Knowledge is more than information

In the contemporary debate about knowledge management (KM), the terms ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’ are frequently used synonymously or, at least, with a widely overlapping content. In his dialogue ‘Phaedrus’, Plato (428–348 BC) lets Socrates (ca. 470–399 BC) plead for a consequent distinction between knowledge and information – even if he does not use these terms. His argumentation is still relevant – perhaps more than ever. The terms Plato uses, are ‘actual speech’ and ‘written speech’ (instead of ‘knowledge’ and ‘information’, respectively). ‘Actual speech’ is understood as a lively dialogue in which participants refer to each other, react to the arguments of the partner(s), answer actual questions, try to convince the other(s); this all is based upon actual consciousness, conviction, engagement, perhaps even passion. ‘Written speech’, however, has as such no passion (even if the author might have written it passionately). Written speech has no life in it. It answers to questions in a uniform way. In ‘Phaedrus’, Socrates drafts the metaphor in which the inventor Theuth explains his creations to Thamous, the king of Egypt: ‘y, but when it was the turn of writing, Theuth said, ‘Your highness, this science will increase the intelligence of the people of Egypt and improve their memories. For this invention is a potion for memory and intelligence.’ But Thamous replied, ‘You are most ingenious, Theuthy The loyalty you feel to writing, as its originator, has just led you to tell me the opposite of its true effect. It will atrophy people’s memories. Trust in writing will make them remember things by relying on marks made by others, from outside themselves, not on their own inner resources, and so writing will make the things they have learnt disappear from their minds. Your invention is a potion for jogging the memory, not for remembering. You provide your students with the appearance of intelligence, not real intelligence. Because your students will be widely read, though without any contact with a teacher, they will seem to be men of wide knowledge, when they will usually be ignorant. And this spurious appearance of intelligence will make them difficult company.’ The dialogue continues, and the difference between actual speech (here interpreted as ‘knowledge’) and written speech (here interpreted as ‘information’) becomes increasingly obvious. The difference is fundamental: ‘active’ knowledge, embedded in human consciousness, on the one hand, and ‘passive’ information, written down, printed on paper or stored on electronic devices, on the other. Socrates says about written words: ‘You might think they were speaking as if they had some intelligence, but if you want an explanation of any of the things they’re saying and you ask them about it, they just go on and on for ever giving the same single piece of information. Once any account has been written down, you find it all over the place, hobnobbing with completely inappropriate people no less than with those who understand it, and completely failing to know who it should and shouldn’t talk to. And Knowledge Management Research & Practice (2004) 2, 61–62 & 2004 Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. All rights reserved 1477–8238/04 $25.00