Course description[ edit ] Theory of Knowledge is a course created by the IB organization and must not be conceived as pure epistemology. This course involves a process of exploring and sharing students' views on "knowledge questions" an umbrella term for "everything that can be approached from a TOK point of view"so "there is no end to the valid questions that may arise", "there are many different ways to approach TOK," "the sheer scope of the TOK course is daunting" and "teachers and students need the confidence to go too far outside their traditional comfort zones. The focus of the discussion should not be the differentiation between "right" and "wrong" ideas but on the quality of justification and a balanced approach to the knowledge claim in question.
Hire Writer These methods of justification are all interrelated yet different according to the specific situation you are dealing with.
Something that I found very interesting is that I consider both mathematics and ethics justified by the same method which is logic. When I thought of it in a deeper sense and tried to define logic when it comes to both subjects I did not get the same definition.
However, when it comes to ethics even though they differ from one person to the other and from one group to another, whenever an ethical claim is made I justify it using a different kind of logic than the one I use in maths, here I look if this ethical claim has a logical justification and if it is parallel with my own religion and what I have been raised to believe, only then can I claim that this ethical example is a logical one when it comes to my opinion.
I noticed that when I defined logic when it come sot both subjects I used deductive reasoning because I looked at the theory first then confirmed it after I observed it and looked back at the proof I then confirmed or justified it.
This differs when it comes to an ethical claim because both little or numerous justification will never lead to everyone accepting that ethical claim to be right or wrong. I do understand that when it comes to ethics there is more than one major division.
Ethic absolutism and relativism are two of the major divisions that have been recognised globally and that are contradicting.
Ethic absolutism implies that there is a right or wrong applicable universally while Ethic relativism implies that such a thing as right or wrong does not exist outside of the values of particular individuals or groups.
When a country is at war it is the common people who suffer Essay Although I believe in relativism that does not mean that I do understand that absolutism can exist and is a valid argument. When it comes to ethics people are bias and intolerant because emotional justification will play a major role.
Religion, culture, experiences and individual opinion play a large role when it comes to ethics more so than mathematics or any other subject for that matter.
In mathematics there are a set of rules that are always followed and even the exceptions of that rule are known globally and accepted after substancial evidence has been made to prove that in this application these values do not work or are not accepted.
Further elaborating on how evidence or proofs are made in maths can be using the axioms that are very clearly stated in any pure mathematics or applied mathematics book where they allow anyone who understands them to reach the same conclusion or final answer if they are given the same mathematical problem.
We can never know for sure what the effect of an ethical decision will be.
The reason behind that is because we we do not have sufficiently well-defined ethical axioms as we do in mathematics.
I can not reach such a confusion or fully elaborate all the deep meanings of justification when it comes to both these subjects.
But what I can do is tell you is that the factors that must be assessed when it comes to ethics and the criteria used to assess them are much more problematic and complicated than the ones in mathematics.
Basically, ethics are rational, but can never be as concrete as the answers to math. How to cite this page Choose cite format:Theory of Knowledge Essay TOK ESSAY PLAN “ our knowledge is only a collection of scraps and fragments that we put together into a pleasing design, and often the discovery of one new fragment would cause us to alter utterly the whole design” (Morris Bishop).
” Vocabulary and knowledge mean differently to each person. In layman’s terms, vocabulary may simply be the language in general or specifically the words that a knower uses for communication, education and many other aspects of everyday life.
Does art, or can art, tell the truth? What kinds of truth does art deal with?
Choose one form of art (visual art, literature or music) and discuss the nature of this art and its links to truth. Each theory is intertwined and are the best examples to represent Plato’s own view on what knowledge really is, even thought they are unique in their own way by opening up new and different ideas, Here we will explore how one example relates to the other in terms of the truth of knowledge from Plato’s point of view.
The theory of knowledge essay is the externally-assessed part of TOK, in contrast to the presentation, which is marked ‘in house’.
You choose from a list of 6 different prescribed titles, and try to somehow cram the sum of your TOK knowledge into words. Theory of Knowledge Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher and a mathematician who is generally recognized as one of the founders of analytic philosophy.
He, like many other people was searching for proof and evidence of us- people being rational animals, .