ToK Essay 5 Nov 23: "The world is the way we understand it"

“the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it—and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? 

Is this always the case ?

Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

So at the start of the this essay we have a clear proposition that the world is constructed or created by our processes of understanding it. In philosophy this is called a rationalist argument, however you don't necessarily need (or want) to refer to the philosophical debate between rationalism and empiricism. That said this debate will very much underpin the discussion that I bring to this essay.

Let's start by quickly looking at some of the interesting words used in the prescribed title, and the first phrase of Interest here is the world isn't just the way it is. the use of the isn't just and later use of the phrase bring something to it, would indicate that the human construction of knowledge is an additive process, i.e. we add to that which is gained from the senses rather than essentially alter, or change, it.

 The use of the term understanding in the quote indicates that this process is one in which we bring meaning to the world that is presented to us. This is a rich area for further discussion in the essay should students choose to take this route. 

ToK Essay 5 Nov 23 - a few overview arguments

In these overview notes we will quickly and broadly look at to arguments for supporting the proposition in the prescribed title, and to arguments evaluating or opposing the proposition in the prescribed title. in the essay guidance notes “10 Arguments for essay #5 “ we go into a lot more detail on 10 arguments including knowledge arguments, evaluations or counterclaims, suggestions for real life situations, and implications arising from the knowledge arguments. Those notes are over 8,300 words long and give you a lot more than can be achieved in this web page. 

ToK Essay 5 Nov 23 - interpretation

Argument one for the proposition could be that The interpretation that we bring to the world doesn't radically change the external reality so much as give it internal meaning. This argument could be applied to either AoK History or AoK Natural Sciences. The essential argument here is that our additive interpretation (understanding) doesn’t radically change the world, but just makes it gives it a representative meaning so that we can label it and categorise it within pre-existing knowledge frameworks. Students who have studied Knowledge and Language as an optional theme can draw upon some of the debates covered in that unit. 

This argument is easier to apply to AOK Natural Sciences than it is to AOK history. in Natural Sciences we would be arguing that the scientific method produces objective and accurate data about an external reality, and then human interpretation of that data retains the essential features and characteristics of that external reality. To apply this argument to AoK history we need to develop an understanding of a process which minimise the role of perspective and subjective biases in the historiographical process. Well this is a hard argument to make, it is not an impossible argument. Students following this argument may want to look at the production of historical knowledge as a process of empiricism. This is explored in a lot more detail in the essay guidance notes.

ToK Essay 5 Nov 23 - interpretation (different perspective)

Argument two is that the world we experience is largely an interpreted world rather than a real world. in philosophy this would be called irrationalism however you don't have to use this term in your essay. The argument here is that we select, group, label, categorise, and add meaning, to the experiences of the world. As such we fundamentally change what we know about the world around us.

This argument can be applied to both AOK history and AoK Natural Sciences. however it is far more straightforward to apply to AOK history. Students who would like to follow this route should consider looking at history as a product of human construction, or history as a rationalist process. The argument in history is a constructionist argument that we select specific historical knowledge, and interpret it in ways that serve pre-existing knowledge, to confirm a preferred world view. The arguments in the Natural Sciences would be that the operationalization of variables and the interpretation of scientific result fundamentally changes that which is observed. again, we go into this in a lot more detail in the detailed essay guidance notes .

ToK Essay 5 Nov 23 - reality

Turning towards arguments against the proposition in the prescribed title. The first arguments would be that the external world is how we experience it, we do not add things in through interpretation. As such we are arguing that our knowledge of the world is objective and accurate. This is an empiricist argument (however you do not have to use that term in your essay). This argument could be used both for AOK history and AOK Natural Sciences, however it is far easier to make for AOK natural sciences. The hypothetical deductive scientific method is essentially an empirical method which is designed to minimize human interpretation and subjectivity. 

ToK Essay 5 Nov 23 - context

The final argument covered here, concerns the role of context in our understanding of the world. An argument could be developed that the degree to which we interpret external reality is dependent upon the context of the knower, and the knowledge that they are acquiring at that time. Context can include a very wide range of factors including the cultural perspectives of the knower, the intention and purpose of the knower, the type of knowledge that is being acquired, and the pre-existing knowledge frameworks. 

This argument lends itself particularly well to AOK history, but can also be applied in AOK natural sciences. Contrasts could be drawn using real life situations in AoK history. We could consider historical knowledge which has been produced for different purposes, or within different cultures, or by historians with different perspectives. This will show the role of context influencing the different ways that the same historical event has meaning (“understanding”) attached to it. This argument is developed and a lot more detail, including real life examples that you could draw upon, in the detailed guidance essay notes.

We also have 25 questions that you could ask artificial intelligence (such as ChatGPT, or Bard) to help you to write this essay.

This is just a brief overview of four of the arguments that could be used in this essay.  Our detailed guidance notes have a lot more detail on these, and six other arguments.