TOK Analysis Help

[HelpMeOnTOK]

Hi,

I am currently taking TOK and find it very hard to analyze issues and statements TOK style...what should we include in a TOK presentation to make it a very good analysis.

I understand that we have to use the reason, perception, emotion, language thing along with some other stuff like second-hand knowledge, etc. but what do we need to include in a presentation other than those..??

I also would like to know how do we incorporate the (reason, perception, emotion and language) and relate it to any issues or articles, what is the point of using those ways of knowing??

Thanx

[Guest Lily Bean]

It's very hard to just describe 'how' without an example since it's not a one size fit all thing. I guess one thing we can say is that you try and look for the ways these ways of knowing (reason etc) are used in the situation you're given but again that's really vague. perhaps you could give us an example of something you're working on and we can suggest things on that?

[Silviana]

Hey- I don't know if this has anything to do with what you're asking, but we recently learned about the Socratic method and how we should use it in essays etc... so... ?

[Guest Lily Bean]

[quote name='Silviana' post='17429' date='May 29 2008, 06:45 AM']Hey- I don't know if this has anything to do with what you're asking, but we recently learned about the Socratic method and how we should use it in essays etc... so... ?[/quote]
So what exactly? What is the Socratic method anyway?

[callum]

Hi. When I first started studying TOK I found it hard to get into the swing of it as well. Its a new style of analysis in comparison to what you do in middle school.

My teacher's an IB TOK examiner. Here's some of the suggestions he gave me:

- focus on issues of significance, especially in relation to knowledge
- identify knowledge claims and then analyse them to pieces
- look at the ways of knowing, how they justify the claims and how they don't (ie. biased language, emotional attachment, false reasoning etc)
- remember to identify the implications of the claims, cause and effect ...
- try and use personal examples to give significance to your argument (apparently the IB hate the over-used textbook examples such as Copernicus and Gallileo changing the world's scientific paradigms)
- use the areas of knowledge and the distinctive knowledge styles that belong to each of them
- when looking at an ethical issue, as most people do for the presentation, look at the theories of ethics (utilitarianism, relativism etc.)
- if its possible try to reconcile the claims and counter-claims at the end, make some form of conclusion

In approaching a TOK analysis, I follow the following pattern:

Knowledge issues > knowledge claims > justifications and counter-claims > implications > reconciliation (if possible)

Edited May 30, 2008 by callum

[Mr. Shiver]

^ Great post.

[quote name='callum' post='17484' date='May 29 2008, 10:00 PM'](apparently the IB hate the over-used textbook examples such as Copernicus and Gallileo changing the world's scientific paradigms)[/quote]
They also get annoyed by Hitler references.

[Guest Lily Bean]

[quote](apparently the IB hate the over-used textbook examples such as Copernicus and Gallileo changing the world's scientific paradigms)[/quote]
Yes, that is so true. Examples like the world is flat/round, black swans etc are extremely cliched in TOK and should be avoided at all costs

[robertomx]

[quote name='callum' post='17484' date='May 29 2008, 09:00 PM'](apparently the IB hate the over-used textbook examples such as Copernicus and Gallileo changing the world's scientific paradigms)[/quote]

YEAH. and also those references to abortion and such.