ToK Exhibition Prompt 11: Can New Knowledge Change Established Values or Beliefs?

Exploring ToK Exhibition Prompt 11: “Can new knowledge change established values or beliefs?” reveals interesting questions about the nature of knowledge, values, and beliefs. In this blog post, we explore three knowledge arguments, each illustrated by a specific object, to provide a comprehensive approach to answering this prompt. This method can help you to develop a structured and insightful ToK Exhibition for Prompt #11.

Understanding the Prompt

Prompt 11 poses several critical questions: How long must values and beliefs be around to be considered ‘established’? How many people must subscribe to them for these values to be ‘established’? And how many people must adopt new values for them to be considered ‘changed’? By addressing these questions, we can develop focused knowledge arguments, knowledge questions, and knowledge issues.

Knowledge Argument 1: Scientific Beliefs and New Knowledge

Object 1: Photo of the Sinosauropteryx Fossil

Knowledge Argument: New knowledge can modify established beliefs if those beliefs are primarily scientific.

Explanation: The discovery of the Sinosauropteryx fossil in 1996 significantly altered scientific beliefs about dinosaur skin. Previously, it was widely accepted that dinosaurs had scaly, reptilian skin. However, the Sinosauropteryx fossil displayed feather-like structures, providing the first concrete proof that some dinosaurs had feathers. This revelation reshaped the perception of dinosaur appearance and behaviour, suggesting a closer evolutionary relationship between dinosaurs and birds.

Commentary: Prior to this discovery, over 800 species of dinosaurs had been identified, establishing the belief in scaly dinosaur skin. The Sinosauropteryx finding challenged and changed this belief. Scientific knowledge is inherently subject to continuous testing and examination. If new evidence contradicts previous assumptions, those assumptions must be adapted or changed. This deductive and inductive nature of scientific knowledge makes it susceptible to change, increasing its reliability and objectivity. As such, new evidence is likely to change established beliefs if those beliefs are scientific.

Knowledge Argument 2: Identity and New Knowledge

Object 2: Research Paper by Leon Festinger on Cognitive Dissonance

Knowledge Argument: New knowledge is less likely to change established values or beliefs if those values or beliefs are directly related to personal primary knowledge such as identity.

Explanation: Festinger’s 1962 research on cognitive dissonance explored a group believing in an impending extraterrestrial visitation. When the event did not occur, instead of abandoning their beliefs, the group adjusted adjacent causal beliefs. They rationalised the non-arrival of extraterrestrials as a result of their preparations. Festinger argued that the group’s identity within their knowledge community prevented them from changing their core beliefs. As such, new knowledge is less likely to change values and beliefs if those values and beliefs are concerned with identity.

Commentary: Values and beliefs tied to personal identity are deeply ingrained. New knowledge that contradicts these values represents a threat to one’s identity, leading individuals to find alternative explanations rather than change their beliefs. This example illustrates that new knowledge is not always a unified concept; different individuals may interpret it differently, making it more complex and inconsistent.

Knowledge Argument 3: Secondary Knowledge and New Knowledge

Object 3: 2021 Newspaper Article on Gerald Ratner’s Comments

Knowledge Argument: New knowledge is highly likely to change established values or beliefs if those values or beliefs pertain to secondary knowledge largely unrelated to identity.

Explanation: In 1991, Gerald Ratner, owner of Ratners jewellers, disparaged his own products as “crap.” Despite being the most successful jewellery business in the UK, Ratners collapsed as consumers deserted the stores following his comments.

Commentary: This example shows that values and beliefs arising from secondary knowledge—knowledge acquired through secondary sources rather than direct experience—are more open to change. Ratner’s remarks led consumers to reassess their values about Ratners jewellers. Since these values were not tied to personal identity, they were more easily changed.

Conclusion

In conclusion, addressing ToK Exhibition Prompt 11 involves understanding the nature of knowledge and its impact on established values and beliefs. Scientific beliefs are more susceptible to change due to their reliance on continuous evidence. In contrast, beliefs tied to personal identity are resistant to change, as they form a core part of an individual’s self-concept. Secondary knowledge, however, is more flexible and subject to change.

These are just examples of some of the many ways that you can approach this prompt. There are many, equally valid, possibly better, ways to answer this prompt. For more resources and detailed explanations click here: you can find guides, e-books, and coaching services to help you excel in your ToK Exhibition.

If you found this blog post helpful, please share it and subscribe to the site (it’s free) for more ToK insights and tips.

Stay TokTastic!
Daniel, Sesimbra, July 2024