would like to do the 5th title in the list which is" in expanding the Field of knowledge we but increase the horizon of ignorance(Henry Miller). is this true?"
In this essay,i would first explain what findings does come under the title of field of knowledge and what i have understood as the horizon of ignorance. then i would like to discuss how our knowledge is based on assumptions. this could be illustrated by the example of any scientific research is based upon assumptions such as there is no friction acting on the body or the mass of the electrons are negligible. i could also write about the four ways of knowing and how each of them have their limitations and flaws because of which we can never be completely sure of what we know. also, even if any believed "fact" passes the three truth tests, it still has chances of being flawed as the truth tests too have their limitations. Also, for any belief to in fact be true, it is necessary that no assumptions are made while proving them. As there are many forces acting on us at any point of time and it is almost impossible to identify each and every one of them and quantify them, our knowledge can never be without any flaws. then, i could go on to show that with every new piece of knowledge, we seem to be disproving what was previous knowledge (world is flat etc.). in this way, what we were sure of and certain about changes to an uncertainty, resulting in ignorance as that is one less thing we know for sure. in this way, expanding the Field of knowledge results in an increase in the horizon of ignorance.
Friday, March 7, 2008
I will most probably do topic no.2 ie When should we trust our senses to give us truth.Through this topic I will try and look at the times when our senses do not give us the truth and those that give us truth. Then I will analyse these to see as to why sometimes our senses are not able to give us truth and also see if there are any factors that affect our senses and stop them from showing the truth at times.
i would like to do my ToK esssay on topic no 6 -"compare and contrast our approach to knowledge about the past with our approach to knowledge about the future."
From the discussions in class with Mr. Nicklin and Mr. Issack it became obvious that our approach to the past and the future is quite different, simply because in case of the past we can rely on books, personal reports and other pieces of evidence. in case of the future, we have to rely mostly on conjectures and theories. Simply put, we can only predict the future, whereas we have comparatively more solid information for researching history. I would like to explore this field in greater depth using a ToK approach.
From the discussions in class with Mr. Nicklin and Mr. Issack it became obvious that our approach to the past and the future is quite different, simply because in case of the past we can rely on books, personal reports and other pieces of evidence. in case of the future, we have to rely mostly on conjectures and theories. Simply put, we can only predict the future, whereas we have comparatively more solid information for researching history. I would like to explore this field in greater depth using a ToK approach.
Theory of Knowledge- Presrcibed Titles
At this point in time, the title which appeals to me the most is number 8
"To understand something you need to rely on your experience and culture. Does this mean that it is impossible to have objective knowledge?"
I strongly agree with this statement. according to me, our past experiences play a vital part in determining what we think about the world and things around us. I will, with examples, try to demonstrate how knowledge in the truly objective form is hard to have. However there are boubnd to be exceptions.
"To understand something you need to rely on your experience and culture. Does this mean that it is impossible to have objective knowledge?"
I strongly agree with this statement. according to me, our past experiences play a vital part in determining what we think about the world and things around us. I will, with examples, try to demonstrate how knowledge in the truly objective form is hard to have. However there are boubnd to be exceptions.
TOK Essay Topic
Most probably I will do the third topic
'Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of reason as a way of knowing'
In this essay I will be discussing the strengths of reason such as through reason we can think step by step in sequences and also it help us solve problems. it makes us think and analyse problems. we can look at a situation from different points of view. reason also helps us differentiate what is right and what is wrong. Weaknesses of reason are that it can make us think like machines. EMotion also plays a role. we also tend to leave out certain factors. For example if a child has done something wrong he should be punished but there may be other factors such as emotional stress or the boy is young and aware that his act is wrong. Reason would call for punishment.
'The heart has its own reason that reason (of the brain) knows nothing of'
'Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of reason as a way of knowing'
In this essay I will be discussing the strengths of reason such as through reason we can think step by step in sequences and also it help us solve problems. it makes us think and analyse problems. we can look at a situation from different points of view. reason also helps us differentiate what is right and what is wrong. Weaknesses of reason are that it can make us think like machines. EMotion also plays a role. we also tend to leave out certain factors. For example if a child has done something wrong he should be punished but there may be other factors such as emotional stress or the boy is young and aware that his act is wrong. Reason would call for punishment.
'The heart has its own reason that reason (of the brain) knows nothing of'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)