eankeel Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 My question is "All of the other ways of knowing are controlled by language." What does this statement mean and do you think it is fair representation of the relationship between perception, emotion, reason and language?Firstly, I am going to go against the statement just because that will be easier.I thought i would kind of approach it first by discussing the importance of the langauge, the definition of what language is. then I am going to discuss these with relation to the other ways of knowing, but I don't know what I should include yet. Please help! (opinions) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 If you're doing a TOK essay, you don't go against or for a statement until the end, because you get marked for counterarguments. Just thought I'd point that out in case you hadn't realised Anyways, how about starting from: is it possible to have information without turning it into language?You may be able to imagine a chair, and imagine somebody sitting on it, but would it really be knowledge if you hadn't 'understood' it internally? And can you understand internally without thinking of it in language? Some people say that language is what gives us complex thought. Could I frame something like "what is it to be human?" without using language? The general argument is that language, to some extent, defines concepts. Could ideas like "what", "why", "how" etc. exist without words? Personally I can't think 'what' 'why' 'how' without the word being there in my mind at some level.So the question is more or less, if language is so absolutely fundamental to so much of our thought, can we have anything else about our thoughts or our knowledge without having to put it into language? Perception/emotion, perhaps, can be experienced without language - but then to what extent can that be done? I (personally) think that reason is very difficult indeed to separate from language. If I were you, I'd concentrate your essay on this sort of thing If it's an official TOK essay being marked by the official mark scheme, make sure to involve personal examples, with reference not just to ways of knowing, but also particular areas of knowledge and why that area of knowledge in particular is relevant (i.e. you should be able to show clear distinctions between the areas of knowledge and know what separates them).Good luck! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
balloon Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 You need to consider the ways of knowing individually. Depending on where you want to take it,EMOTION: As a way of knowing A. Requires language in order to turn 'feelings' into the mentally organized, consciously recognized 'knowledge', or B. Does not require language as emotion can be known as a 'feeling' that may not ever be able to be translated into words.REASON: As a way of knowing A. requires language in order to 'file', 'link' and 'define' thoughts to the point that deductions and other mechanisms of reason can be used to generate/extract knowledge, or B. does not necessarily require language to acquire knowledge, as many thought processes that use reason are not conducted with any identifiable language .... ie. 1 thousand thoughts in 1 second can 'visualize' reason without language and so evolve knowledge.SENSE PERCEPTION: As a way of knowing A. requires language in order for your conciousness to understand the messages of your vision, B. does not require language as it is a pre-thought exercise that merely 'detects' without understanding, order or language.You may even argue that emotion uses language as sadness (indicated by tears) has been aroused by chemical 'messages' to the brain and so a specific biological 'language', with the result that tears are produced etc. This could mean that the messages your eyes send to your brain is a kind of language. Here, the way you interpret 'language' as a way of knowing will affect how you answer the question.Of course, these are mostly undeveloped and probably ridiculous ideas. They are merely to get you to understand that you must examine each way of knowing, say if it is controlled by language, if it is not, to what extent it is and then SUPPORT with reasoned arguments and examples. You should always be working with the end in view. You should be able to say 'Yes, all wok are controlled by language', 'No, they are not', 'They are to some extent' or 'Some are, some aren't'.And as I have demonstrated, you MUST define how you will interpret language as a way of knowing, or else you will have no criteria by which to assess the other way of knowing.Remember. TOK is fun. If you don't manage to convince yourself somehow, then it is useless to you, and you have effectively wasted your time. Fund an argument that works for you, and stick to it. Bonne chance! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flippy Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) If you're doing a TOK essay, you don't go against or for a statement until the end, because you get marked for counterarguments. Just thought I'd point that out in case you hadn't realised Actually I disagree. I think it's OK to go for or against a statement from the beginning, as long as you question your statement, explore counterarguments and acknowledge that there are other viewpoints, and then evaluate those other viewpoints. That way you're evaluating issues of knowledge as well as maintaining a personal response throughout. Edited July 20, 2009 by Flippy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted July 20, 2009 Report Share Posted July 20, 2009 (edited) Actually I disagree. I think it's OK to go for or against a statement from the beginning, as long as you question your statement, explore counterarguments and acknowledge that there are other viewpoints, and then evaluate those other viewpoints. That way you're evaluating issues of knowledge as well as maintaining a personal response throughout.That's kinda what I meant! As in, don't pick one side or the other exclusively from the start. Edited July 20, 2009 by Sandwich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts