Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Essay Topic ( I can't understand)

Recommended Posts

Hi, :)
can someone help me with my essay topic, I don't understand what it ask me to do or what it's trying to say ( I'm very bad at english (4th language) )

¿How might this apply to ways of knowing, as tools, in the pursuit of knowledge?

it's form the 2014 May TOk essay titles, the second one

“When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems begin to resemble nails” (Abraham Maslow). How might this apply to ways of knowing, as tools, in the pursuit of knowledge?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was it Wittgenstein that said something to the effect that our questions about the world are shaped (determined?) by the tools we apply to it. So, our best tool for understanding the universe and reality is Science (so it would appear, not all agree) and therefore the answers we get back will necessarily be scientific. But that leaves out all other less visible, not scientifically-testable aspects of our lives. That's a big gap. If it cannot be verified scientifically, it doesn't exist - or it does, but may not be counted as knowledge. I may have gone round the question a bit, but does this give some idea for your task?

Edited by Blackcurrant
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is what it means:

The areas of knowledge are different ways of looking at, evaluating, and gaining knowledge. When you look at something only from the view of history, or only from the view of natural sciences, or only from the view from ethics, all of the problems (knowledge issues, gaining knowledge, general problems, etc) are solved using that area of knowledge. The analogy is given because with a hammer, you use it to push nails inward (not screws, staples, etc...although technically you 'could' but that's not the point. Hammers = nails). So basically what the question is asking you to do is how do you use the areas of knowledge in order to GAIN knowledge? How does looking at it from two or three different areas change how you gain knowledge? Is there a difference, or are they the same? (For example, is the way you gain knowledge in history the same way you gain knowledge in ethics?) Once you gain the knowledge, is the way that you evaluate that knowledge all the same as well? Think about those questions, and you'll be off to a good start.

Edited by Emmi
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You also have to realize that it's asking you to look at how each way of knowing is a "tool" in the pursuit of knowledge. So instead of looking at how knowledge is gained in different AoK you have to explain how the WoK can be limited.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is important to keep in mind that question #2 is SPECIFICALLY asking about the WoK and not the AoK. The person who had the best answer used examples and answered the question as if it was asked in relation with the AoK (history, arts, natural sciences etc)

Knowing how picky the IB is when answering the exact question I think it is important to keep in mind that the questio pertains to the WoK (perception, emotion, language, reason) and not the AoK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is important to keep in mind that question #2 is SPECIFICALLY asking about the WoK and not the AoK. The person who had the best answer used examples and answered the question as if it was asked in relation with the AoK (history, arts, natural sciences etc)

Knowing how picky the IB is when answering the exact question I think it is important to keep in mind that the questio pertains to the WoK (perception, emotion, language, reason) and not the AoK.

Thank you for catching that :) It's really easy to get confused, but one little mistake here can cost you a lot of marks! Always read carefully.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is important to keep in mind that question #2 is SPECIFICALLY asking about the WoK and not the AoK. The person who had the best answer used examples and answered the question as if it was asked in relation with the AoK (history, arts, natural sciences etc)

Knowing how picky the IB is when answering the exact question I think it is important to keep in mind that the questio pertains to the WoK (perception, emotion, language, reason) and not the AoK.

Thank you for catching that :) It's really easy to get confused, but one little mistake here can cost you a lot of marks! Always read carefully.

I get confused SO easily with this!! This question would have been so much better if it asked about the AoK, It would have had so much more to say :guilty: I wish they weren't so picky with this stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

soo in other words I need to find the limits of each WOK , tell how we gain knowledge with them and what are the differences between the knowledge that we gain from one WOK from another? correct if i'm wrong

and what knowledge issue can I find? is this one a good knowledge issue? : " Which one is the more accurate one to follow?"
and what real life situations can I find? ( no idea on this one) :S

Edited by Pierre Reynaud

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.