Jump to content

#6 "There are no absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false". Discuss this claim.


Ruby So

Recommended Posts

What I think could be worth looking at is how a statement could be true or false depending on context and what AoK we're talking about. For instance, in chemistry a statement such as "R is H" could be quite true, but in other areas, it complete nonsense.

A good idea to start is to find three examples. One that agrees with the title, one that doesn't, and one that sort of does. Maths is here a rather obvious example, 2+3=5 is true whereas 2+3=7 isn't. Not much room for argument there. Science provides us with another perspective, you can never know where the electrons actually orbit the nucleus according to the Schrödinger model, but we have no reason to believe otherwise. So here the pragmatic view applies, and the distinction between true and false is less relevant.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm doing this topic (now beginning to regret it..) but the biggest and easiest AOK to discuss is ethics, how what is true for some isn't for others..but anything can be related to this topic if you look hard enough. I'm doing ethics, history for AOK's and language + one other for WOK's

tbh I really suck at the personal experience part, anyone got any tips on that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Woah.. I'm doing the same question but I actually find it very interesting. I'm looking at mathematics, ofc, which is my counterclaim since I'm pro the title in my essay. (No, I'm not aiming high) And I'm also looking into language/emotion & history and psychology & language, my example will be loftus & palmer - leading questions and how they change the truth. If any of this makes any sense, I'm kinda tired. But think about what two claims you want to be your "pro-claim" ones and what one you want to be your counter claim. Break it into pieces and it does not make it as difficult. Just remember to breathe! And as soon as you have figured out what AoK's and WoK's you want to talk about; remember to keep it structured! I wish I had more helpful things to say but I'm afraid that I don't, however, I hope it gave something..?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I am writing on number 6.

I have already done a draft - which was too... philosophical, since I basically described my philosophical ideas behind the claim - I basically said that there are distinctions between the two, but they can never be absolute, as both the truth and false are constructs of the human mind used to help us interpret the world around us - and as they are our own constructs, they end with our life, and they're utmost subjective and vary from person to person in varying degrees, and as such in the terms of the universe they could hardly be absolute, since they are not eternal. They are infinite, i.e. there can be untold number of versions of truths and falses, where one can believe something is true, and other person might believe the same thing to be actually false.

They said it was okay-ish, but I was missing the ToK in it - which basically means this was O.K. but I need to apply the Ways of Knowing in order for this to make a successful T O K essay.

You can philosophise in ToK as much as you want, but you must not forget that it should be the Ways of Knowing that make up your essay, not just bareboned philoshophy.

Hope I helped :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

hiyaa...

i am also doing the number 6 ("there are no absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false")

jus wnted to know what other topic i can talk about.

so far im using SCIENCE, MATHS, RELIGION AND HISTORY...

:D

I would suggest that you choose two AoK. You have quite few words to use, so it's better to take two and do them properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As several people asked for intro ideas, why not just start of with defining the key terms first. for the reader its important to know what your definition of "truth" and "false" is.

When you got that you can go explaining which of the different ways of knowing and areas of knowing you will use in order to approach a fairly straight answer. Its mostly best to write the intro at the end, when you've completed your essay. And why not include a quote, such as the one by oscar wilde : the truth is rarely pure and never simple. That already shows that false and truth are connected --> maybe no absolute distinction between the two? Then you can move to your body and use examples and different perspectives ( like psychology, cience, religion) in order to find out weather there IS an absolute distinction possible.

Hopefully that helps :)

Greets

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi everybody.

Basically, had my EE deadline two weeks ago and that was a bit of a last minute rush, even though I started it in the summer. looks like the same's going to happen with my TOK essay. I have a very rough plan, but it's crap really. I really have no idea how to apporach this title. I originally chose the "art is a lie...." essay, but changed. Now I've gone back to this one and I'm kind of regretting it.

Any help would be appreciated. Just tips and ideas on how to approach it, paragraph by paragraph. Which AoK's and WoK's to focus on. I'm so stuck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also writing my essay on this question, and reading mrazakmrazak's post confirmed my thoughts that this title makes it very easy to fall into the kind of mindset where you say the truth is completely subjective and determined by the individual, which doesn't lend to a particularly meaningful or TOK linked essay.

I have a more general question though, is it a good idea for the sake of simplicity to provide your own definitions of true and false and then apply the prescribed title to these definitions? Would this be effective?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

What i plan to write over is the separation between absolutism and relativism.

You see, if one is an absolutist, it means that they're absolutely certain about something. No middle ground

A relativist sees different facets to every situation.

But heres the thing. If one is a firm relativist doesn't that mean they're AbSOLUTELY a relativist?

This kinda blurs the line between one and the other. Which one is true or false and can there be a true or false if they're intermingled?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would NOT go with #6 as it is WAAAAY too broad a topic and you only have 1400 words or something, so you cant cover it in details and you wont get a good grade.

#8 is much better as it is much more specific and there is more than one way to cover that topic without the examiner disagreeing with you and marking you down. besides what everyone else said about the fiction being a lie and the moral behind the story being truth, etc... you can also talk about how art is the basis and inspiration for science, like technology: poeple used to paint, write, sing, etc about flying, for example, and that led to scientists and engineers bringing together their brilliant minds and make a flying machine. that dream(ie: flying man, which is impossible, therefore a lie) became somewhat a reality, ie truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a more general question though, is it a good idea for the sake of simplicity to provide your own definitions of true and false and then apply the prescribed title to these definitions? Would this be effective?

Yes, that is OK as long as it is a fairly reasonable definition.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that "absolute" is really important here.

Either way, here is my essay proposal that I wrote to my teacher.

Relativism is a philosophical position that all points of view are equally valid and that all statements are relative to each individual case. But, if all truth is relative and there is no absolute truth, then the statement all truth is relative and there are no absolute truth would be false because itself is implying an absolute truth. However, would this suggest that all statements are absolute? An absolute statement is a claim that is applicable for every possible situation, which means that it must also be applicable for the future. Yet, one may not know if such statement is applicable in the future. Therefore there is no absolute statement either. Now, in order to answer the question: Is there any absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false?, one must first identify to what extent a statement might be absolute and then evaluate to what extent a statement might be true (or false). So, to what extent can one statement be true or false and to what extent may one consider it to be absolutely true or absolutely false?

Edited by Wen
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that "absolute" is really important here.

Either way, here is my essay proposal that I wrote to my teacher.

Relativism is a philosophical position that all points of view are equally valid and that all statements are relative to each individual case. But, if all truth is relative and there is no absolute truth, then the statement “all truth is relative and there are no absolute truth” would be false because itself is implying an absolute truth. However, would this suggest that all statements are absolute? An absolute statement is a claim that is applicable for every possible situation, which means that it must also be applicable for the future. Yet, one may not know if such statement is applicable in the future. Therefore there is no absolute statement either. Now, in order to answer the question: “Is there any absolute distinctions between what is true and what is false?”, one must first identify to what extent a statement might be absolute and then evaluate to what extent a statement might be true (or false). So, to what extent can one statement be true or false and to what extent may one consider it to be absolutely true or absolutely false?

That's a good viewpoint to start from, however won't score you well unless you re-jig it so that, whilst you mention stuff about relativism etc. in it, you focus mainly around ways of knowing and areas of knowledge. You have to remember that TOK =/= Philosophy, and although some Philosophy seems relevant to TOK, you've got to focus in on the official TOK way of analysing things with their little IB pentagram thingy. If you can think of a way to look at aspects of relativism via examples of TOK things plus at least one original example from your own life, you'll score much more highly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

In my opinion, essays would have to heavily emphasize on the words 'absolute', 'true' and 'false'. I'd explore what they mean (but not by definition) and bring up knowledge issues that surround what is 'true' and what is 'false'. 'Absolute' is a biggie, as some people pointed out. And remember to 'discuss this claim', because that's what the title is asking for. You'd have to agree or disagree on the claim, or have a neutral stand. Remember to explain why you would agree and disagree, since TOK essays are always in need of claims and counterclaims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going for "logically everything is suspect and to expect a premise we have to expect the premise that the first premise is valid and even to accept that premise we have to accept subsequent premises that presume that previous presumptions are valid unto infinity" (Caroll Paradox) and also the whole relativity/perception decides everything biznatch. But really that is kind of the same as I'll talk about how memory and perception and all that are uncertain as they can be modified by factors, even oneself. Oneself is just the ultimate propagator of deception.

I don't really know what to do with this- it's too late to change but I sincerely regret not taking the art one.

EDITL: Please HALP this topic inhales major scrotums

Edited by Grumps
Link to post
Share on other sites

don't have much to add to what has been said already but just wanted to add that one of the main examples that i have been stuck on and almost want to use for certain is the fact that some people believe that the holocaust does not exist. for me personally, this is an absolute truth. there are living people right now that survived that who are essentially "living proof". the fact that people believe the holocaust didn't happen is so preposterous to me that it is almost humorous. i think its a good example only for the fact that something i (maybe you?) believe in so wholeheartedly to be true is something that someone believes to be false.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...