Nov10/May11 #10 "A model is a simplified representation of some aspect of the world... search for knowledge?"

[Lance H]

Hi there,

I have decided to do the above topic for my TOK essay. I just want to run a few ideas past you to see if they will be ok.

Semi structure:

Define Search for Knowledge

Newton/Einstein (Science)

• Newton old
  
• Eintsein new
  
• Newton low speeds
  
• Einstein everything
  

Geographical Models (Social Science)

• Boserup/Malthus
  
• DTM
  
• Changed to suit newly evolving patterns
  
• Time dependant
  

English Rules (Language)

• Always exceptions
  
• So diverse hard to have simplified model
  

Maps (Language/Social Science anyone know???)

• Simplfied but not precise
  
• To have full precise 1:1 scale needed
  

Christianity (Religion)

• BIBLE <- Controversial
  
• Way to 'perfect' live life - not real always
  

Comments? Suggestions? Criticism? Accolades? Oscars? Razzie? Please post!!!

Cheers

Lance

[sweetnsimple786]

It's great that you have lots of examples [most of which I don't understand]. Can you provide a cohesive argument for your paper? That'd help me comment on your ideas. I do want to warn you about trying to cover too much. Saying you'll do 5 areas of knowledge and then only skimming the surface isn't what you want to do. Go into a couple of them really in-depth. Also, try to include personal examples to show you understand how this applies to your life. I can see how some of the stuff you've mentioned can be personal, but I wanted to make sure that you're aware of that.

[wingnut]

here's my plan for this question so far..

start also with the outline of the search for knowledge : science = search for an absolute truth, art = accumulation of more knowledge (quantity rather than quality of knowledge)... search for knowledge is dependent on the area of knowledge and it's methodologies.

how are models formed : ie. experimentation, the role of experts and users of models, and the determination of the truth of a model (truth tests?)

strengths and weaknesses of simplification :

+ : eliminates complexities (eg. physics, we neglect air resistance in motion problems, assume that any object is just in a vacuum)

- : creates only theoretical knowledge (knowledge which doesn't apply to the world we live in, only to theoretical situations - eg. economics models have heaps of 'controlled variables', or even stick with the physics idea)

models and learning :

+ : humans are organizational learners, we require some form of structured knowledge in order to learn, models provide that structure

- : use of models inhibits the creative portion of our minds (we don't get to discover things for ourselves, or get to question theories because we are told to believe that models are true)

+ : flaws in models cause doubt and spur investigation

- : models sometimes override our own rational thoughts - we sometimes just accept what is predicted by a model as true

... help please.

Edited April 7, 2010 by wingnut

[Sandwich]

I think all your ideas sound excellent, Wingnut, and that's the right sort of approach to take, breaking it down as you have. Just make sure you have some counterclaims (in your strengths and weaknesses section, for instance, you've only focussed on weaknesses in what you listed there!), and also personal examples.

The only bit I'd say isn't so strong is the use of models in learning. Although it's a good point, I think it's possibly a little off-topic. I don't know how you feel about it, but to me there's a difference between the "search for knowledge" and "learning". Learning is committing the knowledge to memory after somebody else has searched for it, if that makes any sense -- and you have to remember this essay comes with quite a small word count, so although you could argue it's part of the search for knowledge on an individual level, I wonder whether it would be significant enough to include when you consider the search for knowledge itself.

I think there are some more ways in which models contribute to the search for knowledge that you could discuss: for instance what about the use of models to predict the future? Also what about the use of models to see what's not there yet and direct our search for it? Like the Higgs-Boson, or whatever.

Also something big which I think you -could- suggest is whether everything we think and know is a model of the world, to some extent. For instance we put a lot of our personal experience into models of cause and effect. To some extent, because we have the process all information into our own minds, everything could be a model, perhaps P:

Hope that helps slightly.

[wingnut]

ok. thanks for that.

in a tok essay is it mandatory that you include all areas of knowing?

if so how could i incorporate stuff like language into this essay? that one has always confused me a little. haha.

that idea, of everything in the world being a model to some extent has kinda been confusing me for a while. how can you make a judgement on whether models help or hinder the search for knowledge if the search for knowledge itself and arguably all knowledge are models.

in the conclusion of the essay, i'd probably just say that models shape our knowledge, and therefore both help and hinder to an extent, but without models, our knowledge, at least as we know it now, would be obsolete. - would that be ok? or is that way to open ended.

[Sandwich]

ok. thanks for that.

in a tok essay is it mandatory that you include all areas of knowing?

if so how could i incorporate stuff like language into this essay? that one has always confused me a little. haha.

that idea, of everything in the world being a model to some extent has kinda been confusing me for a while. how can you make a judgement on whether models help or hinder the search for knowledge if the search for knowledge itself and arguably all knowledge are models.

in the conclusion of the essay, i'd probably just say that models shape our knowledge, and therefore both help and hinder to an extent, but without models, our knowledge, at least as we know it now, would be obsolete. - would that be ok? or is that way to open ended.

Nope, you don't have to include all Area of Knowledge -- although I think you might mean Ways of Knowing if you're talking about language! It's not necessary to include all of those either. The only thing you must do is make sure you DO include them where they're relevant. If it's not relevant, there's no point in talking about it. The only sort of model I can think of for language is verb modelling (lists of endings for verbs in certain languages).

As for your second thing, I don't think the fact that we have to model things into our own perception/intellect/capacity as human beings necessarily devalues the models we have within this model. It's more of something to mention in your conclusion, I think, that potentially everything we think is some form of construct, whether we like it or not.

I'm not sure your conclusion really means much. You should sum up all the points you've made in the essay and use them to make a short balanced judgement as to whether overall you believe it is helpful or hindering. Massive claims like "without models our knowledge would be obsolete" aren't really what your essay has established, rather they're grand statements to make the conclusion seem better. Tempting as it is, never big up your conclusion. It's not so much open-ended (it's fine to leave it open ended, although you should still provide at least some form of provisional conclusion based on the points you made in the essay, or it'll be like you never answered the question!) as over the top.

I mean -- do models shape our knowledge? They certainly don't shape all knowledge - and equally, our knowledge shapes the models! It's kinda a statement for effect rather than content, if that makes sense!

[wingnut]

what would you write about if you were to do this essay?

[KLSmash]

Models are an oversimplification of reality and prediction of the future, and as a result, certain variables are forced to be ignored. However, there are hidden assumptions that are made, that can often cause a model to be completely wrong. An example of this is modelling how diseases spread amongst a population. I'll take the example of H1N1/swine flu. However, it turned out, that certain people that had a similar flu in the late 1970s were immune to H1N1/swine flu. Chances are, this was not known when the first models were made and as a result, they were not THAT accurate.

Just my two cents.

[gkong]

Approach your essay with examples first, I found that thinking of specific examples then expanding in my WoKs and AoKs was easier then working from my WoKs/AoKs to specific examples.

I'm done writing this essay and thank God its out of the way.

[FutureIB]

Well I am hesitant whether to address this one, or the doubt is the key to Knowledge, although this is more tempting, because when addressing natural sciences, there are great many examples, such as the prediction of Mendeleev of the existence of Germaine long before its discovery through the periodic table which is a model that helped massively. Another thing would be that fact that science may reach a point where it becomes difficult that it besets all types of logic and thus models will allow us to think logically in an easier, I just went through my chem book and read the ToK parts they are amazing and definitely helpful in terms of writing a ToK essay.

[sweetnsimple786]

Hmm I guess I would try to outline both of them and see which one you like more. I'd pick the one that was harder but not crazy hard because when I think I already know the answer, I'm not satisfied with it, and I end up wasting a lot of time. Anyways, you might want to focus on another area of knowledge in addition to the natural sciences to balance things out, or at least mention them in your counterclaims.

[toktoktok]

this is my outline for my essay. do you think I have missed out important things or do I have things that don't make sense? please take a look.

1. Introduction

· Define search for knowledge (search for true justified belief)

· Statement

2. Fundamental

· Helping

○ Simplifies a complex situation, eliminating variables

¨ e.g. physics: ignoring resistance in motion

○ Research becomes easier (financial advantage)

○ Suitable on various situations

¨ models cover the core of the situations

· Hindering

○ Necessarily imperfect (map 1:1 = not practical)

¨ Chance of missing variables

○ Creates only theoretical knowledge

¨ not applicable to the world we live in (e.g. economic models)

3. Practical

· Helping

○ Common frame of reference in scientific world (paradigm)

¨ Easier share of knowledge à more knowledge

· Hindering

○ Common frame of reference in scientific world (paradigm

¨ Other opinions from scientists are easily missed out

¨ Social/financial pressure (Galilei)

¨ Risk of tunnelvision & inhibiting creativity

4. Conclusion

· Fundamental: mainly helping

· Practical: mainly hindering

· Statement: true or false?

I'll also add this as an attachment for clarity. could you please command soon? i need to hand it in somewhere this week. thanks! xxx

[Albert]

this is my outline for my essay. do you think I have missed out important things or do I have things that don't make sense? please take a look.

1. Introduction

· Define search for knowledge (search for true justified belief)

· Statement

2. Fundamental

· Helping

○ Simplifies a complex situation, eliminating variables

¨ e.g. physics: ignoring resistance in motion

○ Research becomes easier (financial advantage)

○ Suitable on various situations

¨ models cover the core of the situations

· Hindering

○ Necessarily imperfect (map 1:1 = not practical)

¨ Chance of missing variables

○ Creates only theoretical knowledge

¨ not applicable to the world we live in (e.g. economic models)

3. Practical

· Helping

○ Common frame of reference in scientific world (paradigm)

¨ Easier share of knowledge à more knowledge

· Hindering

○ Common frame of reference in scientific world (paradigm

¨ Other opinions from scientists are easily missed out

¨ Social/financial pressure (Galilei)

¨ Risk of tunnelvision & inhibiting creativity

4. Conclusion

· Fundamental: mainly helping

· Practical: mainly hindering

· Statement: true or false?

I'll also add this as an attachment for clarity. could you please command soon? i need to hand it in somewhere this week. thanks! xxx

Hi toktoktok,

I just handed my TOK essay on this topic in yesterday after many hours of sweat and pain =) Coming from a fellow student's point of view, you are obliged not to take into account anything I say, I just have a few recommendations.

Firstly, what is your knowledge issue? (or statement if that's what you mean). Or in simplified terms, what is the knowledge question? This is vital throughout your essay as you'll be referring back to this 'issue' throughout your essay.

In Economics, be careful when you say they are 'not applicable'. One of the key roles of models, particuarly in Economics, is to 'predict', not to 'solve'. They are used to 'guide' us along the right path. Perhaps throw in a few important words such as 'doubt' and 'trust' in Economic models to make your claim sound more sophisticated and TOK-ish.

When you say Common frame of reference in scientific world (paradigm)do you mean they provide a 'structure' to our information? I think that is a very important point to bring up, think of how useful having a structure to something is. Saves time, avoid confusion etc etc.

Likewise, try and avoid using common examples to support your claims. Galileo is a very common example which my teacher told me to avoid at all costs. Try and be abstract, talk to your teachers, try and get them to give you some ideas about some good examples. After all, you want your essay to stand out to the examiner, right?

A nifty little quote you might like to think about for some more inspiration is this; “The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones.” JM Keynes

Anyways, I have to dash. I wish you so so SO much luck on this essay! Hope I'm of some assistance. But overall, I think your doing a great job, so keep it up! Ahh the relief when it's over!

[Tilia]

Likewise, try and avoid using common examples to support your claims. Galileo is a very common example which my teacher told me to avoid at all costs. Try and be abstract, talk to your teachers, try and get them to give you some ideas about some good examples. After all, you want your essay to stand out to the examiner, right?

A good idea is to choose original and personal examples. This is how you show independent thinking and a personal response. What comes to mind to me is how I model molecules as small balls, which is not "correct" and can be hindersome when it comes to orbitals etc.

[DistinctTonic]

Can I include both positive and negative aspects in a single body paragraph? I'm confused over structuring the essay, and also how I could get the word count up to 1200, since there isn't a whole lot you could talk about without stating trivial matters.

[Tilia]

Can I include both positive and negative aspects in a single body paragraph? I'm confused over structuring the essay, and also how I could get the word count up to 1200, since there isn't a whole lot you could talk about without stating trivial matters.

I recommend the general rule "one thing per sentence and one idea per paragraph". I think this is a good topic, with a lot to talk about, actually. If you tell us what you've come up with, we might be able to help you further.

[DistinctTonic]

Can I include both positive and negative aspects in a single body paragraph? I'm confused over structuring the essay, and also how I could get the word count up to 1200, since there isn't a whole lot you could talk about without stating trivial matters.

I recommend the general rule "one thing per sentence and one idea per paragraph". I think this is a good topic, with a lot to talk about, actually. If you tell us what you've come up with, we might be able to help you further.

OK thanks, I'll stick to the one idea per paragraph rule. What I'm thinking of doing is sort of cutting the whole thing into different subjects like for example focusing on the uses and limitations of models within the realm of science in the first and second paragraphs, uses and limitations with respect to mathematics/physics in the third and fourth, and leave the fifth and sixth for ethics. Is that a good plan or should I structure it differently? My intro paragraph defines what the search for knowledge is and how models can relate to it, and also states the function of models and how they can be helpful/hindersome in a nutshell. I find it repetitive though to talk about uses/limitations of different areas of knowledge back and forth, paragraph after paragraph. I think it sort of rephrases my previous points - my problem may be a lack of examples.

[eddieabaka]

Ok for one of my paragraphs i was talking about the assumptions made when making models like ignoring air resistance in many calculations. however, whiles i was writing it down i noticed that i did not know the name of this model. anybody know the name?

[sefakor]

Ok for one of my paragraphs i was talking about the assumptions made when making models like ignoring air resistance in many calculations. however, whiles i was writing it down i noticed that i did not know the name of this model. anybody know the name?

I think when calculating using Newtons Law Of motion we ignore air resistance so it might be that!

[Tilia]

Can I include both positive and negative aspects in a single body paragraph? I'm confused over structuring the essay, and also how I could get the word count up to 1200, since there isn't a whole lot you could talk about without stating trivial matters.

I recommend the general rule "one thing per sentence and one idea per paragraph". I think this is a good topic, with a lot to talk about, actually. If you tell us what you've come up with, we might be able to help you further.

OK thanks, I'll stick to the one idea per paragraph rule. What I'm thinking of doing is sort of cutting the whole thing into different subjects like for example focusing on the uses and limitations of models within the realm of science in the first and second paragraphs, uses and limitations with respect to mathematics/physics in the third and fourth, and leave the fifth and sixth for ethics. Is that a good plan or should I structure it differently? My intro paragraph defines what the search for knowledge is and how models can relate to it, and also states the function of models and how they can be helpful/hindersome in a nutshell. I find it repetitive though to talk about uses/limitations of different areas of knowledge back and forth, paragraph after paragraph. I think it sort of rephrases my previous points - my problem may be a lack of examples.

This structure sounds good and clear to me. But examples are vital! For every major point there should be an example, I think examples are even mentioned in the criteria. So do have some