What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge ?
Get LOTS more help with this prompt from the e-book What is the relationship between personal experience & knowledge? explained
Only €5 (US$5.30) this e-book has detailed explanations of knowledge claims, and suggestions for objects that could be used.
Available for immediate download (get help now, no waiting around for email replies).
This is just an example of a commentary for the ToK Exhibition prompt "What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge ?".
A video overview of this commentary can be found at this link.
Exhibition Commentary Structure.
I recommend using this structure for writing the commentary for each object (in the prompt "What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge ?".
ToK Concepts should only be included if they're relevant, don't 'force' them in for the sake of using them.
'Evidence' can be citing evidence, a newspaper article, or details about the object itself. There should not be a separate evidence section at the end, just weave the 'evidence' into the commentary.
The overall ToK Exhibition Commentary structure is shown below.
Knowledge Claims for exploring the relationship between personal experience and knowledge.
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:
Personal experiences can stimulate the systematic production of knowledge by the knower.
Knowledge Claim 2:
Personal experience can challenge the pre-existing knowledge of the knower.
Knowledge Claim 3:
Knowledge can significantly extend the personal experiences of the knower.
Object one: A carbon filament bulb made by Thomas Edison
Photo Credit: Terren, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
Link between real world context of object one and the prompt.
Object one is one of the first incandescent carbon filament bulbs produced by Thomas Edison in Menlo Park, NJ, USA 1878. Reputedly, Thomas Edison started research on improving the electric bulbs of the late 19th century after seeing a train station gaslight exploding, which caused a fire. This experience sparked his interest in creating a safer and more efficient lighting system. He conducted extensive research and experiments to develop the first commercially successful incandescent light bulb (Edison). The personal experience of seeing a gas bulb explode led him to create new knowledge about light bulbs.
Link between object one and Knowledge claim one.
Light bulbs were already in existence in the late 1870’s before, it is reported that Edison experienced a gaslight exploding, leading to his subsequent research. However, Edison was motivated to systematically produce new knowledge because of his personal experience with the exploding gas light (“Who Invented the lightbulb?”).
The process of systematic knowledge production would take several years of research and experimentation. Edison's approach was to test hundreds of different materials for their suitability as a filament, the part of the light bulb that produces light when heated by an electrical current (“Who Invented the lightbulb?”).
As such, the individualised, subjective, experience of seeing a gaslight explode was translated by Edison into a process of knowledge production involving the scientific method (deductive reasoning), trial and error learning, and inductive reasoning. This shows that personal experiences can lead to the systematic, structured and methodical production of knowledge.
Justification for the inclusion of object one.
The improvement and standardisation of the incandescent electric light bulb undertaken by Thomas Edison had significant implications for both the continued development of the use of electricity in domestic settings, and the realisation of the utilisation of electricity in domestic goods. As such, Edison’s personal experience was significant for knowledge production in the Natural Sciences, Human Sciences, Mathematics and The Arts.
Object 1 : 290 words
Object 2: The book The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker.
Photo credit: Candidate’s own photograph.
Link between real world context of object two and the prompt.
When I first read the book The Language Instinct by Steven Pinker (Pinker) it challenged many of my fundamental beliefs about language acquisition, and the aetiology of wider human characteristics. My reflection on the book led me to later change many of these pre-existing beliefs. In this example such beliefs represented knowledge. As such the experience of reading the book led me to change my knowledge. As such the book demonstrates that personal experiences can challenge, and subsequently change pre-existing beliefs.
Link between object two and knowledge claim two.
Before reading The Language Instinct, at the age of 23, I strongly believed that human behaviours (such as language) are acquired through social interaction, i.e. they are “socially constructed”. In the book Dr Pinker argues that drive to acquire knowledge is a nativist, and instinctive, i.e. biological and relatively independent of social construction. This perspective directly challenged my pre-existing knowledge and beliefs.
After reading the book I reflected upon the evidence presented by Dr Pinker, the arguments developed, and the weaknesses indicated in my pre-existing knowledge. I discussed the book with a number of people who both supported Dr Pinker’s argument, and with those who disagreed with the nativist perspective. As a result of this reflection I changed my pre-existing beliefs and perspective so that they were more closely aligned with Dr Pinker’s.
As such object two demonstrates that personal experiences (such as reading a book, and discussing it with others) can challenge, and change, pre-existing beliefs.
Justification for the inclusion of object two.
I have included object 2 because my pre-existing beliefs on the social construction of human behaviours were very strong before I read Dr Pinker’s book. I could not envisage the impact that the experience of reflection upon the book would have had on my pre-existing perspective based knowledge. Object 2 is not just included because contradictory knowledge and experiences can change pre-existing knowledge, but that it was the experience of reflection of encountering contrasting knowledge which had such a significant effect on my pre-existing knowledge.
Object 2: 315 words
Object 3: A Programme for The Edinburgh Festival 1988
Photo Credit: Candidate’s own photograph
Link between real world context of object three and the prompt.
Object 3 is a programme for The Edinburgh International Arts Festival 1988, I appeared in a theatre production at this festival with The National Youth Theatre of the United Kingdom. Taking part in the festival was a significant personal experience which was realised through the knowledge of my high school drama teacher. My drama teacher knew about the audition process for the company of The National Youth Theatre, and she knew how to coach me for the auditions. She had detailed knowledge which significantly extended my personal experiences.
Link between object three and knowledge claim three.
We often consider how our personal experiences can lead to the development of new knowledge. Often this new knowledge is produced by and for others. However, object 3 shows how the knowledge of others can significantly impact our personal experiences. Such external knowledge can be systematic, standardised and specialised. The systematic nature of this external knowledge differentiates it from the subjectivity of the personal experiences that we may derive as a product of such knowledge. When such knowledge is not known to us but changes our experiences its impact can be even greater than knowledge that is known to us.The use of this knowledge by another person to shape our personal experiences can extend those experiences beyond that which we would have originally imagined, or expected, because of the secondary nature of the knowledge of the other. At 17 yrs old I did not know about the National Youth Theatre. Further, if I had known about it I would not have known how to develop a qualifying audition. My personal experiences (of the youth theatre) depended upon the knowledge of my drama teacher.
Justification for the inclusion of object three.
Object three is specifically included because the knowledge of my high school drama teacher was quite beyond my knowledge, and personal experiences at the time. The object demonstrates a reversal in the conventional relationship between personal experience and knowledge (the former leading to the latter). Further, object 3 shows how the specialist systemic knowledge of others influences both the personal experiences of other knowers, and their subsequent development of further systemic knowledge.
Object 3: 340 words
Total: 945 words
Works Cited
Edison, Thomas. “Thomas Edison.” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison. Accessed 26 April 2023.
Pinker, Steven. The language instinct. W. Morrow and Company, 1994.
“Who Invented the lightbulb?” Live Science, 2 November 2022, https://www.livescience.com/43424-who-invented-the-light-bulb.html. Accessed 26 April 2023.