![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The topics for my TOK paper, paraphrased:
1. lots of important people make knowledge claims. how can you, as a TOK student, distinguish between knowledge, opinion and propaganda?
2. how do methods used in areas of knowledge determine the scope of the research and the conclusions you can reach?
3. statistics can be used to interpret reality or distort it. discuss how it can assist/mislead, and how to determine its value.
4. "to what extent do personal attributes affect ways of knowing and why, if at all, does answering this question matter in the first place?"
5. do questions like "why should i be moral?" or "why shouldn't i be selfish?" have definitive answers? does having a definitive answer make a question more or less important?
6. if being educated means seeing through the clichés of one's time, how does learning the different areas of knowledge and in TOK contribute to becoming educated
7. some people say that religious beliefs can be neither justified nor refuted by reason. this claim is used to excuse lack of religious belief or to conclude that it's based on faith. to what extent is faith a legit basis for knowledge claims?
8. [weird quote about "external nature," "mental imagery" and "inherited prejudice"] how accurate is this of everyday life?
9. compare/contrast knowing a friend to knowing how to swim, knowing a scientific theory or knowing a historical period. what conclusions about the nature of knowledge can you reach?
10. sometimes we hear a reasoned argument that the opposes our view; sometimes we hear a passionate plea for a view we have good reason to reject. what is the importance of reason and emotion in distinguishing between belief and knowledge?
I have to write 1200-1600 words about this. I am so doomed.
1. lots of important people make knowledge claims. how can you, as a TOK student, distinguish between knowledge, opinion and propaganda?
2. how do methods used in areas of knowledge determine the scope of the research and the conclusions you can reach?
3. statistics can be used to interpret reality or distort it. discuss how it can assist/mislead, and how to determine its value.
4. "to what extent do personal attributes affect ways of knowing and why, if at all, does answering this question matter in the first place?"
5. do questions like "why should i be moral?" or "why shouldn't i be selfish?" have definitive answers? does having a definitive answer make a question more or less important?
6. if being educated means seeing through the clichés of one's time, how does learning the different areas of knowledge and in TOK contribute to becoming educated
7. some people say that religious beliefs can be neither justified nor refuted by reason. this claim is used to excuse lack of religious belief or to conclude that it's based on faith. to what extent is faith a legit basis for knowledge claims?
8. [weird quote about "external nature," "mental imagery" and "inherited prejudice"] how accurate is this of everyday life?
9. compare/contrast knowing a friend to knowing how to swim, knowing a scientific theory or knowing a historical period. what conclusions about the nature of knowledge can you reach?
10. sometimes we hear a reasoned argument that the opposes our view; sometimes we hear a passionate plea for a view we have good reason to reject. what is the importance of reason and emotion in distinguishing between belief and knowledge?
I have to write 1200-1600 words about this. I am so doomed.
