Making big assumptions (ToK Essay #3 May 25)
Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #3 May 25 implies that there is a link between the pursuit of knowledge and finite resources. This association may, at first sight, seem somewhat anomalous. However, after consideration, the link can be understood if we’re willing to accept a number of assumptions. In this blog post I will unpack some of those assumptions, and look at some of the academic research regarding these assumptions.
Assumptions underpinning the central link in the PT (pursuit of knowledge & finite resources)
The link implied between the pursuit of knowledge and the use of finite resources assumes several fundamental ideas about the relationship between the pursuit of knowledge (incl. knowledge production) and the availability of various types of resources. These resources could range from the tangible to the intangible, including physical, social, and psychological resources that influence both the scope and methodology of the knowledge framework. Evidently, the PT contains the assumption that the resources are finite. This assumption will be considered as part of the wider assumptions underlying those concerning the implied link.
1. Finite Nature of Physical Resources
The first assumption underlying the statement is that physical resources, such as fossil fuels, materials, and energy, are essential for producing knowledge and that these resources are finite. Further, the link could imply that the “relentless drive to pursue knowledge” requires that increasingly more of these physical resources will be consumed. This assumption implies that without access to these resources, certain types of knowledge production, for example empirical research, may be limited. Implications of this implication could be that competition for these resources increases as demand for scientific advancement grows, potentially limiting access for future generations or less affluent societies.
There are, of course, many weaknesses in this rudimentary argument and assumption. The identification, use and availability of resources is subject to human construction. We could call this the “basic Malthusian error”, however that is a little unfair to Malthus.
2. Dependence on Social Structures
The link implied in the PT could also be understood in terms of social resources, such as communities of knowers, governance structures, legal systems, and educational institutions. We could argue that social resources are crucial for the pursuit of knowledge. Democratic societies, for instance, often provide a foundation for academic freedom, the free flow of information, and intellectual debate, all of which are thought to improve the pursuit of knowledge. However, arguably the coherence of these social structures is not infinite. Political instability, corruption, or the erosion of knowledge communities can undermine the structures and institutions that foster knowledge, such as universities, think tanks, and public forums. This assumption underscores that knowledge production is not just an isolated intellectual activity but one that is embedded in and dependent on broader social frameworks and networks, which themselves have limits.
3. Psychological and Personal Limitations
Psychological resources, such as personal identity, mental energy, and emotional resilience, could also be assumed to be finite in the pursuit of knowledge. This suggests that the capacity for individuals to engage in deep thinking, critical reflection, or creative processes is limited by their psychological well-being. Scholars, artists, and thinkers often experience burnout, stress, or identity crises, which can diminish their ability to contribute to knowledge creation. This assumption highlights the human cost of intellectual work, suggesting that mental health and personal identity are finite resources that must be managed in the pursuit of knowledge.
4. Knowledge is a Resource-Dependent Process
Another assumption in the implied link is that knowledge is neither a passive nor abstract concept but an active, resource-dependent process. The creation, dissemination, and application of knowledge all requires resources, whether in the form of time, money, technology, or human effort. This implies that knowledge is not free or unlimited; it is constrained by the availability of these resources. Consequently, the pursuit of knowledge may be prioritised or restricted depending on the resources available to a society, organisation, or individual.
5. Tension Between Knowledge and Resource Sustainability
Finally, the implied link assumes a tension between the relentless pursuit of knowledge and the sustainability of the resources used to support that pursuit. As finite resources are depleted, the assumption is that the pursuit of knowledge must adapt, either by developing new methods of resource use, shifting priorities, or innovating to reduce resource dependency.
Are these assumptions correct ?
One of the (many) ways to approach ToK Essay #3 May 25 could be to take one or two of the assumptions above, and to examine its veracity using examples, and ToK concepts / structures. Here we look at a sample of some of the evidence relating to these assumptions.
Is “Techno-optimism” too optimistic ?
At the core of many of the assumptions is the question of whether technology can provide us with new methodologies, and new resources, for the unlimited and unrestrained pursuit of knowledge. This is often called “Techno-optimism”:
Techno-optimism is the belief that technological advancements can solve many of the world’s major problems, including environmental, social, and economic challenges. Proponents of techno-optimism argue that innovations in fields like renewable energy, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence will allow humanity to overcome limitations imposed by finite resources, avoid environmental degradation, and continue economic growth. This perspective is often seen as opposing more cautionary or Malthusian viewpoints, which emphasise the risks of over-reliance on technology and potential ecological limits. Techno-optimists are typically confident in humanity’s ability to innovate its way out of crises.
The Singularity - The height of techno-optimism ?
In The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, Ray Kurzweil argues that humanity is approaching a transformative point in history, where the boundaries between humans and machines will blur (Kurzweil, 2005). This concept, known as the Singularity, will be driven by rapid advancements in fields like artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and nanotechnology. Kurzweil predicts that by the mid-21st century, human intelligence will merge with artificial intelligence, leading to radical extensions of human life and capability. He also discusses how technological growth follows an exponential curve, accelerating towards this Singularity, where humans will transcend the limitations of biology. As such, the Singularity, is a hypothetical model by which we can reconcile the relentless pursuit of knowledge with finite resources.
Techno-optimism - pure idealism soon to be sullied by reality.
Vaclav Smil is an environmental activist and policy analyst. In his book Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure, Smil explores the complex and often misunderstood nature of technological progress. Smil argues that while many view technological innovation as a linear path to success and societal improvement, history shows that this narrative is filled with overhyped predictions and notable failures (Smil, 2023). He critically examines the trajectory of various inventions, showing that many groundbreaking technologies took much longer to deliver significant impact than initially promised. Smil highlights cases such as nuclear energy, which, despite early optimism, has faced substantial hurdles in terms of safety, economics, and public perception. He also critiques the pervasive belief in “quick fixes” through technology, noting that innovations often bring unintended consequences and require a long time to achieve meaningful change. By examining both successes and failures in historical context, Smil challenges the techno-optimism prevalent in today’s discourse, advocating for a more nuanced understanding of how invention and innovation truly shape society.
If we take Smil’s perspective we could argue that ways to reconcile the relentless drive with finite resources would be to take a more cautious approach to technological innovation. Such an approach should be informed by historical patterns, and focus on improving the sustainability of existing resources.
Homeostatic Equilibrium: the middle way.
We could argue that reconciliation of the link implied in the PT will occur naturally, or automatically, by the many self-correcting mechanisms built into the various systems involved.
Ted Nordhaus’ essay “Must Growth Doom the Planet?” critically examines the Malthusian view that economic and population growth will inevitably lead to ecological collapse (Norhaus, 2020). Nordhaus references Vaclav Smil’s critique of techno-optimism, arguing that technological innovation alone cannot decouple economic growth from environmental impacts. However, Nordhaus challenges Smil’s pessimism, noting that slowing population and economic growth in developed countries has already begun reducing resource consumption and environmental pressures. While he acknowledges the challenges of maintaining growth with finite resources, Nordhaus suggests that innovation, economic shifts, and declining fertility rates may naturally alleviate pressures on resources without catastrophic consequences.
These are just a few ways to approach the assumptions underlying the implied link at the heart of ToK Essay #3 May 25. If you want to know more about this essay you can pick up the Student Guidance Notes for ToK Essay #3 May 25 linked here.
ToK Teachers can use the TokToday Teacher Support Pack to help to guide and support students writing their ToK Essays in the May 25 session - Click here for more details.
Daniel, Lisbon, October 24
References
Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. Penguin.
Norhaus, T. (2020, March 2). Must growth doom the planet? — the new atlantis. The New Atlantis. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/must-growth-doom-the-planet
Smil, V. (2023). Invention and innovation: A brief history of hype and failure. MIT Press.
