Jump to content

Can I use the same AOK twice for my knowledge questions?


Recommended Posts

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 theories accordingly, and repeat? I've always had trouble putting law into human sciences being as a lawyer is not a "scientist" - perhaps we can say the same about psychologists, but their knowledge is grounded in the product of scientific research. Law is based on prescribed legal code/tradition, precedence, and what politicians decide should be a law (which I'm sure we can all agree is far from scientific most of the time!).

I always felt law was closer to history - lawyers study the evidence, review the facts, assess the creditability of information, try to reconstruct a narrative of what happened, and present their version to a judge or jury, who will ultimately decide what the "truth" is and how to dispense justice. This process sounds a lot more like what a historian does, doesn't it? I would ask your TOK teacher what they think about law being closer to history than natural science and perhaps you can change your arguments to make it work. Good luck!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, tokQuestions_com said:

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 theories accordingly, and repeat? I've always had trouble putting law into human sciences being as a lawyer is not a "scientist" - perhaps we can say the same about psychologists, but their knowledge is grounded in the product of scientific research. Law is based on prescribed legal code/tradition, precedence, and what politicians decide should be a law (which I'm sure we can all agree is far from scientific most of the time!).

I always felt law was closer to history - lawyers study the evidence, review the facts, assess the creditability of information, try to reconstruct a narrative of what happened, and present their version to a judge or jury, who will ultimately decide what the "truth" is and how to dispense justice. This process sounds a lot more like what a historian does, doesn't it? I would ask your TOK teacher what they think about law being closer to history than natural science and perhaps you can change your arguments to make it work. Good luck!

Hello,

Thank you so much for your in-depth answer that made me question law itself! Problem is I'm using history as my other AOK so maybe I'll just get rid of law or psychology as a whole. 

Thank you so much again!

Cheers 🙂

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...