Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


tokQuestions_com last won the day on December 20 2019

tokQuestions_com had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6 Recognised

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    May 2018
  • Country
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, that's definitely on the right track. For sense perception, you could discuss how cigarettes were made appealing through the way they looked, smelled, etc. Perhaps also how the advertisements looked. You'd have to combine other WOKs, for example emotions, as rarely does sense perception function alone. Language is another good one, especially the sub-WOK of "authority" which is part of language. That's extremely relevant due in relation to doctors as we consider doctors knowledgeable and we trust their authority. Good luck!
  2. The second one is much better as it's really about knowledge, rather than ethics. I'd generalize it more along the lines of, "to what extent does social media influence the way we behave?" and use exercise as the main example. Good luck, stay healthy!
  3. If you have a huge concern, contact your IB Coordinator. It might be that your IB Coordinator saw the TurnItIn report and decided that it's alright as it is despite the one line missing citation.
  4. No, it's not "gone", don't panic. The final trigger to submit it to the IB is done by the IB Coordinator. He/She will probably also see your Turnitin report. Expect that you'll be called in to talk about it. Admit to the mistake and you'll be asked to correct the mistake (add the citation) and then re-upload. That's usually how it works.
  5. It kind of is plagiarism. I mean, if you attribute the ideas, then it's technically not. But, if you submit it "as is" and being honest that you didn't really write the essay, well, then you didn't write the essay, the ideas aren't yours, and you shouldn't receive any points for the essay. Right? Use those kind of websites as inspiration or guidance. Come up with your our examples and arguments. Good luck!
  6. So, you are in fact using two AoKs but examples from three subjects. What point are you using the example of econ to make that's not being made with psychology? In other words, what benefit does using two examples from the same AoK give you? If it's to reiterate the same point, the drop one of the examples - you only need to make the point once. My experience with these kinds of issues is that depth is being sacrificed for breadth. If you are taking the time to treat the topics correctly, then you should have no problem meeting (if not a problem with exceeding!) the word count with and ex
  7. “How do we know if our behavior is ethical?” You can discuss the different approaches to ethics and the value system a vegan and non-vegan might have.
  8. That's a very general question - start with a thesis and dive right into it! It's hard for me to give us advice beyond basic essay structure. Each paragraph should start with a statement of the idea to be presented, then explanation of the idea, then an example supporting the claim, and finally a repetition of the idea. The paragraph after that should do the same, but with the counter-claim.
  9. That doesn't sound like a very good situation to be in at all 😕 "Being as philosophical as u can" depends on if you are in fact making philosophical points or just writing in some contrived way to sound smart. The first one will work, the second one probably won't. I'm not sure what else can be said. If you have an idea about which prescribed title you want to do, what arguments you want to make, etc., then that's something I can respond to with greater detail.
  10. It's always a risk to do that, especially if the prescribed title specifically asks for two separate AOKs. The main risk is coming off to the examiner that you're not capable of making a good argument across multiple AOKs, and the TOK is the "big event" where you show your versatility in inter-disciplinary thought. In other words, it might come off as taking the easy road and the examiner will respond accordingly. That said, I would respond to your question with another question: is "law" a human science? Do lawyers use the scientific method, set up experiments, collect data, modify their
  11. If it's just a question about structure, the official guide offers a diagram: Start with an overview of the RLS, then explain how you came to your general KQ from it. Explore and elaborate on the TOK related issues, drawing and evolving them into new KQs which, in turn, you relate back to other new RLSs. Please note: you only spend a very short time at the start talking about your RLS before de-contextualizing the conversation to discuss the KQ in general.
  12. I hate to break it to you, but you might not have anything if you don’t have RLSs 😞 If all your KQs, AOKs, WOKs, etc. are without context and aren't related to any real life situations, then I'm not surprised you're struggling to find structure. You need to "reboot" a bit and start from scratch. Start with a RLS and extract the KQ, then explore it generally, further extract narrower KQs and finally related those back to New RLSs. In the process, incorporate the ideas you have if it makes sense, but don't force them in. Share your RLS here and extracted KQ here if you want feedback
  13. Do you have any examples of a situation that emotion changes people’s beliefs about something? What about language - how does it help people (society) come to a belief? Both these WOKs are important in the process of personal knowledge becoming shared knowledge, so it might help to think about it that way.
  14. I am not sure how I can help but I’ll try. It’s not clear to me how the RLSs relate to the AoK as I don’t immediately see the link of a bombing, a fire, and a murder to Art or Human Science. I more readily see ethical issues in them than the others. You say you have a claim for one, but which one? I can’t really evaluate it as you don’t write it, unless I missed it or didn’t see the link. 😞
  15. I would somewhat disagree with @Sandwich in that "Who decides what's ethical?" is a knowledge question, although I grant the point that it's not as open as it could be and, as a result, might be hampering you from a deeper exploration. Rephrasing it to something like "How do we know what's ethical?", for example, immediately widens the range of possible explorations. "Who" suggests the answer is a person or group of people while in fact that might not be what you're looking to talk about. How did you settle on the topic of robots? It almost sounds as you were assigned this particular topi
  • Create New...