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

What Makes a Good Object for the ToK Exhibition?

Students often ask me whether a particular object is a good object for the ToK Exhibition. To help you decide, I’m going to share three clear rules to determine whether your object is suitable for the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Exhibition. These guidelines will ensure your object meets the criteria set by the International Baccalaureate (IB) and effectively demonstrates your understanding of ToK concepts.

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

Rule 1: Is Your Object Specific?

A common misconception is that ToK objects must be personal. While personal objects can be specific, they are not the only option. The key is specificity. A specific object has distinct characteristics or a unique story that ties directly to the ToK concepts you're exploring

Example: Personal & Specific Object

The IB's May 2023 ToK Subject report clarifies this with an example: a Bible is not specific, but your family Bible, inherited from your grandmother, is. This personal connection makes it specific because it carries particular significance and history.

Example: Non-Personal & Specific Object

In the 2023 Exhibition example C, a 19th-century water pump from London was used. This pump was integral to Dr John Snow’s identification of cholera's transmission in 1853. Although not personal to the student, its historical and scientific importance makes it a specific object.

However, specificity alone does not make an object good. It must also demonstrate a specific knowledge argument.

Rule 2: Does Your Object Demonstrate a Specific Knowledge Argument?

A specific object needs to illustrate a particular knowledge argument relevant to the ToK prompt you are addressing. This means the object should help you explore how knowledge is developed, shared, and understood.

Example: Family Bible

Selecting a family Bible isn’t enough by itself. You must explain how its specificity helps explore knowledge issues in the prompt. For instance, you could argue that the Bible helped you realise that new knowledge cannot always change established values and beliefs (prompt 11), or it highlights that some things are unknowable if they are metaphysical (prompt 18).

If you need help understanding what a knowledge argument is, check out the next blogpost, “What is a Knowledge Argument?”

Rule 3: Could Many Other Objects Demonstrate Your Specific Knowledge Argument as Well?

For your object to be excellent, it must demonstrate the specific knowledge argument better than other comparative objects. This distinction is essential for achieving the highest marks.

Example: Edison’s Light Bulb

Answering Prompt #8, "To what extent is certainty attainable?", you might argue that certainty is rarely attainable because much knowledge is serendipitous. You could choose Edison’s first light bulb to illustrate this point, as its creation involved accidental discovery. While this object is specific and demonstrates a knowledge argument, many other objects, such as Fleming’s penicillin, X-rays, or Heparin, could serve the same purpose, making it less unique.

Example: Dr John Snow’s Hand Pump

Consider the hand pump from which Dr John Snow discovered cholera’s transmission method. Answering prompt #33, "How is current knowledge shaped by its historical development?", this object exemplifies how current scientific knowledge is built on historical understanding of public health. While other objects could demonstrate this argument, the hand pump’s role in establishing epidemiology makes it uniquely effective.

Conclusion

To summarise, here are the three rules for selecting a good object for your ToK Exhibition:

1. Is your object specific?

2. Does your object demonstrate a specific knowledge argument?

3. Could many other objects demonstrate your specific knowledge argument as well?

By following these rules, you can select objects that not only fit the criteria but also enhance your understanding and presentation of ToK concepts. For more guidance, check out our free video series, "How to Do Your ToK Exhibition", or our e-book series on the ToK Exhibition, which provides examples of knowledge arguments and suitable objects.

Thank you for reading, and I hope this helps you create a fantastic ToK Exhibition. Stay toktastic, my friends!

Daniel, Lisbon, June 24

What is the Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompt?

Students often ask, "What is the easiest ToK Exhibition prompt?" And truth be told, it’s a bit like asking, "What's the best flavour of ice cream?" It really depends on your tastes, or in this case, your interests, knowledge, and experiences. But being the curious beings we are here at ToKToday, we thought, why not try to quantify the ease (or difficulty) of the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Exhibition prompts?

The Quest for the Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompt

Today, we're diving into the deep end of ToK prompts to figure out which ones are a breeze and which ones are more like Maths AA HL P3 (IYKYK). To do this, we need a way to measure ease or difficulty. So, I’ve broken down the challenge of a ToK Exhibition prompt into three not-so-scientific but oh-so-fun criteria:

1. Closed-ended Three-part Structure:

2. Does the prompt lend itself to an easy, three-part structure? Since the Exhibition is based on three objects, prompts that naturally break down into three distinct parts are a gift from the examiners. For example, Prompt #2, "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" can be easily divided into three responses: Yes, No, and Sometimes. In contrast, Prompt #1, "What counts as knowledge?" is more open-ended and thus, more challenging to pigeonhole into a tidy three-part answer.

3. Abstract vs. Concrete:

4. Is the prompt asking you to wrestle with abstract ideas or more tangible, concrete ones? Generally, the more abstract the question, the harder it is to pin down. For instance, Prompt #7, "What are the implications of having or not having knowledge?" is quite abstract. In comparison, Prompt #10, "What challenges are raised by the dissemination/communication of knowledge?" is far more concrete and easier to tackle.

5. Complex (Abstruse) vs. Clear Wording:

6. Some prompts are written in a way that makes you feel like you need a degree in deciphering hieroglyphics, whilst others are as clear as a sunny day. The clearer the wording, the easier it is to grasp. For example, Prompt #13, "How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?" has complex wording. It involves multiple layers of inquiry, making it a tough nut to crack. On the other hand, Prompt #2, "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" is straightforward and direct.

Ranking the Prompts

Based on these three criteria, I’ve scored each ToK Exhibition prompt out of 10 in each category, giving us a total possible 'easiness' score out of 30. This highly subjective scoring system allows us to create a kind of league table, ranking the prompts from easiest to hardest.

The Five Hardest ToK Exhibition Prompts

Starting from the top (or bottom, depending on your perspective), here are the five toughest prompts to tackle:

1. Prompt #25: How can we distinguish between knowledge, belief, and opinion?

2. This tricky prompt asks not just for definitions but for the nuanced differences between these concepts. It’s the philosophical equivalent of herding cats.

3. Prompt #7: What are the implications of having or not having knowledge?

4. This one twists your brain into strange shapes as you try to grapple with the abstract implications of possessing or lacking knowledge. Read more about implications at this link.

5. Prompt #20: What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge?

6. It’s a popular choice but beware – it’s abstract and asks you to explore the relationship between concepts rather than the concepts themselves. Read more about this prompt at this link.

7. Prompt #13: How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?

8. The wording here is a labyrinth. It requires you to untangle how we can assess improvements in knowledge and what constitutes past and current knowledge. Read more about this prompt at this link.

9. Prompt #38: To what extent is certainty attainable?

10. Low scores across all three criteria make this prompt a formidable challenge. Tackling it requires a solid understanding of the nature of certainty.

The Five Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompts

On the flip side, here are the prompts that are like the sweet smell of graduation for DP students:

1. Prompt #2: Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?

2. Scoring high across all our categories, this prompt is the champion of easiness. It’s clear, structured, and lends itself to a wealth of illustrative objects.

3. Prompt #11: Can new knowledge change established values and beliefs?

4. This prompt offers a nice, closed-ended structure and is straightforward in its wording. Plus, there are endless examples to support your argument.

5. Prompt #9: Are some types of knowledge less open to interpretation than others?

6. It’s easy to break this into a three-part structure, and the clear wording makes it accessible. You just need to consider different types of knowledge and their interpretability.

7. Prompt #10: What challenges are raised by the dissemination/communication of knowledge?

8. This is the most concrete of all the prompts, making it easier to grasp and explore in a structured way.

9. Prompt #12: Is bias inevitable in the production of knowledge?

10. While it does flirt with the tricky concept of inevitability, its clear wording and closed-ended structure make it a relatively easy prompt to tackle.

In Conclusion

There you have it! The easiest ToK Exhibition prompt, according to my rather subjective criteria, is Prompt #2: "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" But remember, these rankings are just for fun and based on my personal interpretation. Your experience might be different, and that's perfectly fine!

So, did I get it right? Have I unfairly marked a tricky prompt as easy or missed a deceptively difficult one? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

If you need more help with your ToK Exhibition, check out the free & paid resources linked here.

Click here for the e-book Every ToK Exhibition Prompt explained.

Happy exhibiting, and may the easiest prompt be ever in your favour! Stay Tok-tastic !

Get the full table of prompts ranked by "easiness" at this link.

Daniel, Lisbon, June 2024

Exhibition Prompt #33: How is current knowledge shaped by its historical development ?

The video version of this blogpost is linked here and below.

The historical development of knowledge.

To answer this prompt we must consider the various ways in which we can describe, or characterise, the historical development of knowledge. This term is not solely confined to AoK History, but applies equally to all Areas of Knowledge, current knowledge in all AoKs has a period of historical development.

A few of the different ways that we could describe the historical development of knowledge could include

• periods of debate or contest.

• periods of integration or increasing cohesion

• periods of upheaval

• periods of denial

• periods of acceptance

• periods of lapsed, suppressed or repressed knowledge.

• periods of thesis, periods of antithesis, and periods of synthesis.

We could go on identifying different ways to describe the historical development of knowledge, this is not an absolute nor limited definition. I am going to use periods of evolution, revolution and synthesis as the descriptions of historical development for my ToK Exhibition of Prompt #33.

ToK Themes (Optional)

This prompt lends itself particularly well to the ToK Optional Themes (Knowledge & Technology, Knowledge & Language etc) - All of the themes are very much concerned with the question - "how is current knowledge shaped by what came before it ?". So, feel free to build your Exhibition around a theme, of course there is no requirement from IB to build a theme.

Choosing Objects - Developing Knowledge Arguments.

IB recommend that you find objects from which knowledge arguments will arise. For example I look at an object, and think “oh wow - this object demonstrates how current knowledge is shaped by its historical development !”. So, if this process works for you then feel free to look around your world, and find 3 objects in which ToK is manifest.

However, if you’re anything like me, and most of the students that I have taught you may find it a little difficult to see ToK manifest itself in the world around you. If you do find it difficult then I recommend that you write 3 distinct perspectives, or knowledge arguments (1 for each object). Once you have 3 distinct perspectives you can then find a specific object to demonstrate each perspective, or knowledge argument.

A note on specificity:

To get 5 or more marks in the ToK Exhibition you need to explain how each object makes a specific contribution to the Exhibition, this contribution has to be different to the contributions made by the other 2 objects. This means that not only does your object have to be highly specific rather than generic, but it also has to demonstrate a specific perspective, or knowledge argument.

So what makes an object specific, and what makes an object generic ? Let's take a pencil as an example, any pencil random plucked out of a box is a generic object - there are billions of pencils in the world, any other pencil could be swapped out for this pencil. However, if we selected the pencil that Martin Luther used to write his 95 Theses that led to the start of the Protestant Reformation in Wittenberg in 1517 the is no longer a generic pencil, but now a very specific pencil. Ideally we want to link that specificity to the knowledge arguments (see below).

We often hear that the objects have to be personal, this is an error. The objects have to be specific, not personal. Using personal objects is just an easy way of making them specific objects, but they don’t have to be personal. Consider the example of the pencil in the previous paragraph. The pencil was owned by Martin Luther in 1517, so it’s not personal to me, but it is very specific.

How do I justify the inclusion of objects in the Exhibition ?

If you look at the ToK Exhibition marking criteria, you will see that to score 5-10 marks you need to justify the inclusion of each object in the Exhibition. So, if we want to get high marks in the Exhibition we need to focus on this justification for the inclusion of each object. The ToK Subject Report from May 23 gives us some idea of what is meant by justification, it says

“ it is helpful for [students] to see the justification as following from the links. Links are successfully made when they clearly explain the connection between the object and the knowledge question in the prompt. The justification provides further elaboration of that connection by showing what it is about that specific object that is so interesting in making us think about the prompt.”

ToK Subject Report May 2023

Writing 3 perspectives, or knowledge arguments for Prompt #33.

Justification is a specific link that each object has to the prompt, it’s more than the original link. A useful, and relatively easy, way to identify a specific link for each object is to write 3 perspectives, or knowledge arguments, on the prompt. These perspectives can be thought of as 3 different ways to answer the prompt. This is obviously one perspective, or knowledge argument, per object. The three knowledge arguments that I’ve written for Prompt #33 are:

1. Current knowledge can be shaped by evolution in its historical development.

2. Current knowledge can be shaped by revolution in its historical development.

3. Current knowledge can be shaped by synthesis in its historical development.

You will see that I have used the words from the prompt in my knowledge arguments, this helps to maintain focus on the prompt. I will now go through each knowledge argument by identifying an object, and explaining the object’s link to the prompt using the knowledge argument.

Object 1: mRNA Vaccine Certificate (Thailand 2021)

Photo: Candidate’s own photo.

My first object is my vaccine certificate for receiving an mRNA vaccine ( I am using this for the knowledge argument that current Knowledge can be shaped by evolution in its historical development). It’s specific real world context is that it is a certificate for an mRNA vaccine that I received in Thailand in June 2021

The link to the prompt is that our current knowledge of vaccines has enabled virologists to develop vaccines using Messenger Rna (MRNA). The historical development of knowledge regarding viruses, the human immune system and immunology has gone through processes of refinement that have culminated in the MRNA vaccine. At each stage of the historical development some knowledge has been selected for further development, whilst other knowledge has been discarded - ie a process of evolution in the historical development of our current knowledge of vaccines. For example in the 1960’s it was thought that the immune system responded more strongly to the strain of the virus first encountered rather than later strains included in subsequent vaccines. However, subsequent research showed that whilst the immune system does indeed exhibit a preference for responding to antigens it has encountered before, this does not necessarily hinder its ability to respond to new strains (Wikramaratna).

The justification for the inclusion of this object in the Exhibition is that it demonstrates that our current knowledge of vaccines is shaped by an evolutionary process in its historical development. This process is one in which functional and effective knowledge is retained for further development whilst ineffective knowledge is discarded, and therefore does not contribute to the next iteration of knowledge development. The intended and actual function of knowledge can shape its historical development in terms of an evolutionary process working towards ever more adaptive knowledge.

Object 2: Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687, Cambridge UK).

Photo: (University of Sydney, 2020)

My second object is Newton’s first edition of his 1687 book Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. There are only 4 copies of the first edition, this one contains Newton’s handwritten notes in the margin, and is held in the archives of University of Sydney. The link between this object and the historical development of knowledge is that Philosophia Principia Mathematica shows that the historical development of knowledge can sometimes be revolutionary. This object demonstrates that the historical development of some knowledge can be characterised as a fundamental, and significant, change from knowledge that has previously been developed in that field, or discipline. This fundamental and significant change I am characterising as a revolutionary historical development.

Prior to Philosophiae Principia Mathematica much of the reasoning in Physics was qualitative and observational. As such the knowledge of physics was generally more hypothetical and predicated upon the subjectivities of the observer. Newton's use of calculus in Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica allowed for precise calculations of forces, orbits, and motions, shifting the methodology of science towards quantitative predictions. This work laid the groundwork for classical mechanics, marking a pivotal shift in the approach to scientific inquiry and mathematical application to the natural world. As such, this object represents a dramatic and fundamental change in how knowledge is produced and interpreted in Physics. As such, the object represents a revolution in the historical development of knowledge of physics(Temple & Tracy, 1992).

The justification for including this object in the Exhibition is that it demonstrates that revolutionary change in the historical development of knowledge appears to involve the discardment of much existing knowledge, principles and methods. However, whilst the new knowledge framework may appear very different from the pre-revolutionary framework there is still an interrelationship between the two which characterises the historical development of the knowledge . The new knowledge may not have been possible without the pre-revolutionary framework, and some elements of the antecedent knowledge may still be present in the new knowledge. This object demonstrates that the historical development of knowledge can be thought of as a mutually reciprocal process between the present and the past.

Object 3: Comment Article from The Chicago Maroon Newspaper (Jan 21st 2005)

Photo: Candidate’s own photo.

My third object is the article “From “Way” to Grey: two decades of genre remixing” published in the Chicago Maroon Newspaper on 21st January 2005 (Steinman, 2005). The link between this article and the prompt is that the article looks at the various ways in which the historical development of knowledge can be characterised by the synthesis of knowledge from different genres, disciplines or Areas of Knowledge. Synthesis refers to taking various elements of knowledge from different genres and combining them to form new knowledge. As such, current knowledge can be shaped by the synthesis of various elements in its historical development.

The article “From “Way” to Grey” explores the synthesis of knowledge across different musical genres, focusing on the fusion of hip-hop and rock. It describes the collaborative remix of "Walk This Way" by Aerosmith and Run-DMC as a pioneering example, breaking down genre barriers and achieving both commercial success and critical acclaim. The article highlights how the synthesis of apparently contrasting knowledge can lead to the development of effective current knowledge. It discusses a further example of the synthesis of knowledge through "The Grey Album," which creatively mixed Jay-Z's "The Black Album" with The Beatles' "The White Album," representing a deeper cultural and racial blending. This object explores the idea that current knowledge is shaped by the blending, or synthesis, of apparently disparate elements of knowledge in its historical development.

The justification for the inclusion of this object in the exhibition is that it could be argued that all current knowledge is, to some degree, the product of synthesis in its historical development. This object specifically looks at current knowledge that is the product of synthesis of highly contrasting, and in some ways dissimilar, elements in their historical development. It could be argued that such synthesis can create highly effective, and significantly different, current knowledge. As such, this object demonstrates neither evolution, nor revolution but functional fusion in the production of knowledge.

That’s just an example of how this prompt could be approached. There are, of course, many many other valid ways to respond to this prompt. If you want a more detailed write up of ways to unpack this prompt, examples of knowledge arguments, and suggestions for objects can you can pick up a copy of ToK Exhibition Prompt #33 Explained at this link, or you can pick up explanations for all ToK Exhibition Prompts at this link.

References

• Ali, H. (2013). Mapping the secular mind. International Institute of Islamic Thought. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvkc67rh

• Jay-Z & Danger Mouse. (2004). The Grey Album [Album].

• Steinman, J. (2005, January 21). From “Way” to Grey: Two decades of genre remixing. Chicago Maroon. https://chicagomaroon.com/2277/arts/from-way-to-grey-two-decades-of-genre-remixing/

• Temple, B., & Tracy, C. A. (1992). From Newton to Einstein. The American Mathematical Monthly, 99(6), 507. https://doi.org/10.2307/2324058

• The Beatles. (1968). The Beatles [Album].

• University of Sydney. (2020). Philosopia Naturalis Principia Mathematica(First Edition, 1687). https://www.sydney.edu.au/content/dam/corporate/images/news-and-opinion/news/2020/january/principia/newtown-principia-title-page-usyd.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/cq5dam.web.1280.1280.jpeg

• Wikramaratna, P. S., Sandeman, M., Recker, M., & Gupta, S. (2013). The antigenic evolution of influenza: Drift or thrift? Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, 368(1614), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2307/23362559

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:

ToK Essay #3 Nov 24: Sever Ties with Its Past

This blogpost proposes just one of many possible approaches to ToK Essay #3 November 2024. We take the approach that the concept of "severing ties with its past," results in the significant transformation of an Area of Knowledge (AoK). This blog post aims to develop how this approach could apply to the Arts, and looks at the evaluation and implications of the knowledge argument used.

This blogpost accompanies the video linked here, and below.

Understanding Severance in the Context of AoK

The approach taken to understanding "sever ties with its past" is that there are significant changes to one or more elements of. the Knowledge framework of the AoK. This severance might be necessary for an AoK to maintain relevance amidst cultural and technological shifts that render old paradigms obsolete.

The Knowledge Framework and Cultural Shifts

The Knowledge Framework within ToK outlines the scope, themes, and nature of problems considered by an AoK. When cultural changes external to the AoK occur—be they technological advancements, shifts in available resources, or broader social transformations—the previously relevant knowledge may no longer suffice. The AoK must then adapt, potentially severing ties with its past methodologies and perspectives, to stay relevant. This adaptation can be seen as both necessary and beneficial, allowing the AoK to evolve and continue contributing meaningfully to society.

Real Life Example: The Shift in Visual Arts

An example of the process of 'severing ties with its past' outlined here, can be observed in the Arts during the mid-19th century. Prior to the 1860s, European visual arts, particularly painting, were dominated by realism—the accurate, detailed, unembellished depiction of the visual world. The invention of the camera and the rise of photography challenged this dominance by fulfilling realism's role more efficiently and effectively. This technological shift forced the Arts to reconsider their function; the result was the emergence of the Impressionist movement, which focused not on replicating reality, but on capturing the impressions—emotions, atmospheres, and experiences.

Far more details on this example can be found at this link.

Implications and Evaluations

The transition to impressionism demonstrates the severance of ties with the past in an AoK in response to external changes, but it also raises questions about the nature of such transitions:

• Continuity vs. Severance: Even as new movements like impressionism rose to prominence, the techniques and elements of realism did not vanish. This coexistence challenges the notion that an AoK can, (or maybe even should), completely sever ties with its past.

• Benefits vs. Losses: By adopting new methodologies and scopes, an AoK might risk losing valuable aspects of its tradition that could still have relevance. The decision to sever ties must be balanced against the potential loss of depth and continuity.

• Causality and Influence: The direction of influence—whether societal changes prompt shifts in AoK or vice versa—can be ambiguous. In some cases, movements within an AoK, such as the early impressionists' drive for recognition, might themselves instigate broader cultural shifts.

Conclusion

In discussing severing ties with the past within an AoK, as examined in ToK Essay #3 Nov 24, responses could largely revolve around the definitions developed for the key terms in the essay. Whilst the benefits of staying relevant and adaptive are clear, the complexities involved in deciding when and how to sever these ties highlight the intricate balance between innovation and tradition in the production of knowledge.

Further guidance and detailed analyses are available in our comprehensive ToK Essay Guidance Notes, designed to support your writing of ToK Essay 3 Nov 24.

Watch on YouTube:

Ingenuity in the production of knowledge.

What Could Be Meant by Ingenuity in the Production of Knowledge?

ToK Essay #2 Nov 24 asks us to consider the role of ingenuity in the production of knowledge. This blog post introduces ways to consider both the definition of the term, and its use in ToK Essay #2 Nov 24. The development of ways to answer the question is linked in the next blog post (linked). Further, this blog post accompanies the YouTube video linked at the end.

Unpacking Ingenuity

To kick things off, let's consider ways of understanding the term "ingenuity". Whilst a stroll through the dictionary definitions of ingenuity reveals it as a capacity for invention or creativity, a knack for clever design or construction, these descriptions are insufficient when applied to the production of knowledge in a ToK Essay. For students Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #2 Nov24, it's imperative to develop a definition of ingenuity that helps, or supports, the specific knowledge arguments being presented.

Ingenuity in the production of knowledge could be thought of in the following ways:

• Introducing new areas of study or focus within a particular Area of knowledge (AoK), broadening the areas of inquiry of the AoK.

• Employing innovative methods and tools for knowledge production, which could include using new technologies or methodologies.

• Offering fresh perspectives within a field of knowledge, consequently enriching debates or interpretations of existing knowledge.

• Adopting new ethical approaches to address previously unsolvable dilemmas within the AoK / disciplines .

These are just a few of the many possible ways to understand ingenuity.

Ingenuity: Always Needed, But Never Enough

The assertion that ingenuity is "always needed, but never enough" in the production of knowledge is the focus of the question rather than merely the definition of ingenuity. This idea suggests that whilst ingenuity is indispensable, it must be complemented by other elements to fully realize the production of knowledge. These additional components might include existing principles, methods, and tools of a particular field, insights from other domains of knowledge, or even the serendipitous sparks of coincidence and chance.

This leads us to develop various alternative conditions of the prescribed title (regarding the role of ingenuity in knowledge production):

• Can ingenuity alone suffice in the production of knowledge?

• Is the need for ingenuity conditional, perhaps depending on the purpose of the knowledge sought or the context in which it is produced?

• How do existing frameworks and principles within a field of knowledge influence the necessity for ingenuity?

Bridging the Gap with ToKToday

If you are writing ToK Essay #2 Nov24 the ToKToday Essay Guidance Notes provide structured support, detailed examples, and a comprehensive analysis to not only understand but also effectively articulate the various roles that ingenuity could play in the production of knowledge.

A Feminist Perspective of Science

ToK students often find it hard to evaluate the Natural Sciences beyond validity issues of the scientific method. The feminist perspective of science helps us to reconsider some issues of objectivity and knowledge production in the sciences. This blog post considers the influences of gender on the acquisition, production, and interpretation of scientific knowledge, we focus on the work of key feminist theorist Donna Haraway, and use the work of Sandra Harding, and Evelyn Fox Keller. For ToK (Theory of Knowledge) students, understanding the feminist approach to science helps to appreciate the nuances in the construction of scientific knowledge, and the role that gender plays in that process.

The Critique of Traditional Objectivity

Historically, the quest for scientific objectivity aimed to eliminate biases, believing in the existence of a 'natural light of truth.' (as put forward by Descartes). However, feminist and Marxist critiques challenge this notion, arguing that biases are inherent to the human condition, thus questioning the very possibility of absolute objectivity. Donna Haraway, in "Situated Knowledges," evaluates previous feminist attempts to undermine the scientific pretension to a 'view from nowhere.' She argues against the possibility of Baconian objectivity, advocating instead for a new form of objectivity that acknowledges the 'situatedness' of scientists.

Situated Knowledges and the Role of Gender in Science

Haraway's concept of 'situated knowledges' introduces the idea that all scientific knowledge is rooted in the specific contexts of its producers. This notion extends beyond the Marxist focus on class to include gender as a critical factor influencing scientific inquiry. Unlike earlier feminist philosophers who may have focused on a distinctly 'feminine' science, Haraway and others like Sandra Harding and Evelyn Fox Keller highlight the broader implications of gendered biases in the methodology and practice of science. They critique the dominance of 'toxic masculinity' in scientific methodologies, which often emphasize control and predictability, overlooking the diverse and interconnected nature of scientific phenomena.

Feminist Science: Beyond Bias

The feminist perspective on science seeks to move beyond simply identifying biases to proposing more inclusive and reflexive approaches to scientific research. This involves recognizing the value of diverse perspectives in enriching scientific inquiry and ensuring that scientific practices and policies are informed by a wide range of experiences and understandings. The involvement of individuals from various backgrounds—gender, nationality, class—in both research and policy-making is crucial for a more holistic and democratic approach to science.

The Interplay of Science and Technology: A Cyborg Manifesto

Haraway's "A Cyborg Manifesto" further explores the relationship between science, technology, and society, suggesting that our engagement with technology shapes our perceptions and interactions with the world. By embracing the cyborg as a metaphor for the complex interconnections between humans and technology, Haraway challenges traditional dichotomies and advocates for a more nuanced understanding of our technological entanglements. This perspective encourages us to reconsider the ways in which scientific and technological advancements are integrated into our lives and how they redefine our concepts of humanity and nature.

Rethinking Scientific Objectivity and Knowledge Production

The feminist critique of science calls for a reevaluation of what counts as objective knowledge and who gets to produce it. By emphasizing the importance of 'situated knowledges,' feminist theorists argue for a science that is more responsive to the social and ethical implications of its practices. This entails a shift from a singular, universal perspective to a multiplicity of viewpoints that reflect the complex realities of our world.

Conclusion: Towards a Feminist Science

The feminist perspective on science offers a powerful critique of traditional notions of objectivity and a pathway towards a more inclusive, ethical, and reflexive science. By acknowledging the influence of gender and other social factors on scientific inquiry, we can move towards a science that not only produces knowledge but also reflects the diverse realities and experiences of its global community. In doing so, we embrace a feminist science that values diversity, interconnection, and the responsible application of scientific knowledge for the betterment of society.

References

• Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.

• Haraway, D. (1985). A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.

• Harding, S. (1991). Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives.

• Keller, E.F. (1985). Reflections on Gender and Science.

• Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society.

This exploration into the feminist perspective of science not only highlights the critical role of gender in shaping scientific knowledge but also calls for a reimagined approach to scientific inquiry—one that is inclusive, ethically conscious, and reflective of the diverse world it seeks to understand.

To find out (a lot) more about the feminist perspective of science head over to The Partially Examined Life blog and podcast.

3 easy ways to teach critical thinking in ToK

In Theory of Knowledge (ToK) critical thinking is not just a buzzword but a foundational skill that can significantly impact students' understanding and their ability to score well in ToK. But what exactly does it mean to "teach critical thinking"? Many of the teachers that I work with have asked for more help with this.

Understanding Critical Thinking in ToK

Critical thinking in ToK can be distilled into two primary elements:

1. Evaluation of Arguments: This involves identifying the strengths and weaknesses of an argument. It's about scrutinising the evidence, reasoning, and conclusions presented.

2. Development of Alternative Explanations: Beyond just critiquing, critical thinking also encompasses the ability to propose different explanations or viewpoints.

While there are numerous facets to critical thinking, focusing on these two skills can significantly aid students in excelling in ToK.

Teaching Critical Thinking Through Knowledge Issues

One of the most effective ways to cultivate these critical thinking skills is by engaging with knowledge issues. A knowledge issue refers to any factor that might influence knowledge - be it in its acquisition, development, production, or evaluation. Key knowledge issues relevant to ToK include reliability, validity, selectivity, predictability, hierarchy, inference, misrepresentation, and various biases.

These issues are intrinsically linked to the 12 core ToK concepts, with each concept potentially serving as a category under which specific knowledge issues can be grouped. For instance, the concept of culture could encompass knowledge issues like misrepresentation, inference, and confirmation bias.

Practical Approaches to Teaching Knowledge Issues

Here are three effective strategies for teaching knowledge issues in the ToK classroom:

1. Grouping Knowledge Issues Under ToK Concepts: Start by having students categorize knowledge issues under the 12 core ToK concepts. Provide them with a list to get started, and encourage them to add their own. This activity boosts familiarity with ToK concepts and deepens understanding of knowledge issues as students discuss and justify their categorizations. For lesson materials that could be used for this activity click here.

2. Applying Knowledge Issues to Real-World Examples: Introduce students to a selection of knowledge issues, then present a real-world case study. Ask students to identify relevant knowledge issues and explain their relevance. This approach helps develop key ToK skills necessary for both the Exhibition and the Essay. For lesson materials that could be used for this activity click here.

3. Using Edward DeBono’s Six Thinking Hats: Adapt this cognitive framework to encourage alternative thinking. Assign each student or group a "hat" that represents a specific way of thinking (e.g., "Facts" for the White hat, "New Ideas" for the Green hat). Present a real-world problem for analysis through the lens of their assigned thinking direction. This activity fosters an understanding of perspective, context, and the intentions of knowledge producers and knowers.

For more in depth thoughts, and further learning materials, on teaching critical thinking in ToK click here

Conclusion

Teaching critical thinking in ToK doesn't require endless watching of TED videos, nor extensive texts. By focusing on ToK skills and creating engaging, activity-based learning experiences, teachers can effectively impart critical thinking skills. For more ideas and resources, feel free to explore further or reach out with suggestions and inquiries.

If you have any content suggestions or questions, don't hesitate to contact us at Daniel@ToKToday.com.

Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

Stages for Teaching the ToK Essay

Teaching the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) essay is a challenging yet rewarding endeavour that requires careful planning and thoughtful instruction. The ToK essay is a critical component of the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programme, demanding students to reflect on the nature of knowledge and how we know what we claim to know. Drawing on my experience of guiding students through the ToK essay in 22 exam sessions, I've distilled my approach into five key stages that have proven effective. These stages are designed to optimise the teaching process for the ToK essay, ensuring both teachers and students are well-prepared for this intellectual undertaking.

1. Planning Not Writing

The most crucial insight I've gained is the importance of prioritising planning over writing. Students should devote a significant portion of their time to unpacking the essay titles, exploring the concepts, and crafting knowledge arguments. This preparatory stage is vital for a successful essay, making the writing process smoother and more productive. I advocate for a planning-to-writing time ratio of roughly 80:20, encouraging students to engage deeply with their ideas before committing them to paper. This approach ensures that students are thoroughly thinking through their arguments and structuring their essays coherently before they begin the actual writing.

2. Delay Choosing Titles

A common mistake students make is rushing to select their essay title. Delaying this choice until later in the planning phase allows students to broaden their understanding of ToK concepts and apply these insights to various prescribed titles (PTs). This strategy enhances their conceptual flexibility, enabling them to craft more nuanced and comprehensive essays. By postponing the selection of essay titles, students can explore a wider range of ideas and approaches, ultimately choosing a title that resonates with their insights and understanding of ToK.

3. Problematizing Concepts, Knowledge Issues & Knowledge Arguments

To achieve high marks in the ToK essay, students must adopt an analytical, evaluative, and critical stance towards ToK concepts and the knowledge framework. Many students begin with a settled view of ToK, which can limit their ability to critically engage with the essay's demands. By problematising ToK concepts and encouraging critical examination of knowledge issues—such as reliability, validity, and falsifiability—students can develop a more sophisticated and questioning approach to knowledge. This critical engagement is essential for constructing compelling arguments and achieving excellence in the ToK essay.

4. Groupwork Teamwork

Given the typical class size for ToK, individualised teacher support for each student's essay can be challenging to provide. Leveraging the power of group work can offer peer support, advice, and guidance. Establishing writing groups for students tackling the same prescribed titles can foster a collaborative learning environment while adhering to academic integrity rules. Promoting the essay as a collaborative process can alleviate individual anxiety and ensure a supportive learning community where all students progress together.

5. The Draft Deadline Is the Big Deadline

Emphasising the draft deadline as the primary milestone can significantly impact the quality of the final essays. By treating the draft deadline with greater importance than the final submission deadline, most of the "heavy lifting" can be completed early on. Some schools celebrate this stage with a Draft Deadline party, highlighting its significance. A well-developed draft sets the stage for refining essays from middle to higher mark bands, focusing on enhancement rather than basic completion.

These five stages offer a comprehensive approach to teaching the ToK essay, providing a framework for students to develop their ideas thoughtfully and critically. For teachers embarking on this educational journey, these strategies can facilitate a more engaging and effective learning experience, helping students to navigate the complexities of the ToK essay with confidence.

Teachers can get a free teaching schedule overview at this link.

If you are a teacher who would like help with delivering the ToK Essay, or you're a student who would like help writing your ToK essay, please contact me: Daniel@TokToday.com

Stay ToKTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

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*.

What are the examiners thinking about the ToK Essay in 2023 ?

The Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Subject Report is written by examiners after each exam session, it is a reflection on what examiners have seen in the work submitted for the exam session. The report includes details on common mistakes made, and recommendations for avoiding those mistakes in the future. As such the ToK Subject Report is the most definitive document for understanding “what the examiners want”. I strongly recommend close reading of the TOK Subject Report for all ToK teachers. The ToK Subject Reports can be found in the Programme Resource Centre of MyIB.

In this blog post I summarise some of the pertinent and interesting points about the ToK Essay arising from the May 23 ToK Subject Report. I will publish a similar post about The Exhibition in a couple of days. I have written similar posts about previous ToK Subject Reports in the past (linked & linked). 

What do we learn about the ToK Essay from the May 23 ToK Subject Report ?

1. Students need to address all parts of the prescribed title. Don’t ignore parts of the question, this affects coherence of the answer (top of P5.)

2. Precise and direct reading of question is important (e.g Q2 M23 “For artists & natural scientists” many students did not consider artists & natural scientists, they just considered ‘for the general public’.).

3. A stepped approach to build an argument is most effective for complex essays that contain multiple elements (eg #4M23: "Do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (Russell)? Discuss with reference to the NS & one other AoK"). This essay requires students to deal with each element in turn, and to develop knowledge arguments relating to each. Contrasting claims / counterclaims / evaluation points are particularly important in complex essays (eg #4 M23, bottom of pg 6/top of 7).

4. Visual representations (eg charts & graphs) are now appropriate in ToK essays (Essay 5 M23).

5. Focus on writing a critical exploration of the PT (the driving question) rather than on a descriptive essay. A critical exploration includes: 

• Arguments supported by examples

• Implications

• Awareness of & evaluation of different points of view. 

• Limitations of arguments

6. Use of “points of view” rather than counterclaim. Points of view allows for a more nuanced range of points than a counterclaim. Points of view do not necessarily contradict, nor cancel out, the initial claim.

7. Examples should be explicitly connected to the knowledge argument and shown to justify a point.

8. Examples drawn from the student’s own studies, or own life, generally make better examples because it is easier for the student to analyse them and to understand the implication of the example (para 3, Pg 8).

9. AoK History should consider:

• The history of events that are at least 10 yrs old.

• The history of events that have been investigated by historians (rather than e.g. by journalists).

• The process of the production of historical knowledge rather than the event itself.

10, Geography & Economics are often used well as Human Science disciplines.

11. The Planning & Progress Form is of increasing importance as an academic integrity check given the growth of AI etc.

OK - this is just a very brief summary of some of the main points. Some of these points are included because they are surprising, or new, to me. If you want more details on the subject report I recommend downloading it from the Programme Resource Centre. A similar summary of points about the ToK Exhibition in the May 23 Subject Report will be out soon.

Stay ToKTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon Feb 24

Watch this post as a video:

Implications in ToK Essay: What are they?

Implications in the ToK Essay: A Guide to Achieving High Marks

Understanding Implications in Theory of Knowledge Essays

Achieving high marks in your Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay is a significant milestone. A crucial element that can help you score between 9 and 10 marks is the inclusion of implications in your arguments. Many students struggle to understand what these implications are. This post aims to clarify 'Implications' and guide you on how to effectively incorporate implications into your ToK essays.

Defining Implications

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, an implication is defined as

"the action of implying; the fact of being implied or involved, without being plainly expressed; that which is involved or implied in something else."

Oxford English Dictionary

In simpler terms, think of an implication as the potential "so what?" outcome of an argument. It’s what could logically follow from the premises you have established.

Illustrating Implications with a Simple Example

To understand this better, let's consider a straightforward, non-ToK example:

• Argument: Abigail ALWAYS takes an umbrella with her when it is raining.

• Observation: Abigail has taken an umbrella with her.

• Implication: It is raining.

This example shows the direct implication. However, we can delve deeper and consider other implications such as:

• Abigail thinks that it is raining.

• It was raining when Abigail decided to take the umbrella, but it might not be now.

• Abigail believes it will rain before she returns.

These examples illustrate how a single observation can lead to multiple implications.

Applying Implications to a Real ToK Essay

Consider the ToK essay topic: "To what extent is the production of knowledge determined by methodologies?" (#6 May 23)

Suppose the essay concludes that methodologies have less influence on knowledge production than the context of the knowledge and the intentions of the producer. Several implications can be drawn from this conclusion:

1. Methodology Variability: The methodologies of knowledge production can be varied or altered according to the needs of the knowledge producer with little effect on the knowledge produced.

2. Defining Areas of Knowledge: Areas of knowledge and subject disciplines should not be defined solely by the methodology used to produce knowledge within that discipline or AoK.

3. Contextual Nature of Knowledge: Knowledge is primarily contextual, and when taken out of its context, it may lose its meaning, regardless of the methodology used to produce it.

The Importance of Exploring Implications

Exploring implications allows for a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the argument. It shows a critical engagement with the topic and can significantly enhance the quality of your ToK essay.

Further Resources and Assistance

If you need more help with your ToK essay, consider exploring other videos under the ToK Essay tab on the ToKToday YouTube channel, or purchase the e-book "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" for detailed guidance.

ToKToday is dedicated to helping you excel in your ToK essays. Remember to like, subscribe, and share for more insightful content on Theory of Knowledge.

Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 24

How can we know current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge? (Exhibition prompt 13)

Guidance notes for Prompt 13 are available from this link.

These notes include:

1. An overview explanation of the prompt.

2. Examples of three knowledge claims for the prompt.

3. Suggestions for the types of object that would be appropriate for each knowledge claim.

4. How to structure the ToK Exhibition Commentary.

Knowledge arguments before objects.

I recommend writing knowledge arguments BEFORE you choose objects. I know it’s tempting to choose objects first, but if you can write 3 knowledge arguments first not only will your objects be easier to choose, but it will be far easier to "access the higher mark bands, and we all want higher scores."justify the inclusion of each particular object in the exhibition" (required for the higher mark bands).

Unpacking the prompt

How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?

The first terms that jump out are current and past. When is current current and when does it become past ? So, current & past can be relative terms.  The next term that interests me is improvement. We could define an ‘improvement’ in knowledge in many different ways, for example:

• The current knowledge is more functional than past knowledge, that means it has more uses or usability.

• The current knowledge could be more effective than past knowledge.

• The current knowledge could be more ethical than past knowledge. That’s contentious, so I think we’ll come back to that one.

• The current knowledge might fulfil the intention of the knowledge producer better than past knowledge. This can also be contentious when we consider who produces knowledge & why. 

• The current knowledge could produce more unexpected benefits than previous knowledge. I like this idea, it gives us a window to serendipitous knowledge production.

• The current knowledge could allow for more synthesis across various Areas of Knowledge than past knowledge.

These are all various ways in which we could define improvement in knowledge, there are many other ways, you can devise your own measure of improvement.

The common mistake with prompt 13

A common mistake is interpret the prompt as asking whether current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. However, the prompt is actually asking how can we know whether current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. As such, we need to focus on ways in which we might know about improvement in knowledge. 

Ways in which we might "know" about improvements in knowledge.

A few ways in which we know things include:

• we have evidence for it

• we are able to measure it

• it is observable to us

• we have experienced it

• we are able to compare current knowledge with past knowledge

There are many many different ways to know things and I'm sure that some of you will be able to come up with better ways of knowing than I can.

Knowledge Arguments

To write the knowledge arguments we're just together the two important parts of the prompt: how we know things, and ways to define improvements.

Knowledge Argument 2 is slightly contentious because some would argue that we can only assess ethics by the standards of the time in which you live. One of the counter-arguments to this is to focus on the methodology of assessment rather than the context of assessment. So, I’ve written this KA to use reason as the means or methodology by which we know.

Knowledge Argument 3 may also be a little contentious by taking the line that we may not know something, this is a small risk that should be OK because we’ve already shown 2 ways in which we can know something, so now I’m taking a more critical approach to the question. I’m also drawing upon the core unit in ToK Knowledge and The Knower. 

Choosing Objects

IB strongly recommend that you choose things that are of significance to you. These could be things that you have studied in your DP, or things that you are personally interested in. I have chosen 3 things that I am interested in, but you will probably have different interests, so you should choose different objects to mine.

Knowledge Argument 1: We know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge when objective evidence demonstrates current knowledge to be more effective than past knowledge.

The object that I’ve chosen to demonstrate this KA is a scientific epidemiological report from the US Centre for Disease Control on the control of the viral disease Smallpox through the use of the Smallpox vaccine. The report gives quantitative objective statistical evidence of the vastly reduced incidence of smallpox arising from use of the vaccine.

Knowledge Argument 2: The second knowledge argument is that We know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge if it is reasoned to be more ethical by contemporary standards of ethics.

I’ve chosen The European Convention on Human Rights to demonstrate this. The convention arises from a contemporary understanding of ethics arising from the use of reason as a way of knowing during the 18th & 19th century period of European Enlightenment. My argument being that reason as a way of knowing allows us to know that current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. 

The third knowledge argument is  that we may not know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge if our knowledge of improvement is mainly derived from the experience of the knower.

The object that I’ve chosen to illustrate this argument is a modern documentary film made about Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre. The documentary compares the experience of current forms of entertainment with the experience of watching plays at Shakespeare’s Globe in the sixteenth century. My argument being that if we measure improvement of knowledge in terms of the experience of the knower then we can’t be certain that the experience of contemporary forms of entertainment are necessarily an improvement of past forms of entertainment. Experience is an individual phenomenon which cannot be satisfactorily compared across time, place, nor other contexts. 

Make it personal and specific

You will probably develop different knowledge arguments, and use different objects to mine. But I just wanted to show you how to unpack this prompt, some different ways to think about the prompt, and ways in which to move from knowledge arguments to objects. Making the objects relevant and significant to you is an important part of the ToK Exhibition

Stay Toktastic my friends.
Daniel, Lisbon, Jan 2024

Help! Urgent help needed - ToK Essay!

 I am receiving lots of messages from students across the world at the moment saying things like "Help! I need urgent help with my ToK Essay! My deadline is very soon, and I’m finding it really difficult". Please keep reaching out, I love to help you, that’s what I’m here for.

Today, on ToKToday we're going to look at what you can do if you’re worried about completing your ToK essay. Maybe you don’t know where to start, or you may have left it a little late. Here’s the ToKToday guide to saving your ToK life:

1. Planning.

No matter how little time you have left, spending some time Planning will help you to write a better essay. You have 1600 words, so think of it as an 8 paragraph essay, each para is 200 words long. A basic essay structure that will deliver for most titles is shown below:

Generic ToK Essay Structure

This is a super rough & ready essay structure designed to get you out of a last minute hole. Of course  there are many other essay structures that you could use, many better essay structures, but if you’re down to the last 36 hrs before hand in time this essay structure can deliver you an essay that will pass. If you need more help with how to structure the essay see the video linked here.

In the introduction you can explain your interpretation of the prescribed title, and explain how you intend to answer the prescribed title, if there are assumptions in the title  you may want to explain whether you intend to address these and why. Many students define key concepts in the Introduction, however I would recommend putting your definitions in the knowledge arguments in each AoK.

2. Knowledge Arguments

Knowledge Arguments are the central focus of your essay, these are what you will get most of your marks for. So spend time working these out before you start writing. You need at least one central knowledge argument for each AoK. You can then develop other knowledge arguments as the evaluation points for the main knowledge argument in each AoK.

If you’re struggling to find knowledge arguments then use your ToK Notes, your ToK textbook (if you have one), blogs on this site, and the ToKToday videos on YouTube.

3. Real World Examples

Lots of people get hung up on which real world examples to use. You can draw on your other DP subjects for real world examples, pull them from the things that you have studied in other DP subjects. How you use the real world example to illustrate the knowledge argument  is more important than the real world example used.

4. Evaluation Points.

If you want to score more than 5 out of 10 you need to evaluate your knowledge arguments. These are best thought of as “other points of view”. Good evaluation points will constitute further knowledge arguments in your essay. If you are struggling to identify evaluation points then watch the video linked above .

5. Filling in the paragraphs.

Once you know what you are putting in each of your 8 paragraphs you have your structure. Now all that you have to do is to fill in the words around the main points in each paragraph. This is how you both speed up the writing process and improve the quality of you what you write. 

6. Implications & Conclusions.

Finally you need to include a concluding paragraph that ties all of the arguments across both AoKs together. The conclusion must directly and unequivocally address the original prescribed title, this will probably require using the words from the prescribed title in your conclusion. You could also include the implications of your conclusion in this final paragraph. 

More help with ToK Essay

We have lots of resources & support for you to help you to write your ToK Essay:.

• We have at least 3 videos on YouTube explaining, and giving examples for, EACH ToK Essay title.

• We have blog posts explaining possible different approaches for each essay title.

• We have detailed Guidance Notes for each ToK Essay title.

We can also provide online coaching sessions to support you every step of the way in writing your essay.

Finally, once you have a first draft in place we can provide detailed written feedback to help you to refine your thinking and writing.

If you need help then please feel free to reach out, the more time we have to work together before your submission deadline the better we can develop your essay so please don’t leave it too late. 

If you have any questions or suggestions please feel free to email me at Daniel@ToKToday.com, or use the Messenger icon on this website.

Daniel, Lisbon,
January 2024

Don't want to read? Watch the video instead:

Effective Note-Taking and Study Skills in ToK

A subscriber asked me to talk about the best ways to take notes in ToK. It sounds pretty straightforward, but as ever with ToK there's more to this seemingly simple question than first meets the eye.

Introduction to Note-Taking in ToK

In Theory of Knowledge (ToK) classes, students often grapple with the best methods to take notes. Note-taking preferences can vary widely due to individual student preferences, teaching strategies, and available resources. This blog post aims to distil some universal principles of effective note-taking in ToK, We will look at the link between ToK note-taking and ToK Study Skills.

The Purpose of Note-Taking in ToK

The first question to consider is: Why are you taking notes in your ToK lesson? The immediate answer might be to help remember the content. However, this leads to further question: Why do you want to remember ToK content, and is note-taking the best way to do so?

Is Traditional Note-Taking the Best Method?

While traditional note-taking methods like the Outline, Cornell, and Box methods are popular, it's essential to find what works best for you. Experimentation is key. For instance, some students may find success with flow charts, while others might prefer a more visual approach like a bullet journal pictorial, even using digital tools like an iPad.

For details of various note taking strategies try this page, or this page.

The Active Processing of Content

The crucial aspect of any note-taking method is that it involves active engagement with the content. This semantic processing, as opposed to rote memorisation, significantly enhances content retention.

Why Remember ToK Lesson Content?

This brings us back to the fundamental question: Why are you trying to remember the content of ToK lessons? While a common goal is to excel in ToK assessments like the Exhibition and Essay, it's important to recognise that ToK is not just about content. It's about developing a set of skills - thinking, analytical, writing, and research skills.

Retaining and Developing ToK Skills

The best way to retain and develop the skills learned in ToK lessons is through practice and reflection. This involves actively applying ToK principles to your Diploma Programme subjects and reflecting on your strengths and areas for development. Questions like "What am I good at?" and "What do I need more practice on?" are vital.

The ToK Reflection Journal

A highly recommended tool is the ToK reflection journal. This journal is a space for students to regularly reflect upon their learning, link it to previous knowledge, plan future learning paths, and more. The format of this reflection can vary - written journals, audio recordings, or pictorial bullet journals - the key is frequent and honest reflection.

Conclusion and Further Engagement

In conclusion, whilst traditional note-taking methods have their place, the essence of effective learning in ToK lies in actively processing information and focusing on skill development through practice and reflection. For those seeking more guidance or wishing to suggest content for future discussions, feel free to reach out via email (Daniel@TokToday.com) or use the Facebook Messenger icon on this website.

By embracing these principles of note-taking and study skills in ToK, students can significantly enhance their understanding and application of ToK concepts, leading to a more profound and insightful engagement with the subject.

Stay Toktastic,
Daniel, Dec 2023

Watch on YouTube:

Evaluation in ToK Essays: Understanding Different Points of View

Introduction to Evaluation in ToK Essays

A subscriber asked me to explain what IB mean by "Different points of view" (aka "evaluation", or "counterclaims") in the ToK Essay. This is a fairly detailed exploration of what evaluation means in the context of the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay. "Different points of view" (ie evaluation) is a critical component for achieving a high score, especially for marks 5 or higher in the IB ToK Essay Marking Scheme. This post aims to explain 'different points of view', which is central to writing a nuanced and well-argued ToK essay.

The Essence of Evaluation

In ToK essays, 'different points of view' / evaluation refers to exploring varied perspectives on a main knowledge claim. Previously termed as 'counterclaim', the International Baccalaureate (IB) now focuses on a more nuanced approach, moving away from binary arguments to encompass contrasting perspectives. I often use the term 'evaluation' to refer to different points of view as students will be used to using the term evaluation in group 3 subjects like Economics and Psychology.

Examples of Different Points of View

Let's consider an example from the May 2024 essay topic on Custodians of Knowledge. Suppose the main claim is: "We don’t need Custodians of Knowledge because they suppress the evolution of knowledge." Different points of view, or evaluation points, on this claim could include:

1. Preservation of Knowledge: Custodians of Knowledge preserve existing knowledge, enabling further evolution.

2. Independent Evolution: The evolution of knowledge is independent of custodians, driven by external needs.

3. Co-evolution with Knowledge: Custodians are a byproduct of knowledge evolution, developing alongside it.

Commenting on the relative strength of these arguments and linking them to the prescribed title helps you to develop 'Implications', which helps your essay to be placed in a higher marking band.

Developing Different Points of View

Different points of view in a ToK essay can include:

• Contrasting relationships to the main claim.

• Additional factors influencing the relationship described by the main claim.

• Flaws in the causality, or direction of causality, indicated by the main claim.

These perspectives can be developed through the four pillars of knowledge: Acquisition, Production/Construction, Evolution, and Evaluation. By questioning how knowledge in your essay was acquired, produced, evolved, and evaluated, you can effectively develop diverse viewpoints.

Structuring Your ToK Essay

The number of different points of view in your essay depends on your essay's structure and question. A typical structure might look like this:

• Claim in AoK 1:

• Real-world example

• Different PoV1

• Real-world example

• Different PoV 2 (and possibly 3)

• Claim in AoK 2:

• Real-world example

• Different PoV 3

• Real-world example

• Different PoV 4 (and possibly 5)

Whether the main claim in Areas of Knowledge (AoK) 1 and 2 should be the same depends on your essay's approach. A different claim in AoK 2 can provide more evaluatory ("different points of view") material.

Conclusion and Additional Resources

Understanding and effectively incorporating different points of view is essential for a high-quality ToK essay. It demonstrates critical thinking and the ability to engage with complex ideas from multiple angles. For more detailed guidance and examples on ToK essay structures and writing strategies, refer to the e-book "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" and the detailed guidance notes for this season's essays.

By adeptly evaluating different points of view, your ToK essay can transcend from a mere presentation of ideas to a critical exploration of knowledge, enhancing both its depth and academic rigour.

If you have suggestions for further blogposts/videos get in touch: Daniel@TokToday.com, I'd love to hear your ideas.

Stay ToKTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon, Dec 23

Watch the video on YouTube!:

Unpacking ToK Essay Titles

Introduction to Unpacking Essay Titles

I'm reading lots of essays from May 24 students at the moment, a common challenge that I see students face is effectively unpacking the Prescribed Title (PT) in their Theory of Knowledge (ToK) essays. Unpacking the PT is a crucial step in the essay-writing process, and this post aims to guide you through this task to improve the clarity and coherence of your essay.

What Does Unpacking the PT Mean?

Unpacking the PT involves explaining your interpretation of the essay title at the start of the essay, typically in the introductory paragraph. Although the ToK Essay marking rubric doesn't explicitly require this, it significantly aids the examiner in understanding the direction and focus of your essay. It sets the stage for a "clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title." (ToK Essay Assessment Instrument, IB 2020)

Examples of Unpacked ToK Essay Titles (May 24 Session)

To illustrate, let’s examine unpacked versions of three titles from the May 2024 session:

Unpacking as a Prelude to the Thesis Statement

The unpacking of the title should lead into your thesis statement, which is the main argument of your essay. It provides a wider perspective on your more focused thesis statement. Ideally, this unpacking should form the opening sentence or sentences in the introduction of your essay.

Further Resources

For more detailed insights into crafting your ToK essay introduction, refer to the earlier video on this topic. Additionally, the ebook "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" and the detailed guidance notes for each Prescribed title in this season offer invaluable assistance in navigating the complexities of ToK essays.

In conclusion, unpacking the Prescribed Title at the beginning of your ToK essay is a critical step that frames your argument and provides clarity to your exploration of the essay title. By carefully defining and contextualising your approach to the title, you set a solid foundation for a coherent and critically engaged essay.

Stay Toktastic!
Daniel, Lisbon, Dec 23

Watch on YouTube:

Writing an Effective Introduction for Your ToK Essay

Why consider the ToK Essay Introduction ?

As we progress through the essay writing season, a key question arises for students engaged in Theory of Knowledge (ToK) assignments: What should be included in the introduction of a ToK essay? As I read ToK essays from across the globe, it's evident that writing a compelling introduction is a common challenge. This post will guide you through the essentials of writing an effective introduction for your ToK essay.

What to Include in Your ToK Essay Introduction

The International Baccalaureate (IB) doesn't prescribe a specific approach for the introduction of your ToK essay. The primary goal of your introduction is to engage directly with the prescribed title and set the stage for your essay. Consider including the following elements:

1. Interpreting the Prescribed Title: Offer a concise explanation of how you understand the prescribed title. This sets the context for your readers.

2. Outline of Your Approach: Briefly explain how you intend to answer or address the prescribed title.

3. Identifying Assumptions: If any assumptions arise from the prescribed title, make a brief reference to them.

4. Thesis Statement: Your introduction should include a central claim or thesis statement. This acts as the guiding argument for your essay.

What to Avoid in the Introduction

Certain elements do not contribute to earning marks and can be omitted from your introduction:

1. Overly Grandiose Statements: Avoid general statements about humanity, the world, or the universe that do not directly relate to the prescribed title.

2. Unsubstantiated Assertions: Ensure that your claims in the introduction are supported by evidence or logical reasoning.

3. Rhetorical or Further Questions: These often do not add value to your introduction and can be left out.

The Debate Around Definitions

Whether to include definitions in the introduction is a matter of personal preference. Here's a recommendation:

• Place Definitions in the Body: Discussing definitions as part of the knowledge arguments in the essay body allows for more flexibility. If definitions are set in the introduction, you're bound to them throughout the essay, which could limit your argumentative scope.

Seeking Exemplars

For examples of excellent introductions, consult your ToK teacher. The IB provides exemplar essays that showcase effective introductions. These model answers can be invaluable in understanding what makes a successful introduction.

Additional Resources

For more in-depth guidance, consider picking up my e-book, "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" (linked).

Alternatively you could pick up the individual detailed guidance notes for the essay that you have chosen. These Guidance Notes give you step by step advice on how to answer each essay question.

Conclusion

An effective introduction sets the tone for your entire essay. It should engage with the prescribed title directly, clearly outline your approach, and establish your central thesis. By focusing on these key elements and avoiding common pitfalls, you can craft an introduction that not only captures attention but also lays a solid foundation for your arguments.

Stay tuned for our next discussion on addressing unsubstantiated assertions in ToK essays.

Stay TokTastic.
Daniel, Lisbon, Dec 2023

Mastering ToK Essay Structure: A Comprehensive Guide

Introduction to ToK Essay Structure

December is the busy essay writing season for May session schools! I've been reading ToK Essays from students all over the world in which I am frequently seeing problems of structuring the ToK Essay effectively. This post aims to address the often-asked question, "How do I structure my ToK Essay?"

The International Baccalaureate (IB) doesn't prescribe a single structure for the ToK Essay. They require that you “provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title” (IB ToK Essay Assessment Instrument, 2020) Achieving this requires a well-thought-out structure that fosters clarity, coherence, and critical exploration. Let's break down the essentials that every ToK Essay should include, regardless of the chosen title or structure.

Essential Elements of ToK Essays

1. Knowledge Arguments (or Knowledge Claims): For each Area of Knowledge (AoK) considered, formulate at least one main knowledge argument or claim.

2. Real World Examples: Illustrate your knowledge arguments with real-world examples, which may also include evaluation points.

3. Evaluation Points: Consider alternative viewpoints to your knowledge claims. These are crucial for a balanced and critical exploration.

4. Implications: Reflect on the implications of your arguments and any conclusions you reach.

These four elements are non-negotiable in any ToK Essay.

Additional Components for Enhanced Essays

• Definitions of Key Concepts: Best integrated within your knowledge arguments.

• Thesis Statement: A sentence summarizing the essay’s main argument. Typically found in the introduction, it helps organise your arguments and maintains coherence.

• Unpacking the Prescribed Title (PT) in the Introduction: Offer your interpretation and explanation of the essay question here.

For a more detailed exploration, refer to my e-book, "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" linked here

Common ToK Essay Structure

A widely used structure, found in about 75-80% of ToK Essays, looks like this:

This structure is effective for most Prescribed Titles and can lead to high scores.

Alternative Structure for Deeper Analysis

Some students opt for a different approach:

This structure cleverly uses the Knowledge Argument against PT in AoK 2 as evaluation points for the argument supporting PT in AoK 1. This method allows for a more in-depth comparative analysis and potentially higher scores.

Conclusion

Remember, the optimal structure for your ToK Essay is one that enables you to “provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title”. For further assistance with essay structures and content, consult my e-book "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" or detailed notes for each ToK Essay this season (links in the video description).

Embarking on your ToK Essay journey with a clear understanding of its structure is key to success. Happy writing, and remember, the path to knowledge is as much about the journey as the destination!

Stay TokTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon, Dec 23

Watch the YouTube video: