TOK Essay Help?

[charlotteee]

Dear all,

In about 2 weeks, I have a TOK Essay due (not the final, prescribed topic one) and was wondering if any of you could give me any suggestions/tips..

I can choose from the following two questions:

"Which is the more important attribute of the historian: the ability to analyze evidence scientifically, or the ability to develop interpretations of evidence using creative imagination?"

"One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence "strong" enough and how can this limit be established?"

For the first one, I was planning to write about how history is the hardest Area of Knowledge to analyze, as historians can never directly witness the events they research. I plan to write about how they are merely able to find facts through scientific method, but must use creative imagination to figure the rest out...

For the second question, I'm entirely stuck, and don't have anything.

Thanks again

[moneyfaery]

There is no 'hardest' or 'easiest' AoK - each has its advantages and disadvantages.

For the second Q, you'll need to discuss "belief" and "evidence". What counts as evidence? Qualitative data, quantitative data, research papers by authoritative figures i.e. historians, scientists, eyewitness accounts?

[idIB]

I would choose the second question. You need to think about the Ways of Knowing (language, perception, emotions, senses, rational thinking and logic, etc) and thier limitations to see whether or not evidence is valid and strong.

You should talk about emipical evidence vs logic thinking, and the problems of induction etc

I hope this helps

[Sandwich]

The advantage of doing the second one is also that you can talk about Religion as an area of knowledge often entirely unjustifiable yet the overwhelming guide in many people's lives

'Revelation' and 'divine inspiration' are the ways of knowing in that one, although the IB chose to excluse them from its own weird little pentagon thingy. Possibly you can trammel them in along with emotion, but either way it has to be conceded that some people live by, vote with and follow their religion to the bitter end over other knowledge, including that gained through reason, perception etc. They like examples, although prefer examples which haven't been done to death, but stuff like the percentage of people in the US who voted on what is more or less a solely religious issue (abortion, for instance) is actually a statistic you'll probably be able to find.

[flsweetheart422]

The first one: Historian Attributes

If you select this essay, I would recommend that you shift your initial focus to the two different attributes a historian may have "of the ability to analyze evidence scientifically" and "the ability to develop interpretations of evidence using creative imagination" quite early on in the essay. After introducing the topic, you should explain the general strengths and weaknesses of a historian's methodology. Then you identify either the attribute you believe is most important and why, or a very brief (1-3 sentences) about the strengths and weaknesses of both attributes with respect to the role of a historian. Then you need to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of both the attributes in the developed paragraphs. Try to include the detailed information about research methods and how they impact each attribute in this area before you conclude. Definitely try to include examples from your life (or ones that you've seen) and discuss them in respect to the two attributes. As long as you can make some more connections to other Areas and Ways of Knowing, this essay shouldn't be too bad.

"One definition of knowledge is true belief based on strong evidence. What makes evidence "strong" enough and how can this limit be established?"

The second one: Justification of Belief

This essay is a bit more straightforward. Here you would need to establish your own definition of knowledge (consider mentioning Plato)and truth (think about three truth tests and which one best supports your thesis). Essentially this question wants you to establish a definition of knowledge with respect with the amount of support is needed to substantiate that knowledge claim. Make sure you introduce your basic thesis and your 2-3 areas of knowledge that you plan to talk about. In this case, I would consider comparing "knowledge" from either Mathematics or the Natural Sciences with "knowledge" from Psychology, Religion, or anything with a strong emotional rather than empirical foundation. Then you just need to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of both of your chosen methodologies when it comes to substantiating "knowledge" with "strong enough evidence". Especially with this title, you need to make sure that you come to a distinct conclusion and that you actually answer the question.

Personally I would pick the second question because its more specific in what its looking for, yet it broad enough for you to pick exactly what you want to talk about. Either way, there's plenty you can say. Just sit down map both ideas out and have a good think. You'll be able to do it.

[charlotteee]

Thank you so much! I had started writing the first one and indeed realized it was too specific, and I couldn't write too much about it. Thanks for your suggestions - I'm writing the second one now