Dienes & Perner's target article is not a satisfactory
theory of implicit knowledge because in endorsing the representational
theory of knowledge, the authors also inadvertently accept that only
explicit knowledge can be causally efficacious, and hence that implicit
knowledge is an inert category. This conflation between causal efficacy,
knowledge, and explicitness is made clear through the authors'
strategy, which consists of attributing any observable effect to the
existence of representations that are as minimally explicit as needed to
account for behavior. In contrast, we believe that causally efficacious
and fully implicit knowledge exists, and is best embodied in frameworks
that depart radically from classical assumptions.