dating violence as a topic for TOK presentation?

[gratziela]

Hi, I'm doing my preparation for TOK presentation.. Last time i did my trial for oral presentation, i got a very low mark, I'm doing "what is the meaning of life?" for my presentation topic, maybe, it's gone too far, and so I got a very low mark. Now, i'm thinking to change it into "how far should we use our emotion in a relationship (dating)?" do you think it will be better? I'm thinking to talk about how some people does not realize when should they stop thinking about emotions, for example when their partner already mentally pressured them and also how it may leads to dating violence, which is not good. So, we need to stop using emotion and think how to manage this things so then it would not hurt us as a human.. because sometimes people might ignore these abusive things in dating because they love their partner. What do you think about this? Thank you so much.. =)

Edited December 20, 2009 by gratziela

[Austin Glau]

That sounds much better. But when you say "we need to stop using emotion and think how to manage these things so then it would not hurt us as a human", you are implying that the pair are already together. Emotion is what drives relationships. instead of to stop using emotion, how about to balance emotion and abuse and their consequences, because the lack of that is really how abusive relationships start.

[Person]

How about looking more into the issue and seeing if there are more points of view to discuss. My teacher is constantly advising us to choose a question to which there is more than one point of view in order to be able to discuss these point of view.

[gratziela]

@2401 I Hate Tangents: So, do you mean that instead of how to stop emotions, It will be better for me to discuss more about how to balance emotions so that abusive does not happen? =)

@MerelyAlive : ya, I'm trying to find some more issues to be discussed from the topic.. however, I'm afraid that if I look deeply into the issue which is dating violence, I'm afraid it will be off topic.. '

[Austin Glau]

Yes, thats what i was trying to say. Since emotion is what drives relationships, I don't think it would be wise to talk about balancing emotions.

Edited December 30, 2009 by 2401 I Hate Tangents

[gratziela]

Yyes, thats what i was trying to say. Since emotion is what drives relationships, I don't think it would be wise to talk about balancing emotions.

ah.. i see.. hahaha.. =) okay.. thank you very much.. happy belated christmas! ^^

[elmar]

Another topic from dating violence can be how violence affects the people in the relationship negatively, therefore resulting in low-self-esteem, and then leading to depression/self-mutilation/etc. You could also talk about cheating and how unhappiness in a person's personal relationship causes them to cheat.

[gratziela]

Another topic from dating violence can be how violence affects the people in the relationship negatively, therefore resulting in low-self-esteem, and then leading to depression/self-mutilation/etc. You could also talk about cheating and how unhappiness in a person's personal relationship causes them to cheat.

Thank you.. do you think it's a good topic which will help me get a better mark for my TOK presentation? ' i'm really worried about this upcoming presentation, because it will be my last presentation..

[elmar]

Thank you.. do you think it's a good topic which will help me get a better mark for my TOK presentation? ' i'm really worried about this upcoming presentation, because it will be my last presentation..

I've yet to take TOK, so I wouldn't know. If there's a specific criteria or rubric that details how well you need to support your topic, I'd probably mention it briefly, but not go into too much detail about it.

[gratziela]

Thank you very much.. =)

[SharkSpider]

I'm seeing an issue in this topic as is, namely that when you resolve to talk about something, it doesn't mean you've got a reasonable way of philosophizing about that topic. Is violence in relationships okay? The incredibly obvious answer is no, and if you were to argue yes, you'd have a hard time convincing people, unless you did the extreme relativist approach, in which case your presentation would have no substance. The other questions might involve examining the irrational case in which someone doesn't leave an abusive partner, in which case, you're in to psychology, because most people would jump to the conclusion that if it's bad for you, you shouldn't do it. Basically, I can't see any questions that one might ask in order to produce a meaningful philosophical debate, with the topic as it stands. That being said, a question closely related and quite possibly worth examining would be to question the extent that it would be okay for a third party to attempt to interfere in an abusive relationship. What if through some twist of personality, they seek and require abuse and/or degradation in order to feel complete? There was an effect studied in psychology in which hostages in bank heists developed attraction and adoration for their capturers, no matter how poorly they were treated. The question one might ask would be whether or not we have the right to tell someone that they should not feel this way, and if it's justified to stop people from putting themselves in to situations in which they are being abused.

[gratziela]

I'm seeing an issue in this topic as is, namely that when you resolve to talk about something, it doesn't mean you've got a reasonable way of philosophizing about that topic. Is violence in relationships okay? The incredibly obvious answer is no, and if you were to argue yes, you'd have a hard time convincing people, unless you did the extreme relativist approach, in which case your presentation would have no substance. The other questions might involve examining the irrational case in which someone doesn't leave an abusive partner, in which case, you're in to psychology, because most people would jump to the conclusion that if it's bad for you, you shouldn't do it. Basically, I can't see any questions that one might ask in order to produce a meaningful philosophical debate, with the topic as it stands. That being said, a question closely related and quite possibly worth examining would be to question the extent that it would be okay for a third party to attempt to interfere in an abusive relationship. What if through some twist of personality, they seek and require abuse and/or degradation in order to feel complete? There was an effect studied in psychology in which hostages in bank heists developed attraction and adoration for their capturers, no matter how poorly they were treated. The question one might ask would be whether or not we have the right to tell someone that they should not feel this way, and if it's justified to stop people from putting themselves in to situations in which they are being abused.

whoaa took me a long time to finally understood why you said. you expeeerrt mmkay i think i'll consider the question regarding the third party thing. thanks so much for the input! youve been extremely helpful.

[ameatypie]

That sounds much better. But when you say "we need to stop using emotion and think how to manage these things so then it would not hurt us as a human", you are implying that the pair are already together. Emotion is what drives relationships. instead of to stop using emotion, how about to balance emotion and abuse and their consequences, because the lack of that is really how abusive relationships start.

I losely agree with this, however i would also say that actions (both ours and other peoples) generate emotions, and therefore actions are what indirectly drive a relationship.