What’s the Point of the Optional Themes in ToK?

After teaching the most recent iteration of the ToK course a few times I have started to ask What’s the point of the Optional Themes in ToK? Given that these themes are not formally assessed, it can seem like they require additional work for little tangible reward. So, what role do these Optional Themes really play, and should students and ToK Teachers give them serious attention?

This blogpost is accompanied by the video linked here, and below.

The Origins of the Question

This question isn’t just a random musing; it arises from practical experience in teaching ToK. Recently, I explored different models for structuring the ToK course, including a preferred sequencing method that I’ve used for years. One detail that sparked discussion was my choice to teach one of the Optional Themes after students have completed their Exhibition. Traditionally, the International Baccalaureate (IB) recommends that students base their Exhibition on one of the Optional Themes, as this is believed to make it easier for students to see how ToK concepts manifest in the world.

However, I’ve found that adhering strictly to this recommendation might not always be beneficial. Let me explain why.

The Role of Optional Themes in the Exhibition

The IB suggests that linking the Exhibition to an Optional Theme can bring coherence and clarity to the task. However, my experience has shown that this approach sometimes adds unnecessary complexity for students. The Exhibition already demands that students choose a prompt and justify the inclusion of three objects, each linked to that prompt. Adding an Optional Theme into the mix can further confuse students, who are already trying to navigate the nuances of the Exhibition requirements.

It’s important to note that the Exhibition Assessment Instrument doesn’t credit students for integrating an Optional Theme. The focus is on the justification of each object, which is where students can demonstrate their understanding of knowledge and its applications. These justifications, in my view, benefit more from a solid grasp of Areas of Knowledge (AoKs) than from the Optional Themes. The AoKs provide students with the necessary tools to understand how knowledge is created and why it matters, which is crucial for crafting strong justifications.

So, What’s the Point of the Optional Themes?

Given that Optional Themes don’t directly contribute to the formal assessment, why should they matter? First, it’s essential to clarify that I am not against the Optional Themes. On the contrary, I find them incredibly valuable and enriching. Themes like Knowledge & Language, Knowledge & Technology, and Knowledge & Politics offer students a broader perspective on how knowledge interacts with different aspects of our lives.

For example, the Knowledge & Language theme, inspired by Wittgenstein’s philosophy, could arguably be a compulsory element of ToK, given its deep relevance to understanding knowledge itself. Knowledge & Technology is another highly relevant theme in our so-called technological age, provoking debates about whether we are genuinely living in such an era or merely perceiving it that way.

However, despite their richness, these themes are not required for either the Exhibition or the Essay. Students can achieve top marks without ever referencing an Optional Theme, which raises a broader question about the function of assessment in ToK.

The Current Function of Assessment in ToK

The evolution of ToK assessment has significantly influenced how the course is taught. Those of us who have been involved in ToK for over 15 years will remember a time when the course was more exploratory and less tightly bound by assessment criteria. Back then, ToK was not a pass-fail condition for the Diploma Programme (DP), allowing for more open-ended, creative approaches, including ToK drama and even dance pieces.

Since ToK became a pass-fail condition, the emphasis has shifted towards reliability in assessment, which, while important, has narrowed the scope for exploration and reflection. This shift has, in a sense, “un-ToKed” ToK, stripping away some of the course’s original spirit.

Has ToK “un-Toked”

itself?

A Possible Way Forward

When the IB made ToK and the Extended Essay (EE) pass-fail conditions, it was to ensure that schools delivered these core elements properly. Whilst this intention is valid, the unintended consequence has been a more rigid approach to teaching ToK. Perhaps a better solution would be for the IB to place the responsibility for core delivery on schools rather than students. If a school is found lacking in its delivery of ToK, this should be addressed in the school’s evaluation report, with appropriate follow-up.

In such a scenario, the Optional Themes would have a clearer purpose: enriching students’ understanding of ToK without the pressure of pass-fail assessment. This would allow teachers to take a more open-ended, exploratory approach to the course, ultimately benefiting students’ overall grasp of Theory of Knowledge.

Conclusion

The Optional Themes in ToK might not contribute directly to formal assessments, but they are far from pointless. They offer students an opportunity to explore how knowledge interacts with different facets of life, enriching their understanding of the world. Whilst the current assessment model may not fully reflect the value of these themes, they remain a useful part of the ToK experience, helping students to see the broader implications of what they learn.

In the end, the point of the Optional Themes may not be about assessment at all, but rather about expanding the horizons of students’ thinking—a goal that lies at the very heart of ToK.

Please feel free to contact me with thoughts, suggestions, or requests for support: Daniel@TokToday.com.

Skills in ToK

The following blogpost can be watched as a video here, and below.

Skills in TOK: Why They Matter More Than You Think

If you’ve been following TOK Today for a while, you’ll know that I have a particular interest, perhaps even a slight obsession, with the role of skills in TOK. Today’s post is both an appeal for your involvement and an exploration of why these skills are crucial for success in the TOK course.

The Importance of Skills in TOK

Over my 17–18 years of teaching TOK, I’ve come to realise that the skills required for this course are more important than any other aspect. TOK is fundamentally a skills-based course. The content we’re required to cover is minimal—essentially a set of bullet points or headings. The interpretation of these headings is largely left to the educator, which brings us to the importance of skills.

The TOK study guide mentions the word “skills” 12 times, frequently referring to ATL (Approaches to Teaching and Learning) skills. These skills are crucial across all areas of the IB Diploma Programme, but they aren’t specific enough to address how students can excel in TOK, nor how to enhance their learning in ToK. This is why I believe we need a dedicated TOK skills diagram—something that is specifically designed to guide students in TOK.

Why We Need a TOK Skills Diagram

A few years ago, I began developing a TOK skills diagram, starting with the Thailand TOK Teachers Network. Their contributions were invaluable in identifying the key skills necessary for TOK. Following this, the Hong Kong Teachers TOK Network, along with the Pearl River Delta Teachers TOK Network, also provided significant input. The result is a comprehensive TOK skills diagram that highlights a wide range of essential skills.

Download the PDF version of the skills diagram at this link

The diagram summarises crucial areas such as identifying knowledge characteristics, formulating knowledge claims, and engaging in personal, emotional, and interpersonal interactions. Additionally, it covers reading and writing, evaluation, interpretation, analysis, and identifying knowledge issues. Each of these categories encompasses a family of skills that are critical for mastering TOK.

Download the PDF version of Skills Summary Diagram at this link.

Using the TOK Skills Diagram in Teaching

This TOK skills diagram is not just theoretical; it’s a practical tool that you can use to plan your lessons. By aligning your teaching with this diagram, you’ll help students develop the skills they need to excel in TOK. Too often, I see TOK lessons that focus heavily on delivering high-quality content without enough emphasis on how students engage with that content. It’s not just about what they learn, but how they learn it—how they interact with, explore, and understand the material.

There’s a concerning trend where students are bombarded with high-level content like TED Talks, academic journals, and articles that might be more suited to university-level study. While these resources are valuable, they don’t necessarily improve students’ learning in TOK. Instead, we should focus on developing their skills. Once students have a strong skill set, they can choose the content that best supports their understanding.

Get Involved: Help Us Develop a Better TOK Skills Diagram

Whilst the IB has yet to provide a comprehensive TOK skills diagram, we’re not waiting for them to catch up. The current diagram is a work in progress—what some might call a “dog’s dinner”—but it’s a start. You can download this version for free from this blogpost. If you have ideas for improving it, I’d love to hear from you (Daniel@TokToday.com)

Whether through comments on this post, an email, or a message on our Facebook page, your contributions are invaluable. Let’s collaborate with TOK experts, new teachers, and anyone passionate about this subject to refine this diagram. Together, we can create a tool that truly enhances TOK learning and helps students achieve better grades.

Final Thoughts

I often hear from colleagues who want to increase the ToK grades that are awarded to their students. Focussing on the development of skills not only improves student learning, but can also reduce the stress of preparation of content for ToK lessons.

How to Structure ToK Course: The Skills+ Model

This is the fourth blogpost (4/4) in our series on how to structure the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) course. In this post we look at using the Skills+ Model. As ToK teachers, we often seek innovative ways to engage our students and make the learning process both effective and enjoyable. This approach integrates essential ToK skills with inquiry, co-construction, and self-reflection, providing a dynamic and holistic learning experience.

This blogpost can be watched as a video here, or below.

The Skills+ Model: An Overview

The Skills+ Model is designed to focus on the development of key ToK skills through short, interactive activities that encourage movement and collaboration among students. This method not only makes learning more engaging but also enhances retention and understanding of the course material.

Identifying and Developing ToK Skills

The first step in the Skills+ Model is to identify a set of ToK skills you want to develop in each lesson or group of lessons. These skills could include critical thinking, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis, among others. IB are yet to identify ToK specific skills beyond the cross-subject ATLs, however we have been working on our own ToKToday ToK Skills diagrams that can be used for designing teaching.

Each lesson should feature short activities, lasting no more than 15 minutes, that target these skills. Ideally, these activities should involve students moving around the classroom or school, making the learning process more dynamic and interactive. Fun, competitive, and collaborative elements can further enhance these activities.

Mapping Activities to the ToK Curriculum

To effectively integrate these activities into your ToK curriculum, start by teaching the core theme, followed by the five Areas of Knowledge (AoKs). One of the optional themes, usually Language & Knowledge, can be incorporated into all five AoKs. The Exhibition is taught at the end of Year 1, while the second optional theme, often Technology & Knowledge, is introduced at the beginning of Year 2, during the period when students are waiting for the Essay titles to be published. This sequence ensures a comprehensive coverage of the curriculum while keeping the students engaged.

The Structure of ToK Lessons

ToK lessons should consist of a series of short, fast-paced, and fun activities. These can include writing songs, devising short drama pieces, engaging in round-table debates, presenting Pecha Kucha’s, and sketching art. Each activity should focus on developing a particular skill and be anchored in the core theme, an AoK, or an optional theme of ToK.

Why the Skills+ Model Works

Emphasis on ToK Skills

ToK is fundamentally a skills-based course with minimal prescribed content. Success in the ToK Exhibition and Essay relies heavily on the mastery of specific skills. While the IB does not explicitly describe these skills, at ToKToday, we have developed a ToK Skills Diagram to help guide your teaching. This diagram is available for free; you can find the link in the video description.

Enhancing Student Engagement

Students often perceive ToK as a compulsory subject rather than an exciting opportunity to explore knowledge. The Skills+ Model aims to shift this perspective by making ToK something they want to do. By focusing on their emotional orientation towards the subject, we can design the course in a way that is both appealing and motivating for students.

Differentiating ToK from Other Diploma Classes

ToK should stand out from other Diploma subjects, which often involve extensive reading and sedentary classroom activities. By making ToK lessons more dynamic and physically engaging, we can create a distinct and appealing learning environment. This differentiation not only enhances student participation but also improves overall learning outcomes.

In conclusion, the Skills+ Model offers a structured yet flexible approach to teaching ToK. By focusing on the development of key skills through interactive and engaging activities, we can create a vibrant learning environment that encourages students to actively participate and excel in their ToK studies.

For more insights and detailed strategies on teaching the ToK Essay, stay tuned for our upcoming course: Teach the ToK Essay in 12 Lessons.

How to structure the ToK Course 3/4: Themes & Big Questions Approach

This is the third of four blogposts  on models for structuring the ToK Course (earlier posts are linked below). In this model we look at The Themes & Big Questions Approach

This blogpost can be watched as a video here, and below.

Model #1: ToK Curriculum Framework Model linked here.
Model #2: ToK Concepts & Knowledge Questions Model linked here.

How to Structure the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Course: ToK Big Questions (Part 3)

The “Themes & Big Questions” approach offers an engaging way to unpack the ToK syllabus using philosophical themes and overarching questions. This method, often referred to as the ToK Big Questions model, is a powerful tool for teaching ToK, offering a holistic and interdisciplinary approach to learning.

The Themes Approach

The Themes approach involves taking classic philosophical themes and embedding ToK Knowledge Questions or ToK Structures within those themes. For example, the theme of Justice can be explored within the Areas of Knowledge (AoKs) such as Human Sciences or History, and linked to the core unit of The Knower and Knowledge Communities. Knowledge questions for this theme might include:

• Is the truth what the majority of people accept?

• How do empathy and imagination help us to understand other perspectives?

• If moral claims conflict, does it follow that all views are equally acceptable?

• Is it unfair to judge people and actions in the past by the standards of today?

• Should terms such as “atrocity” or “hero” be used when writing about history, or should value judgments be avoided?

• Do historians have a moral responsibility to try to ensure that history is not misused and distorted by people for their own ends?

The Big Questions Approach

Similarly, the Big Questions approach involves using significant philosophical or liberal arts questions as a means to explore ToK content. For example, we might pose the Big Question: Can we know things beyond our personal immediate experience? This question can then be broken down into structured and scaffolded learning experiences, such as text analysis, debates, and presentations. A guided inquiry might incorporate relevant ToK concepts like Evidence, Certainty, and Truth, with students designing their own solutions based on clear success criteria drawn from Exhibition and Essay guidelines.

Advantages of the Themes & Big Questions Approach

1. Open-ended Design: This approach promotes an open-ended design of learning, allowing students to bring their personal experiences, interests, and knowledge into the inquiry. It fosters autonomy in choosing learning resources and utilising them effectively, encouraging a blend of group and individual learning and reflection. This autonomy helps build skills crucial for the Exhibition component of the ToK course.

2. Holistic and Interdisciplinary: The Themes & Big Questions model is intrinsically interdisciplinary, facilitating the integration of various AoKs, core themes, and optional themes. When executed well, this approach enables students to develop a cohesive understanding of ToK, connecting it seamlessly to real-world contexts. It helps students identify and explore ToK issues in practical, meaningful ways.

Challenges of the Themes & Big Questions Approach

While the Themes & Big Questions approach is exceptionally powerful, it also presents significant challenges. When poorly executed, it can be more detrimental than any other model, as it requires the teacher to make clear connections between the real-world contexts and ToK content. Without these connections, students may struggle to grasp ToK concepts, leading to confusion and a lack of ToK knowledge.

This model demands competent and knowledgeable teachers with adequate time to plan and deliver the curriculum. It requires sufficient ToK teaching time, preferably more than the recommended minimum, and ideally small, mixed-ability classes or highly able students capable of making conceptual leaps. This approach is best suited for able Diploma Programme students taught by experienced, well-trained teachers in well-resourced schools.

Conclusion

The Themes & Big Questions approach offers a dynamic and interdisciplinary way to teach ToK, fostering deep engagement and a holistic understanding of knowledge. However, it requires careful planning, skilled teaching, and adequate resources to be effective.

Thank you for reading the third part of our series on structuring the ToK course. Stay tuned for the next instalment, where we’ll explore my preferred model for designing the ToK curriculum. Don’t forget to share your thoughts in the comments below and subscribe to the site (free!) for more insights.

Stay Tok-Tastic,
Daniel, Lisbon, July 2024

How to structure the ToK Course 2/4: ToK Concepts & Knowledge Questions Model

This is the second of four blogposts on models for structuring the ToK Course (the first post is linked here). In this model we look at The ToK Concepts and Knowledge Questions Model.

This blogpost can be viewed as a video here, and below.

This model can be summarised as:

Focus on ToK Concepts not on AoKs.

This model structures the course around the 12 ToK concepts, and uses knowledge questions as prompts to explore those concepts. You could use the knowledge questions found in the IB ToK Subject guide, or devise your own KQs . Examples of units of work using this model can be found here. This particular unit takes the concepts of Truth, Justification and Perspective and looks at them through 2 Knowledge Questions, one from AoK The Arts and one from AoK History.

The first advantage of this model is that it draws on concepts, it is inherently interdisciplinary, and gives a far more coherent understanding of ToK. By focusing the planning around the concept this model enables a far clearer integration of, and transition between, the real world context and the more abstracted world of ToK.

Another advantage of this model is that it encourages teacher-student co-construction of the ToK course lends itself more easily to the inquiry approach to learning. Using concepts as the planning focus is far more open ended than using the ToK Framework, or even knowledge questions. By using concepts students are compelled to at least select relevant knowledge questions, and in many cases students will write their own knowledge questions. This then leads on to students identifying real world contexts for the exploration of their KQs, application of the Knowledge Framework and a greater range of perspectives in the answers produced than might be seen from the previous model. I like to use a rough approximation of Kolb’s Learning Cycle when designing lessons using this model (more on this in later posts). Kolb’s LC lends itself to an active enquiry approach which builds ToK Skills and IB Learner Profile Qualities.

The ToK classroom should be a busy place of movement, noise and activity. A marketplace, an ideas marketplace.

- Daniel Trump

The disadvantages of this model becomes apparent if the model of inquiry is too loosely defined, or stage-posting is not clear enough for students. There is a danger with this model that students don’t actually engage with ToK at all, it is very easy to get bogged down with the real world contexts being considered. This is particularly the case with a poorly designed model of inquiry which does not adequately ‘guide’ the student to consider knowledge claims, knowledge issues, nor the ToK framework. There are also potential problems with syllabus coverage arising from this model (students should learn 5 AoKs and a minimum of 2 optional themes).

In summary, The ToK Concepts & knowledge Questions model is very powerful when used by an experienced ToK teacher, or a teacher who is highly skilled at developing inquiry led learning models. In the next two blog posts I will consider developments that attempt to deal with some of the drawbacks of this model.

Stay Tok-Tastic my friends!,
Daniel, Alentejo, Portugal, July 2024

How to Structure the ToK course – #1/4 ToK Curriculum Framework

This is the first in a four part series on structuring the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) course. In this first blog, we’ll explore one of the most popular ways to design your ToK curriculum: structuring according to the ToK Curriculum Framework.

This blogpost can also be watched as a video at this link.

The ToK Curriculum Framework model is the most straightforward approach to structuring your ToK course. It simply involves spending a designated period teaching each of the five Areas of Knowledge (AOKs) and the two optional themes. This approach ensures you leave time for the crucial assessment components: the exhibition and the essay.

Advantages of the ToK Curriculum framework model

1. its clarity makes it easy to plan and ensures complete curriculum coverage.

2. The structure aligns well with the Knowledge Framework, aiding in the teaching of the essay by drawing clear links between knowledge questions and the framework itself.

3. The standalone nature of the optional themes, like ‘Knowledge and Technology’, fits seamlessly into this model.

4. It is particularly suitable for teachers who are new to ToK or less confident in their approach.

5. It’s a great way to build students’ confidence in their essay writing skills, as the model emphasises the connection between the framework and knowledge questions.

Disadvantages of the ToK Curriculum framework model

1. This model can become content-focused rather than skill-focused, potentially neglecting the skill development inherent to other models.

2. The emphasis on AOKs can sometimes overshadow the development of critical thinking and analysis skills.

3. This approach might limit student autonomy and engagement. It often places the teacher in the role of the expert, delivering subject-specific knowledge, which can detract from co-construction and active student participation.

4. This model can lead to comments from teachers such as  ‘we don’t have enough time to cover the ToK curriculum’ and result in students feeling confused or disengaged with ToK.”

In summary, while the ToK Curriculum Framework model is clear and easy to implement, it can become content-heavy and less focused on skill development. It’s crucial to balance delivering the curriculum with engaging students in active learning and critical thinking.

In the next blogpost we’ll explore The ToK Concepts & Knowledge Questions model for designing your ToK curriculum. If you have requests, suggestions or comments please let me know at Daniel@TokToday.com.

Stay Toktastic!
Daniel, Alentejo coast, Portugal,
July 2024

A little favour

Please could I ask all ToK students and teachers who have used TokToday resources to give me some feedback using the survey below (it will take no more than 2 minutes). It doesn’t matter whether you have only used the free resources, or if you have bought resources, I would love your feedback.

Many thanks to all who have already completed the survey, the feedback is invaluable. Your comments and suggestions will really help me to improve the resources in the future.

How to evaluate AoK Human Sciences

When writing the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay students are asked to evaluate their main knowledge claims. Today’s post looks at the main evaluation points that can be applied to most knowledge claims made in Area of Knowledge (AoK) Human Sciences. Obviously, these evaluations points would need to be considered in terms of the specific claims made in an essay. This is the second in a five part series looking at evaluation points for each of the 5 Areas of Knowledge. The first post, How to evaluate in AoK Natural Sciences, is linked here.

This blogpost (evaluation in Human Sciences) can be watched as a video at this link.

The human sciences consider the complexities of human behaviour and societies. Evaluating human science knowledge involves understanding the unique challenges and limitations inherent in studying humans using the scientific method. Here, we explore four critical evaluation points: researcher and participant reactivity, operationalising and measuring human behaviours, establishing causation, and applying models in real-world environments.

1. Problems of Researcher and Participant Reactivity

One significant challenge in human sciences is the issue of reactivity, which can impact both researchers and participants. Researcher reactivity occurs when researchers’ expectations or behaviours influence the study’s outcome. This can introduce bias, undermining the study’s validity. Participant reactivity, often known as the Hawthorne effect, happens when participants alter their behaviour because they know they are being observed. This can skew the results, making it difficult to draw accurate conclusions about natural behaviours. To mitigate these effects, researchers use techniques like double-blind studies and unobtrusive observation, but completely eliminating reactivity remains challenging.

2. Problems of Operationalising and Measuring Human Behaviours

Operationalising and measuring human behaviours, particularly emotions, presents another set of challenges. Human emotions are complex and multifaceted, making them difficult to quantify accurately. Researchers must develop operational definitions that translate abstract concepts into measurable variables. For instance, defining and measuring happiness might involve self-report surveys, physiological measures, or behavioural observations. Each method has limitations, such as subjective biases in self-reports or the potential invasiveness of physiological measures. Ensuring reliability and validity in these measurements is an ongoing struggle, as capturing the full essence of human experiences in empirical terms is inherently challenging.

3. Problems of Establishing Causation

Establishing causation in the human sciences is particularly problematic, especially when correlation designs are used. Correlational studies identify relationships between variables but do not establish cause and effect. For example, a study might find a correlation between social media use and anxiety, but this does not prove that social media use causes anxiety. There could be underlying variables influencing both factors. Experimental designs, which can better establish causation, are often difficult to implement due to ethical considerations and the complexity of controlling variables in human contexts. Consequently, many findings in the human sciences remain tentative and open to interpretation.

4. Problems of Applying Models in a Real-World Environment

Applying theoretical models to real-world environments also poses significant challenges. Models in the human sciences are simplifications of complex realities, often based on controlled experimental conditions. When these models are applied to the real world, the variability and unpredictability of human behaviour can lead to unexpected outcomes. For example, economic models predicting consumer behaviour might fail to account for cultural differences or individual psychological factors. This discrepancy highlights the limitations of models and the need for continuous adaptation and refinement to better reflect real-world complexities.

In conclusion, evaluating human science knowledge requires a nuanced understanding of these critical points. By examining researcher and participant reactivity, the difficulties in measuring human behaviours, the challenges of establishing causation, and the limitations of applying models in real-world environments, you can develop more sophisticated evaluations of knowledge and knowledge production in the human sciences.

If you need more help with your ToK Essay check out the services available linked here.

If you need help with your ToK Exhibition check out the services available linked here.

What is a Knowledge Argument?

Recently, whilst coaching a student on his Theory of Knowledge (ToK) essay, I realised he was unfamiliar with the term “knowledge argument.” He hadn’t encountered the term "knowledge claim" or "knowledge issue" either, which are often used interchangeably. His candid admission highlighted a common gap in understanding, so I thought it apposite to look at the essentials: what is a knowledge argument?

Understanding the Knowledge Argument

A knowledge argument is a statement about how knowledge is created, received, interpreted, or justified.

In ToK, a knowledge argument is a statement about how knowledge is created, received, interpreted, or justified. These arguments are also referred to as knowledge issues, knowledge questions, or knowledge claims. They all centre on the same concept: a statement about knowledge itself.

Examples in ToK Prompts

All ToK Exhibition and Essay prompts are essentially knowledge arguments or questions. For instance, consider Exhibition prompt #25: “How can we distinguish between knowledge, belief, and opinion?” This is a classic knowledge question. Similarly, Exhibition prompt #2: “Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?” also falls into this category. (This also happens to be the easiest ToK Exhibition prompt: click here for more details)

Essay titles follow the same pattern. For example:

• Q#5 May 2024: “Do we need Custodians of Knowledge?”

• Q#1 November 2023: “Are facts alone enough to prove a claim?”

These prompts are all questions about knowledge, even if they don’t explicitly mention the word "knowledge." They focus on exploring and understanding knowledge in various contexts.

The Importance of Knowledge Arguments

You might wonder why it’s crucial to understand and write knowledge arguments when the IB provides these questions anyway. The key is not just writing these arguments but also being able to explore and unpack them.

Example: Custodians of Knowledge

Take the question from May 2024: “Do we need Custodians of Knowledge?” To answer it, we need to break it down into smaller knowledge questions:

1. What is a Custodian of Knowledge?

2. What needs might they fulfil?

Focusing on the second question—what needs might Custodians of Knowledge fulfil?—we realise that in the context of ToK, these needs will be related to knowledge. Thus, we can derive several smaller knowledge questions:

• Do Custodians of Knowledge preserve and protect existing knowledge?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge identify and maintain knowledge gatekeepers?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge define and describe the methodology of knowledge production?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge define legitimate evidence of knowledge?

These smaller knowledge questions help us to explore and answer the broader question effectively.

Practical Application

By learning to write and explore knowledge questions, you can better address the big knowledge questions posed in the ToK Exhibition or Essay prompts. This skill is straightforward and invaluable, ensuring you don’t miss the centrality of knowledge questions in your work.

For more guidance on your ToK Essay click here, and for help with the ToK Exhibition click here.

Stay Toktastic, my friends!

Daniel, Lisbon, June 2024

ToK Exhibition Prompt 34: In What Ways Do Our Values Affect Our Acquisition of Knowledge?

An exploration of this prompt was requested by a subscriber, and we always strive to keep our subscribers satisfied. If you find this post helpful, please like and consider subscribing to the blog (it's free) for more insightful content.

Understanding the Key Terms

To tackle this prompt effectively, it’s crucial to understand the key terms: "values" and "acquisition of knowledge." Values can be defined as deeply held core beliefs that shape a knower’s identity. Acquisition of knowledge refers to the various ways a knower attains knowledge, encompassing both formal and informal learning, as well as primary and secondary experiences.

Developing Knowledge Arguments

To develop specific perspectives to this prompt, I recommend formulating three knowledge arguments, each corresponding to a specific object. This approach can help achieve a higher score in your exhibition. If you’re unsure how to choose objects, check out my video, "Choosing Objects for the ToK Exhibition: The Debate."

Knowledge Argument 1: Values affect our reasons for acquiring knowledge

Our values significantly influence why we seek knowledge. The deeply held beliefs that form our identity drive our reasons for acquiring knowledge, often aligning with our personal fulfilment and purpose. For instance, if someone values scientific inquiry, they might use a telescope to gather astronomical data. Conversely, someone concerned about climate change might rely on climate science reports.

Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela

Object 1: Personal copy of Long Walk to Freedom.

In my exhibition, I used my personal copy of Nelson Mandela’s "Long Walk to Freedom" to illustrate this point. My concern about racial inequality led me to acquire knowledge from Mandela’s experiences and insights into his campaign against racial inequality in South Africa.

Knowledge Argument 2: Values affect who we acquire knowledge from

Our values also determine whom we consider as credible sources of knowledge. If a knower respects high-status knowledge sources, they may prefer information from prestigious institutions. For example, someone might prioritise information from the International Baccalaureate (IB) over other sources due to its authoritative status.

LSE Research Blogs page

Object 2: Research Pages from the London School of Economics.

In my exhibition, I have used the Research Blogs page from the London School of Economics (LSE). My values, shaped by my education at LSE, led me to trust the objectivity and rigour of its research methodology. This choice underscores how my respect for this institution influences my knowledge acquisition.

Knowledge Argument 3: Values affect how we acquire knowledge.

Values affect the means and tools we use to acquire knowledge. The choice of medium, whether it’s watching a video, reading a book, or consulting a teacher, is influenced by our values. For instance, someone who values digital media might prefer learning through videos.

Object 3: “Construction of a crossing-symmetric, Regge behaved amplitude for linearly-rising trajectories” Veneziano (1968)

For my third object, I selected Gabriele Veneziano’s 1968 paper on String Theory. Veneziano, valuing theoretical physics and mathematical reasoning, acquired knowledge through reasoning rather than empirical methods. This example highlights how values shape the methods we choose to acquire knowledge.

Conclusion

To summarise, our values influence why we acquire knowledge, whom we trust as sources, and how we obtain it. By considering these aspects, you can construct robust knowledge arguments for your ToK exhibition. Remember, there are many ways to answer this prompt.

For more insights, you can explore my e-book, "Every ToK Exhibition Prompt Explained," which provides detailed explanations and suggestions for each prompt. Or you can buy the notes from that book specific to ToK Exhibition Prompt 34 (linked here) - those notes have different knowledge arguments to those presented here, and are far wider, and more detailed than this blog.

If you have any other prompts or topics you'd like me to cover, feel free to leave a comment or email me at Daniel@ToKToday.com.

Thank you for reading! If you found this post useful, please like and subscribe. Stay tok-tastic!

Early Summer Sale!

May session schools are winding up for the year, whilst November session schools are in the thick of it. So, it's a good time for the ToKToday early summer sale (29th May - 5th June). There's up to 50% off most products including:

• ToK Essay Guides.

• ToK Exhibition Guides.

• Written Feedback

• Coaching Sessions.

Go to Shop for more details.

Thank you to all who have supported TokToday during the last year.

Alternative Concepts for the IB Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Course: Part 3

In this final instalment of our series, we’re exploring concepts 9-12 from our list of alternative ToK concepts that could have been included in the International Baccalaureate's (IB) ToK curriculum. If you missed the earlier parts, be sure to check out Part 1 where we discussed Concepts 1-4, and Part 2 where we covered Concepts 5-8.

This blog can also be watched in video format here, or below.

Concept 9: System or Structure

We begin the final segment of our alternative ToK concepts with "System" or "Structure." Our ToK students often encounter systems thinking and systemised processes, particularly in Group 3 and 4 subjects (Human & Natural Sciences). Integrating this concept into ToK could enhance their understanding of the systemic nature of knowledge production. The idea that knowledge results from synergistic processes fits well with existing ToK concepts like Explanation, Culture, and Values. Including System or Structure in the ToK curriculum could help students comprehend how various Areas of Knowledge (AoKs) function.

Concept 10: Form or Aesthetic

Complementing the concept of System, we introduce "Form" or "Aesthetic." This concept offers a different perspective by acknowledging that knowledge may possess qualitative characteristics beyond empirical or quantitative measures. Form is especially useful for the ToK exhibition and essay, providing a basis for classic debates on structure versus aesthetic. Including both System and Form allows for rich discussions about the nature of knowledge in the classroom.

Concept 11: Intention

Our eleventh concept is "Intention." Initially, I hesitated to include it, questioning its substantiality. However, the more I considered it, the more essential it seemed. Intention can be understood in two primary ways: the intention of knowledge producers and the intentions of the knower. Both aspects significantly influence the knowledge produced and understood. The intentionality of the knower relates to their awareness, consciousness, and introspection, seamlessly leading us into our final concept.

Concept 12: Experience

The twelfth and final alternative ToK concept is "Experience." This concept is pivotal in knowledge production, especially in AoKs such as History, The Arts, and the Human & Natural Sciences. Experience is crucial for understanding the debate between primary and secondary knowledge, which underpins many abstract ToK concepts like Perspective, Justification, Power, and Truth. Critically analysing Experience enables students to grasp these more complex ideas effectively.

Conclusion

There you have it—12 alternative core ToK Concepts. What do you think of our list? Is it better or worse than the IB's official 12 concepts? Do you have suggestions for other concepts that should be included? Let us know in the comments; perhaps the ToK gods at IB might consider your suggestions.

You can download a diagram of IB's 12 ToK Concepts at this link, and my alternative 12 ToK Concepts at this link.

Any likes and subscriptions are greatly appreciated.

Thank you so much for reading.

Stay Toktastic, my friends!
Daniel, Lisbon May 2024

12 ToK Concepts that we could have had (part 1)

In September 2020 IB helpfully gave us 12 core ToK Concepts. I often wonder why they chose this specific group of 12, are there better concepts that could have made the list ?

This blogpost can also be watched on video at this link, or below.

"Rules" for alternative ToK Concepts.

We're not suggesting replacing the current 12 ToK Concepts - they’re all good, worthy & useful concepts. Further, it is acknowledged that the existence of the current 12 core concepts does not exclude the use of any other concepts. Obviously we constantly use concepts beyond the core 12 in the ToK course. The alternative concepts that are suggested here are proposed merely as being equally worthy of inclusion in the core. 

Alternative ToK Concepts #1-#4

1. Paradigm.

So much of ToK is about knowledge changing over time, and why it changes over time. Paradigm shifts are such easy & accessible ways to help students to see & understand the dynamic nature of knowledge, they could deserve a place on our core list of 12 ToK concepts. ToK essay questions are often about the development of knowledge.

2. Pattern

Knowledge in all AoKs is underpinned by patterns  - either the presence of them, or lack of them. For example the Human & Natural sciences are founded upon finding patterns, and much artistic theory relies upon patterns. I also thought that the concepts of probability, modelling and forecast which are all linked to pattern, could have been included in this list.

3. Hierarchy 

Hierarchy is included in the list partly because Power is in IB’s 12 core ToK concepts.Whilst I don't want to replace power as a concept from the list, hierarchy better describes the range of applications of power. Hierarchy is the result of power, hierarchy is the framework of power, hierarchy is often why power matters.

4. Subjectivity

The fourth alternative concept is subjectivity. As we already have objectivity in IB’s list of 12 core concepts, it would seem to make sense to have subjectivity in the list. However, I am including subjectivity for more than it’s description of knowledge based on personal experience. Subjectivity can also take us into the debate of whether the knower is the subject or object of the production of knowledge. This debate provides us with a good way to unpack many ToK Essay and Exhibition questions.

This blog post looks at the first 4 alternative concepts for the theory of knowledge (ToK) course.

Do you agree with this 4? What alternative concepts would you suggest? Let me know in the comments below.

Stay Tok-tastic friends!
Daniel, Lisbon,
May 2024

The Gains for Artists and Scientists of Adopting Each Other's Lens

Essay #6 November 2024 asks us to consider the potential benefits that might arise if artists were to adopt the lens of the scientist, and scientists were to adopt the lens of the artist. In our previous blogpost on this essay title (linked) we described these distinct approaches to knowledge. This post will focus on the tangible gains artists and scientists could experience by adopting each other's methodologies, as previously outlined.

The video accompanying this blogpost is linked here, and below.

Artists and Scientists could gain Enhanced Methodologies by adopting each others' lenses.

Gains for Artists

1. Consolidation and Strengthening of Methodologies: By adopting the more defined and structured lens of the scientist, artists could see a consolidation in their methodologies. This approach would help highlight inefficiencies and strengths within artistic methods more rapidly. For instance, if all playwrights employed a uniform methodology to scriptwriting, the process could evolve more swiftly and effectively, as strengths are replicated and weaknesses are addressed across the board.

2. Refinement of Artistic Knowledge: A more prescriptive methodology could lead to the refined production of artistic knowledge. Consider ballet: its tightly defined techniques lead to a high level of precision and excellence. This contrast with less defined forms, like street dance, suggests that tighter methodologies could incrementally enhance the quality and clarity of artistic knowledge.

3. Clarity and Precision in Artistic Expression: With more defined methodologies, the potential for misinterpretation of artistic works is reduced. A uniform approach could lead to greater clarity in the expression and reception of artistic knowledge. Imagine a world where artistic expressions are as clear-cut as scientific reports; the ambiguity in interpreting a song or painting could be significantly lessened.

Gains for Scientists

1. Flexibility in Methodological Approaches: Adopting the lens of the artist, scientists could benefit from greater flexibility in choosing and defining methodologies. This adaptability would allow scientists to tailor their methods more closely to the specific needs of their studies, potentially leading to innovations in how research is conducted.

2. Diversification of Scientific Knowledge Producers: With fewer constraints on what constitutes a 'valid' methodology, AoK Sciences could become more inclusive. This inclusivity could attract a broader range of contributors, potentially enriching scientific disciplines with fresh perspectives and novel ideas.

3. Innovative Solutions to Stubborn Problems: The flexibility and diversity brought by artistic methodologies could lead to creative solutions for longstanding scientific challenges. Unconventional approaches might uncover new angles to approach old problems, fostering breakthroughs that traditional methods have failed to achieve.

Some of the gains scientists may enjoy if they adopt the lens of the artist.

Evaluation of Methodological Changes

Whilst the potential gains are significant, it's crucial to consider the implications of such fundamental changes to the methodologies of any area of knowledge (AoK). Here are some points of caution:

1. Impact on the Coherence of AoKs: If the defining methodologies of an AoK are altered significantly, it could disrupt the very coherence of that field. For instance, if physics were to adopt interpretative dance as a methodology, would it still be recognized as physics?

2. Appropriateness of Methodologies to Their Functions: Each AoK has methodologies tailored to its specific needs and functions. The effectiveness of these methodologies in achieving the AoK's goals must not be compromised in pursuit of flexibility or inclusivity.

3. Changing the Purpose of AoKs: A change in methodologies could lead to a shift in the fundamental purposes of the AoKs. This shift could alter the nature of the knowledge produced, potentially diluting the distinctiveness and integrity of the field.

Conclusion

In this blog post we just touch upon one of many knowledge arguments that could be used successfully in this essay. As you can see here one knowledge argument has many related issues, evaluation points and implication points. In the TokToday guidance notes for this prescribed title we look at a far greater range of knowledge arguments, real world examples, evaluation points and implication points. The guidance notes are available from this link.

Watch the video accompanying this blogpost on YouTube:

The Lenses of Artists and Scientists Explored

This is the first of two blog posts looking at Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #6 Nov 2024: what can be gained if artists adopt the lens of the scientist, and scientists adopt the lens of the artist? The main blogpost for this essay title is linked here.

The video accompanying this blogpost is linked here, and below.

The Pursuit of Knowledge

The term "pursuit of knowledge" is not explicitly defined in the International Baccalaureate ToK Study Guide giving students a degree of freedom in their interpretation of the term. Broadly, the pursuit of knowledge could be thought to encompass both the production and acquisition of knowledge. It suggests an active, intentional effort by knowledge producers (who construct knowledge) and knowers (who collect and learn knowledge). Understanding this term is the first step in exploring the potential benefits ("gains") through the exchange of scientific and artistic lenses.

Understanding the Lens of the Artist and the Lens of the Scientist

Before we tackle the potential gains from the exchange of lenses, it's useful to consider what we may mean by the "lens of the artist" and the "lens of the scientist."

The Lens in the pursuit of knowledge.

The Lens of the Artist

The lens of the artist is informed by values, assumptions, typical methods and tools, conventional theories, and principles that guide the production and acquisition of artistic knowledge.

This lens has many characteristics, including:

1. Definition of Knowledge: Knowledge can be defined either by the artist or the knower, highlighting a flexible approach to what constitutes knowledge.

2. Ethical Codes: Artists often adhere to flexible and dynamic ethical codes, allowing for a broad interpretation of what is ethical in the creation and dissemination of artistic knowledge.

The Lens of the Scientist

Conversely, the lens of the scientist is shaped by values, methods, tools, theories, and principles used in the scientific production and acquisition of knowledge.

This lens has many characteristics, including:

1. Methodology: The scientific lens often utilises a limited range of accepted methods for constructing knowledge, prioritising rigor and repeatability.

2. Fixed Knowledge: Knowledge is typically external, measurable, and fixed, reducing subjectivity and focusing on quantifiable outcomes.

Potential Gains from Lens Exchange

Scientists Adopting the Lens of Artists

If scientists were to adopt the lens of the artist, they might gain significant flexibility in defining what is considered scientific knowledge. Traditionally, scientific knowledge is defined through rigorous methods like the scientific method and peer review. Adopting an artist's lens could democratise this process, potentially allowing for a broader range of contributors and innovative perspectives. Additionally, embracing the artist's flexible ethical codes could provide scientists with greater freedom to explore and define what is deemed ethical in their research. This could lead to new knowledge that would not have been created using conventional ethical codes.

Artists Adopting the Lens of Scientists

For artists, adopting the scientific lens could lead to a more structured approach to producing artistic knowledge. Whilst this might limit some creative freedoms, it could also introduce a new level of discipline and precision to artistic practices. The concept of making artistic knowledge external, measurable, and fixed could challenge artists to produce works that are less open to interpretation, possibly appealing to new audiences seeking clarity and precision.

Conclusion

This blogpost is only an introduction to the key terms in ToK Essay #6 Nov 2024, the next blogpost demonstrates an approach to answering the whole question. This blogpost describes 4 characteristics of the lenses of artists and scientists. There are many other characteristics that students could consider when writing this essay. The TokToday Essay Guidance Notes for ToK Essay #6 Nov 24 looks at 26 different characteristics of the lenses of artists and scientists. The Essay Guidance notes also contain a wide range of knowledge arguments, real life examples, evaluation points and implication points for this essay. youThey can be picked up from this link.

Watch the accompanying video on YouTube

Anomalies: Are We Too Quick to Dismiss Them?

Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #5 November 24 asks us to consider the role of "anomalies" in the production of knowledge. In the first blogpost (linked) on the this essay title we looked at ways to define the key terms, in this second blog post we consider whether we are too hasty in dismissing these anomalies. The video accompanying this blog post is linked here, and below.

The Significance of Anomalies in Scientific Inquiry

Anomalies could represent deviations from expected norms or established theories, we could argue that they can be pivotal in advancing scientific knowledge. In order to develop knowledge they can challenge our foundational understandings and push the boundaries of existing paradigms. For example, consider the potentially groundbreaking observation by researchers at CERN's Large Hadron Collider in 2012, where neutrinos were observed travelling faster than light—a direct challenge to Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity. This anomaly, if confirmed, could have redefined our understanding of physics and opened up new technological possibilities.

The Premature Dismissal of Anomalies

However, the core of ToK Essay #5 Nov 24 lies in our response to such anomalies. Are we too quick to dismiss them? This question is critical, especially when considering the potential for anomalies to lead to significant advancements in knowledge. In the case of the CERN observation, the scientific community faced a dilemma: should this anomalous finding be dismissed due to its contradiction with long-held theories, or should it be scrutinised further to potentially unveil new aspects of our universe?

Historical Perspectives on Dismissing Anomalies

To better understand the impact of dismissing anomalies too quickly, let's revisit the historical case of Alfred Wegener’s theory of continental drift proposed in 1912. Wegener observed what seemed like a jigsaw puzzle alignment of continental coastlines, along with matching geological and fossil records across these continents. Despite the compelling nature of his observations, the scientific community largely dismissed his theory due to the absence of a plausible mechanism for continental movement. It wasn't until the discovery of plate tectonics decades later that Wegener's ideas were validated, illustrating how premature dismissal of anomalies can hinder scientific progress.

Evaluating the Treatment of Anomalies

How typical is the dismissal of anomalies like Wegener’s theory? Most anomalies do not lead to revolutionary theories, but the ones that do are invaluable. Hence, evaluating whether the dismissal of an anomaly was too hasty involves considering whether the anomaly had the potential to significantly contribute to the advancement of knowledge. This evaluation also extends to practical considerations—whether scientists have the resources to pursue every anomaly and whether such pursuits are a productive use of time.

For instance, the discovery of the ozone hole over Antarctica in the 1980s initially appeared as an anomaly. Rather than dismissing these observations, further research was encouraged, which led to identifying chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as the cause, significantly advancing our understanding of environmental science and climate change.

Conclusions

The focus of this question is on the consequences for the production of knowledge of dismissing anomalies. In devising criteria for "too quick", students should be able to provide a range of positions of agreement/disagreement with the prescribed title.

This post, and the previous post, merely outline the possible roles of anomalies in knowledge production. If you want a deeper dive into developing robust arguments for this essay, The ToKToday Essay Guidance Notes for #5 Nov24 offer extensive insights and examples.

What are anomalies in the production of knowledge?

Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #5 November 2024 requires us to consider the terms "anomaly", and "too quick to dismiss" in the production of knowledge. Anomalies, by their very nature, challenge our understanding and expectations, prompting us to question the established norms across various Areas of Knowledge (AoKs).

In this first blog post we consider the two core terms for the essay ("anomaly", and "too quick to dismiss"). In the second blog post for this essay (linked) we look more widely at a way of approaching the essay. There is also a video accompanying this blogpost, linked here and below.

Understanding Anomalies

An anomaly, as initially defined by most dictionaries, is an occurrence deviating from the norm—an irregular or unexpected event. However, this basic definition barely scratches the surface when applied to the Theory of Knowledge (ToK). Here, an anomaly is not just a statistical outlier or an aberrant data point; it extends to encompass anomalous methods, tools, hypotheses, theories, and perspectives that arise in the production of knowledge.

In fields like the Human Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Mathematics, anomalies might be defined as atypical results within a data set, often termed as outliers. These are critical for they sometimes challenge the validity of established theories and may lead to significant scientific breakthroughs or refinements of existing knowledge.

In AoK The Arts and History, we can interpret anomalies more widely, possibly more creatively. In History, an anomaly could be an unexpected finding or a source that does not fit established interpretations or existing knowledge frameworks. Meanwhile, in the Arts, anomalies could range from unconventional methods for the production of artistic knowledge, unique artistic intentions of the knowledge producer (artist), or novel outcomes that stand apart from mainstream genre or style.

The Risk of Dismissing Anomalies Too Quickly

The phrase "too quick to dismiss" suggests a premature rejection of what could potentially be valuable in the further production of knowledge. This concept urges us to consider the potential contributions of anomalies rather than discarding them hastily, which might be indicative of an inflexible approach to knowledge.

Rejecting an anomaly without thorough consideration risks overlooking an opportunity to advance knowledge, solve lingering questions, or even correct flawed methodologies. In AoKs Human & Natural Sciences, for example, the dismissal of anomalies can hinder the falsification process—a method critical to refining or rejecting theories.

Concluding Thoughts

The approach taken early in this essay could be that anomalies are not merely exceptions to the rule; they are potential gateways to deeper insights and advancements in the production of knowledge. By embracing rather than excluding these irregularities, knowledge producers could further enhance the production of knowledge.

This blogpost is a very brief introduction to this essay. The TokToday Essay Guidance Notes explore many more knowledge arguments, real world examples, and evaluation points for this essay.

ToK Essay #4 N24: Hypothesis & Speculation - a significant difference ?

Is the Difference Between Hypothesis and Speculation Significant?

Today we're looking at ToK Essay #4 N24 "Is the difference between hypothesis and speculation significant?" Understanding the distinction between these terms is essential if you're writing this question. The previous blogpost (linked) focussed on defining the terms, as does the video linked here.

The video for this blog post is linked here, and below.

Defining Hypothesis and Speculation

Developing the definitions for hypothesis and speculation is obviously key to this essay. It is recommended that you develop these definitions within the knowledge arguments that are being used for each okay. This will allow for a more precise and talk focused exploration of these two central concepts.

The Significance of Their Differences

We might wonder, "What's the difference between hypothesis and speculation?" and more importantly, "Is the difference between hypothesis and speculation significant?". We could take the role of evidence as one of our measures of whether difference is significant or not. The role of evidence in the formulation of hypotheses is only one way to measure the significance of difference. There are many other ways, to approach the concept of significance.

Evidence and Knowledge Production

In AoK The Human Sciences, the distinction between hypothesis and speculation could be that hypotheses are formulated from evidence whilst speculation is based on more subjective sources such as experience, or intuition. Hypotheses are typically grounded in evidence, which allows for the development of knowledge that advances our understanding of human cognition and social interactions. For example, research by Bargh and Williams in 2006 on the priming of social distance demonstrates how hypotheses grounded in evidence can reveal insights that speculations could not achieve.

The Criteria for Significance

To evaluate whether the differences are significant, we can consider several factors:

• Impact on Knowledge Produced: If the use of speculation leads to different knowledge than the use of a hypothesis, this indicates a significant difference.

• Influence on the Subject or Object of Knowledge Production: Changes in who produces the knowledge or how it is produced can also signal significance.

• Alterations in Purpose or Intention: If a knowledge producer's intentions vary depending on whether they are speculating or hypothesising, this further underscores a significant difference.

These criteria offer us one (of many) way(s) understand and explore the significance of the differences between hypothesis and speculation.

Evaluating the knowledge argument and its Implications

Questioning the Premises

While it is often argued that hypotheses are grounded in evidence and speculation is not, this distinction may not always hold. The evidence underpinning hypotheses might still be subjective or based on prior assumptions, which could blur the lines between these two forms of reasoning.

The Role of Evidence

The use of a pre-existing evidence base to inform hypotheses tends to reinforce established knowledge. Therefore, one could argue that the significance of evidence in distinguishing between hypothesis and speculation may not be as profound, especially if the aim is to break away from established knowledge paradigms.

Conclusion

To determine if the difference between hypothesis and speculation is significant, one must consider how each affects the production, the nature of the knowledge being produced, the knowledge producer etc. This blog post is just an introduction into the many areas that could be explored using this essay question..

For a a wider, and deeper, exploration of this title pick up the ToKToday Essay Guidance Notes for Essay #4. These include more complex knowledge arguments and real-life examples, at 8,000 words long these notes serve as a mini-textbook focussed solely on this essay title.

Watch the accompanying video on YouTube:

Ingenuity: Always Needed but Never Enough?

ToK Essay #2 Nov 24 proposes that ingenuity is a necessary, but never sufficient, element in the production of knowledge. This blogpost explores just one of many ways to approach the role of ingenuity in the production of knowledge. It is designed solely to be an entrypoint for students writing this essay. The blogpost accompanies the main video on this title (linked)

Defining Ingenuity in Knowledge Production

The ways in which students define ingenuity will influence the knowledge arguments that they can develop, and the implications of those arguments. Dictionary definitions of the term are likely to be insufficient for the needs of the essay. For more exploration of approaches of defining ingenuity see this blogpost, and the Covering The Basics video for this title (linked).

The Case of Archimedes and Pi

Let's start with an example from AoK Mathematics of Archimedes calculating Pi. This was not just a moment of individual brilliance but a point where ingenuity met and molded existing knowledge into something more profound. Archimedes' method could be defined as ingenious, but it was also reliant on the work of predecessors like the Babylonians and Egyptians. This suggests that whilst ingenuity was necessary to advance the calculation of Pi, it was not sufficient in isolation. We could use this example to demonstrate that the production of knowledge is a interactive process, drawing on existing knowledge and 'ingenious' new insights.

Exploring the range of roles of Ingenuity

The debate around the necessity and sufficiency of ingenuity opens up various lines of argument:

• One could argue that ingenuity is always needed but is never enough on its own to produce knowledge.

• Another perspective might be that ingenuity is sometimes needed, and at times it can be entirely sufficient.

• Alternatively, there might be situations where ingenuity, while present, is not necessary for knowledge production, and still, it remains insufficient.

These arguments can be nuanced further by considering conditions such as the intended use of the knowledge, the methods and tools for its production, existing principles within the domain of knowledge, or the context of the knowledge producer.

Evaluation points (v.brief)

The Complexity of Ingenuity

One of the challenges in discussing ingenuity is its inherent vagueness as a concept. What counts as ingenious in one context might be seen as conventional in another. This variability suggests a need for more precise terms to describe the additional factors essential for knowledge production.

Replication as a Means of Producing Knowledge.

Moreover, the assertion that ingenuity is always needed may overlook the importance of activities like the replication of previous research, which, while not necessarily ingenious, are crucial for validating and extending existing knowledge.

Towards a Comprehensive Understanding

This blogpost just introduces one approach to supporting the assertion in the prescribed title. It barely touches upon alternative approaches to the PT, nor evaluation points to those approaches. Here we treat Ingenuity as a vital but not exclusive component in the production of knowledge. We could go on to consider that the production if knowledge is not just about ingenuity but about how this element is integrated within a larger framework of existing knowledge and methodologies.

TokToday Essay Guidance Notes for Essay#2 Nov24 offer many different knowledge arguments as approaches to understanding the PT. They contain real life examples that can be used to demonstrate the knowledge arguments, and evaluation points for those knowledge arguments.

What makes art arty?

It's useful to remember that "Art" and artistic knowledge includes music, literature, visual art, textiles, sculptor and film. In ToK a perennial debate is what defines art? Is it the subjective beauty perceived by an observer, or the underlying structures and theories that constitute its foundation? This discussion considers the complexities of aesthetic appreciation versus the structured knowledge that underpins artistic creation, with an aim to find ways to define art.

Aesthetics: The Subjective Experience

Aesthetics, derived from the Greek word "aisthesis," meaning perception, refers to the sensory experience or the beauty perceived in art. In music, literature, visual art, and film, aesthetics play a pivotal role in determining the audience's emotional response. Philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his work "Critique of Judgment," emphasised the importance of subjective beauty and its impact on the individual observer (Kant, 1790). For instance, the haunting melodies of Chopin's nocturnes or the stark, emotive lines of Picasso's Guernica strike chords of beauty and pain in listeners and viewers, transcending their technical composition.

Underlying Structures: The Foundation of Art

Conversely, artistic knowledge is rooted in established theories and structures. In music, this includes the understanding of chords, scales, and rhythm. The chromatic theory in visual art, and the rule of thirds in photography and painting, provide artists with guidelines to create balanced and harmonious compositions. In literature and film, narrative structures like Gustav Freytag’s pyramid and Joseph Campbell's "The Hero's Journey" are pivotal in crafting compelling stories. These structures are not just technicalities but are the backbone of artistic creation, offering a template for artists to innovate and express their ideas (Freytag, 1863; Campbell, 1949).

Music: Harmony and Melody

In music, the juxtaposition of aesthetics and structure is pronounced. The chord progressions in a piece by Bach or the innovative use of the tritone in Beethoven's compositions underpin the emotional response they evoke. Music theory is not just a set of rules; it's a language that enables composers to convey emotions and stories. For example, the use of minor keys to convey sadness or dissonance to express tension is a structured approach to creating an aesthetic experience (Rameau, 1722).

Visual Arts: Colour and Composition

In visual arts, the interplay of colours, lines, and shapes based on chromatic theory and compositional rules like the rule of thirds or the golden ratio, form the basis of aesthetic appeal. Monet's Impressionist works, though seemingly spontaneous, are underpinned by a deep understanding of light and colour theory. Similarly, the geometric precision in Mondrian's abstract works conveys beauty through structured form and colour (Gage, 1999).

Literature and Film: Narrative and Form

In literature and film, narrative structures guide the unfolding of stories. Shakespeare’s use of iambic pentameter in his plays provides rhythmic structure, enhancing the emotional impact of the words. The three-act structure, common in both literature and film, creates a framework within which stories are told, influencing how the audience perceives and engages with the narrative (McKee, 1997).

Balancing Aesthetics and Structures

The crux of the debate lies in finding a balance between these two aspects. Artistic knowledge and structures provide a foundation, but it's the artist's aesthetic choices that bring these elements to life. The tension between following rules and expressing subjective beauty is where art truly becomes 'arty'. This tension allows for innovation and creativity, leading to the evolution of art forms and artistic expression.

Conclusion

In conclusion, art is a complex amalgamation of aesthetics and underlying structures. While the aesthetic experience is subjective and varies with individual perception, the knowledge of underlying structures provides a framework for artists to express their creativity. The interplay of these elements is what gives art its depth, making it a continually evolving and dynamic field. Understanding this intricate balance is crucial for appreciating art in its entirety.

If you want help with your ToK Essay or ToK Exhibition contact me at Daniel@TokToday.com, or use the Messenger Chat icon on this website.

Stay arty my friends!
Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

References

• Kant, I. (1790). *Critique of Judgment*.

• Freytag, G. (1863). *Die Technik des Dramas*.

• Campbell, J. (1949). *The Hero with a Thousand Faces*.

• Rameau, J. P. (1722). *Treatise on Harmony*.

• Gage, J. (1999). *Colour and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction*.

• McKee, R. (1997). *Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting*.