alternative which observs such limit of history and its superation in the “antropological field” – through the a structural, technoscientific and objective development of society – springs as a source from where the “ultramoderne spirit” described at the end of the issue finds its origins. (shrink)