Nov10/May11 #3: "Doubt is the key to knowledge" (Persian Proverb). To what extent is this true in two areas of knowledge?

[skiitle]

hi also doing this question, does anyone know any historical examples to doubt leading to knowledge? or doubt not leading to knowledge=?

anyhelp i can get would be great

thanks

[devin19]

hey guys! i have read about Gödel's incompleteness theorem but i don't see how it relates to this topic... I was planning to do math or History and Science as my 2 AOK's. I have examples for Science but none for Math and History... Do you guys know of any???

[jai15]

Hi everyone,

I need a counterclaim in ethics for this essay! can someone help me out!

[7Em]

I am drafting an essay for this question now, so I will say what my thoughts are so far.

I decided that knowledge could be defined in two ways: what humanity currently know, and what we could know. My two areas of knowledge were science and ethics, and I decided that doubt inhibited learning about what humanity currently knows but is essential to gaining new knowledge

[destroyedparadise]

I am drafting an essay for this question now, so I will say what my thoughts are so far.

I decided that knowledge could be defined in two ways: what humanity currently know, and what we could know. My two areas of knowledge were science and ethics, and I decided that doubt inhibited learning about what humanity currently knows but is essential to gaining new knowledge

Wow! I'm saying, essentially, the same thing! However, I did take a slightly different approach, so don't worry, our essays won't be too similar.

[mishad]

Hey guys, i also doing the same topic and by reading through this forum iv really begun to understand it, the only problem is that I understand the argument for doubt being the key to knowledge but you need the counter argument as well-Doubt NOT being the key to knowledge (chose to look at Science and History)

Could really use some help on the other side of the argument.

[JoeG]

As for my areas of knowledge, do you think that Math and the Natural Sciences would be an unsuitable/bad combination? Or should I choose Math and History?

I know that I should choose what I'm best in, I just want to know if Science and Math are too similar for this essay.

[Cyrus]

I've written a rough draft on this topic already, and recieved a reasonable mark on it from my teacher.

The AOK's I used were Science and History, and then I supported the claim with my own examples of how doubt is applied to real life.

WOK's were reason and a little bit of perception.

Best advice I think is to have good examples that apply to you, because that is where you can score many points.

Best of luck!

Bumblebee,

I'm planning on using those two AOKs as well. The approach I'm planning on taking is to structure my essay around good examples. Can you give a little more insight into that? Did you come up with examples first, and then talk about all the philosophical stuff, or did it all just kind of come together at the same time?

-Cy

[Cyrus]

I too am doing this topic, with Science and History as my AOK. What historical examples did people use? I'm finding these harder to come up with than scientific examples. And how many examples/counter-points/counter-examples did you use?

-Cy

[frankinafishtank]

My first draft is due tonight and i've only written 500 words.

I'm struggling to find 2 AOK to use. I can't use math cause my teacher basically told me i suck I couldn't do it. And i don't take history or any of the natural sciences.

Would ethics/social sciences (economics or psychology) be a bad idea?

Does anyone have any suggestions on how I could form arguments/counter arguments for those 2 AOK?

Any help is useful! thank you

Edited December 5, 2010 by frankinafishtank

[larry]

regarding counter-arguments, which have been brought up a few times, the obvious one (though abit of a straw man) is that doubt is the antithesis of knowledge.

NB: this question also depends on how you define "key to knowledge". Taking "key" in the sense that doubt is THE only way to gain knowledge is easy to make counter-claims about - acutally, it's not very defensible. I took "key" as being integral to truly understanding a piece of knowledge, and thus being able to use it (acting on it or using it to further knoweldge gain).

So, does doubting something ever impede our ability to gain knowledge?

e.g. Doubting a piece of knowledge can prevent its acceptance - plenty of people doubted the earth went around the sun. Here you get into motives for doubting, and on the flip side, doubting "false" knowledge (the earth is flat) can lead to more knowledge gain - if you never doubt something is true, you never come up with a (better) alternative theory

Doubt can also impede our desire to act on knowledge. Best example: climate change. There's a measure of doubt, and because so many billions are tied up in it, this makes some people reluctant to act on it. However, despite the doubt, some people think we should do something about it - i.e. how useful is doubtful knowledge, and to what extent is it useful in decision making - obviously other stuff has an effect.

[Chandler Marie]

Hey guys I chose this topic and using history and science would love some feedback please any ideas?

[diled]

hello, i'm kind of new to this but i also chose this topic and i've been wondering, it's possible to define doubt as a rejection and curiosity of a certain subject?

[JoeG]

Yeah, I think that is an ASPECT of doubt. You could use that in certain areas of your paper (I even thought of this by my on means) but those two definitions don't fully encompass the feeling of "Doubt."

[Fco]

I did this essay about six months ago... and that month and a half of IA was the darkest period of my life.

Anyway, I focused on Ethics and how moral systems are doubted by individuals throughout time, hereby causing change and, although not neccesarily knowledge, more perspectives on our way of living and thinking . I also focused on History, but I can't recall my examples (something about my EE, and about the Rosetta stone story, maybe?)

In the end, THIS finally show me what TOK was all about... giving as much examples to each claim/counterclaim. I guess if they need so much examples to understand the concept it's because some examiners are conceptually stupid.

[luaykanaan]

Hey, im doing the same topic! i am almost done! but wanted to ask a question!! i need someee help

the 2 areas of knowledge i chose were natural sciences and mathematics.

i need examples of how doubt in math is a key to knowledge...

[Sandwich]

Hey, im doing the same topic! i am almost done! but wanted to ask a question!! i need someee help

the 2 areas of knowledge i chose were natural sciences and mathematics.

i need examples of how doubt in math is a key to knowledge...

It'd probably be easier to write about how doubt in Maths isn't a key to knowledge... I'm not sure that there are any examples!

[JoeG]

There has been developments and many famous debates in mathematics. So there is some level of doubt that occurred in these debates, and even still to this day.

I know I've said this before, but Godel's Incompleteness Theorem is a good example. Even the responses to it are good examples.

The Theorem basically says there are some things that we CAN'T know therefore prove in mathematics.

Also, if you go into ancient Greek and Renaissance Mathematics you can find some cool ideas.

I know a few, but I don't want to give any of my ideas away. Plagiarism phobia lol.

Edited January 5, 2011 by JoeGuff

[Tay Jay 2011]

I'm writing my TOK essay and it's all going well until I get to the argument section.

I have no idea where to begin!!

I need help finding an argument against doubt is the key to knowledge.

Please and thank you

[Tay Jay 2011]

I was working with the cause of the civil war and how people doubt that states rights/slaves are the cause of it

I also used the existence of Troy and what caused the demise of the empire