On what grounds might we doubt a claim?
Get LOTS more help with this prompt from the e-book ToK Exhibition Prompts 1-5 Explained (over 8,000 words).
The e-book contains:
An overview explanation of each prompt.
Examples of three knowledge claims for each prompt.
Suggestions for the types of object that would be appropriate for each knowledge claim.
How to structure the ToK Exhibition Commentary.
This is just an example of a commentary for the ToK Exhibition prompt "On what grounds might we doubt a claim ?".
A video overview of this commentary can be found at this link.
Exhibition Commentary Structure.
We can use the following structure for each object to answer the prompt "On what grounds might we doubt a claim?". ToK Concepts should only be included if they are relevant, and appropriate to the knowledge claim being developed. Evidence can be details from the object, published articles, or research. Evidence should not be a separate section, just place the evidence within the discussion as appropriate.
The overall ToK Exhibition Commentary structure is shown below.
Knowledge Claims for On what grounds might we doubt a claim?
It is recommended that you develop three knowledge claims (one for each object) BEFORE you identify objects. If you have one distinct knowledge claim for each object it is easier to write a knowledge discussion which is specific to that object.
Knowledge Claim 1:
Contradictory evidence is grounds on which to doubt a claim.
Knowledge Claim 2:
A biased / prejudicial claimant is grounds on which to doubt a claim.
Knowledge Claim 3:
Unsubstantiated and untested methods of knowledge production are grounds on which to doubt a claim
Object 1: Photo of exhibition at Creationist Museum Cincinnati
Photo Credit: (Boyle)
Link between Object 1 and the prompt.
This photograph popped up in my feed whilst I was researching aspects of evolutionary psychology. the photograph is from the creationist Museum in Cincinnati usa. It shows a human and a dinosaur in the same installation, inferring that they may have lived at the same time. This photograph constitutes grounds to doubt the claim that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, because the vast weight of evidence that I have come across has claimed that there were millions of years between the existence of dinosaurs on earth and the evolution of humans. this Photograph shows that contradictory evidence is grounds on which we might doubt a claim.
Link between object 1 and knowledge claim 1.
Whilst contradictory evidence might be grounds on which to doubt a claim, the problem related to this photograph is whether to doubt the claim put forward by the creationist museum, or to doubt the claim put forward the currently conventional weight of evidence that humans and dinosaurs did not exist at the same time. contradictory evidence alone does not necessarily help us to substantiate a claim as truth, but only to introduce doubt into the claims that the evidence is related to. as such, the photograph demonstrates that Evidence alone does not constitute knowledge. contradictory evidence which can lead to doubt only introduces contrasting understandings or Divergent knowledge. the photograph shows that we can know two contradictory things without being able to establish truth from either. Obviously, a range of factors other than evidence is involved in establishing the truth of a claim such as the weight of evidence, the source of evidence, and pre-existing knowledge schemas.
Justification for the inclusion of object 1.
I have included object one because it is in stark contrast to the prevailing and widely accepted scientific knowledge that humans and dinosaurs did not exist at the same time. However, many writers have commented that the fossil evidence for the timeline of human evolution is scarce relative to that that would be expected to be found. As such, whilst object 1 demonstrates that contradictory evidence may be grounds on which to doubt a claim, doubt is introduced by a far wider range of factors other than solely contradictory evidence.
Object 1: 356 words
Object 2: The Film “The Trick” (BBC)
Photo credit: (“BBC One - The Trick”)
Link between Object 2 and the prompt.
Object 2 is the BBC film The Trick (“BBC One - The Trick”), the film describes an incident in 2009 when it was claimed that scientists were conspiring to falsify meteorological data in order to demonstrate climate change. The film details that the evidence for this claim came from climate change deniers who stole and misrepresented emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. Object 2 shows that claims made by knowers with intentional bias, or prejudice, are grounds on which to doubt a claim.
Link between Object 2 and knowledge claim 2.
Claims that are made to support a pre-existing bias may misrepresent or misconstrue evidence in such a way to support or consolidate that bias. Such bias can be introduced by the knower making the claim, or the evidence used to support the claim. In most cases there is probably an interrelationship between the two. Object 2 describes how biased knowers were able to misrepresent evidence in order to support the claim that climate change was not happening, and was a falsification constructed by climate scientists (Grundmann). That this claim was given disproportionate coverage in the media is an example of the file drawer problem. As such, object to shows that the intentions, or biases, of claimants is integral to our acceptance or doubt of claims.
Justification for the inclusion of object 2.
Object two is included because it demonstrates the difficulty of removing doubt, and establishing certainty, when considering a claim. To make a claim a knower must have some intention, and such intention could be understood as bias, prejudgment, or prejudice. however with object two we are claiming that intention strike bias is grounds on which two doubt a claim. objective shows that we must approach claims with a healthy, but open, scepticism. such scepticism should be informed by a wide range of knowledge that we can bring from elsewhere pertaining to the original claim.
Object 2: 306 words
Object 3: A photo of defendants in the Theranos Trial (2022)
Photo Credit: (Wile)
Link between Object 3 and the prompt.
Object three is a photograph of defendants in the Theranos financial scandal in USA 2022. Theranos claimed that it had invented a special rapid blood test requiring a very small amount of blood using a small portable testing device. It was claimed that the test could detect a wide range of diseases. Both of these claims were later proven to be false. That no other scientific company had managed to invent such a device led people to question the claims. As such object three demonstrates that unsubstantiated and untested methods of knowledge production are grounds on which to doubt a claim.
Link between object 3 and knowledge claim 3.
The remarkable, and highly innovative, claims that Theranos were making regarding scientific testing produced great excitement amongst the investor community and led to significant financial investment. The development of new knowledge, and new technology, can lead to greater human productivity, and therefore naturally invites financial investment. However, object three demonstrates that claims to such innovation alone are grounds on which to doubt a claim. Such claims are not necessarily unfounded, but when they are unique, they represent at least grounds for doubt. triangulation of such claims with evidence and other knowledge producers can increase the certainty of knowledge for such claims.
Justification for the inclusion of object 3.
Object three is included because it shows the problem of integration of new knowledge into a pre-existing knowledge framework. Just because we doubt a claim based on its methodology, or the uniqueness of that methodology, does not necessarily mean that the claim is unfounded. However, Object 3 shows that external factors (such as money) can lead knowledge producers to misrepresent the methodology producing evidence supporting the claim, or the claim itself. Object 3 shows that transparency of the methodology of knowledge production is essential when making a new claim.
Object 3: 291 words
Total Exhibition Commentary: 953 words
Works Cited
“BBC One - The Trick.” BBC, 2021, https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0010s10. Accessed 24 April 2023.
Boyle, Alan. “Evolution debate plays out on creationism's home turf.” NBC News, 4 February 2014, https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/evolution-debate-plays-out-creationisms-home-turf-flna2d12044727. Accessed 24 April 2023.
Grundmann, Reiner. “Climatic Research Unit email controversy.” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy. Accessed 24 April 2023.
Wile, Rob. “Theranos lab head confirms testimony in Elizabeth Holmes case.” NBC News, 17 October 2022, https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/theranos-lab-director-confirms-testimony-elizabeth-holmes-rcna52316. Accessed 24 April 2023.
Check out other ToK Exhibition resources that may be of interest to you: