Theory of KnowledgeTOK

TOK Camp 2013 – TOK Presentation Preparation Part 2

The presentationThe presentation is the first of the two assessments for TOK.You can do your presentation as an individual, or in a group of

2.Either way, each speaker has to speak for 10 minutes.The presentation involves skills, knowledge and

understandings that will be directly applicable to the second assessment: the essay.

The presentation is internally assessed (assessed by your TOK teachers) whereas the essay will be externally assessed.

The basic structure of the presentation

Topic for the rest of this presentation: Once I have extracted a high quality knowledge issue from my real-life situation, how do I go about developing it?

How to develop a knowledge issueKnowledge issues are questions about knowledge.In order to develop a knowledge issue, you need to use

your TOK concepts and theory to explore your knowledge issue.

It may be that – through this process - you arrive at a single answer to your question.

However, it may be that you arrive at a set of possible answers, all of which have something going for them.

ExampleReal life situation: Ms Fergus-Brown avoids buying coffee

at the new Chinese-run café on Main Street.Knowledge issue: What role does reason play in sustaining

prejudice?Ms Ferguson-Brown, and then Dr Hodges, will show you

how they would approach the knowledge issue.Your job is to pick out the common principles behind the

two approaches.

Ms Ferguson-Brown’s approach

Ms Ferguson-Brown’s approach

Ms Ferguson-Brown’s approach

Ms Ferguson-Brown’s approach

Dr Hodges’ approachWhat is the most obvious response to this

question?It doesn’t play a role. Prejudice is irrational. It is biologically-based: humans, like all other animals,

are biologically driven to further the interests of those who are most genetically similar to them.

Fear of the other is a biological fact of life.

Dr Hodges’ approachWhat other responses might we make by drawing on our

TOK theory?Perhaps people are prejudiced because they suffered some

traumatic experience, and they have over-generalized.How does this relate to emotion as a WOK?As much as we might put this kind of a response down to

emotion, there is reasoning involved.But it’s unsound reasoning.Fallacy of weak induction: generalizing from a single case or a

small sample.

Dr Hodges’ approachOK, but could sound reasoning ever play a role in

sustaining prejudicial beliefs?What if every time you ate Chinese food, you became

sick?Then the inference to the conclusion that Chinese food

is unhealthy might not be based on fallacious reasoning.But, if a belief is based on sound reasoning, is it

really prejudicial?So on and so forth …

What are the commonalities and difference between the two approaches?