Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone,

I'm doing my FINAL TOK presentation in a few days and, while i already have my real life situation and a well developed KI, I am stuck as I'm trying to figure out what to do next. How can i relate different AOK and WOK to my KI? Please Help.

This is my Introduction

2009, an unusual event strikes the citizens of the city of L’Aquila in Abruzzo, a region in the South of Italy. Hundreds of people lose their lives, a greater number are injured and almost the entire population has no water or shelter following the natural disaster. After this tragic event, six scientists were convicted, as they were found guilty of not being able to predict correctly the happening of the earthquake. Society was completely split on this matter. Some stated that the scientists were guilty and should have been punished for not fulfilling their job requirements. Others supported the experts and defended the fact that earth and nature are unpredictable and no one could be able to be aware of such a devastating event. Society, nowadays, has put a lot of faith in science. This is due to its high success in the prediction and explanation of events. Moreover, as science is considered an Area of Knowledge characterized by an elevated level of truthfulness, we have started to deem scientists are almost infallible people. Therefore, we see scientists as an authority and we have increasingly valued their opinion as time passed, exposing ourselves to the consequences of authority bias. However, considering that certainty is not completely achievable to a full extent, should we hold the opinion of scientists accountable?

Immediately, knowledge issues begin forming: to what extent does progress in human knowledge aid expert predictions in countering the unpredictable nature of the earth? The situation, as all tend to be, is filtered with exceptions and peculiarities that distinguish it from any other. In summary, scientists were able to visualize some abnormal activity in the earth’s surface but did not share it with the public for a variety of reasons and more importantly, because there was not sufficient proof to state that an earthquake was going to destroy an entire city. Therefore, does the possession of Knowledge carry out an ethical responsibility? (That's my main Knowledge Issue)...what do i do from here?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Essentially, what you have to do is break down this knowledge issue: form knowledge claims, look at different interpretations, bring in your knower's perspective. So, what I would do is this:

Introduce knowledge claims, talk about reasons why it does carry an ethical responsibility and explain this well, then link it back to your real life situation and show how it proves this. However, I would definitely try and find another real life example as just having one like this can be quite weak.

Next, introduce your counterclaim, talk about why it doesn't have ethical implications, or why it shouldn't (you can do this the other way round obviously because you might actually think that it doesn't and then your counter claim is that it does). Then, again, link it back to your real life examples.

In doing all of this, you should have come up with a really good argument.

I think you should involve your knower's perspective all through the whole presentation, however, many people like to have a particular section in the presentation to talk about the knower's perspective, just to make it clear.

Good Luck!! I hope this helps

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  


Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.